SM, further to my last post:

Where does our democratic right to support a party or a policy end and a perversion of democracy begin?

In the decades since Gough there is no bigger nor more sinister perverter of democracy than than the political correctness that has made a joke out of freedom of speech.

Although for raw brutish effect the unions are in a place of their own. Toppling a popular PM and installing the redhead usurper, then toppling her too and recently running a BS 'election' of Labor leader while loading the dice to favour Caucus and the hidden puppet-masters behind.

Ludwig,

"Where does our democratic right to support a party or a policy end and a perversion of democracy begin?"

The answer is simple, corruption begins with intent. You can have a corrupt "donation" of $100 or a purely altruistic donation of $100 000. The question is whether to ban all activity because of the 1% that is corrupt, or do you manage it.

I however, suspect that your motives are less than pure. Since the staggering levels of corruption have been exposed in Labor, the private donations to the party have dried up, and this is a cynical attempt to level the playing field.

Over many years in NSW the Coalition has enjoyed considerable gifts from the booze industry, the fag industry, the gambling industry and of course foreign and local property developers. Just take one look at the laws that relate to the above in NSW and there is no need to wonder why. Its been money well spent.

So SM, are big companies corrupt if they give big donations in order to try and sway government decisions in favour of their vested interests?

Or is it fair and reasonable for them to do this?

I can see it two ways:

Yes they can be thought of as corrupt if they feel that they are acting for vested-interest profit-motive reasons and they know that what they want is not really in the best interests of society.

Or no they can be thought of as not corrupt because it is their right to lobby and to donate with those sorts of motives.

Corruption can thus be hard to define as it concerns donors. But even if you think that no donors are acting corruptly, the net effect can still be a corruption of democracy, as it most certainly is with big businesses giving big donations which strongly sway government in one particular direction.

Ludwig,

Instead of posing theoretical questions, perhaps you could try the real world and give an actual example.

If you know of any corruption, then please take it to the police, and they can prosecute. Thought bubble possibilities are no basis for draconian legislation.