The peak body representing local government in Queensland said a proposed law banning political donations by developers would send money underground and expose the state to NSW-style laundering.
The local government association of Queensland has lodged a formal submission opposing the Palaszczuk government’s plan, announced in response to a crime and corruption commission probe into local government elections.
This week Luke Smith, the mayor of Logan, became the third south-east Queensland politician to be charged by the commission. He is accused of official corruption, failing to update his register of interests, and two counts of perjury.
The local government association said it supported measures to increase transparency in local government elections, including the real-time disclosure of donations, expenditure caps and compulsory registers of interests.
It proposed capping spending by mayoral candidates to $2 for every registered voter, with an upper limit of $200,000. Candidates’ spending would be limited to $1 a voter, with a $50,000 limit.
The government’s push to ban developer donations is being fought by the association and by property developers.
“The [association] remains opposed to banning donations from property developers because prohibition drives activity underground and thus reduces transparency,” its submission said.
“The need for a comprehensive ban on a single class of donor therefore raises questions as to need and equity, given prohibitions are not proposed for other classes of donors who can seek to exert influence over policy and investment decisions of government.
“Developer donation bans in NSW, the only state in Australia with such bans, including for local government elections, have been proven not to work.”
It cited Operation Spicer, the 2016 investigation by the NSW independent commission against corruption that uncovered widespread flouting of donations bans, as well as complex methods used to conceal donations to candidates.
“This proves the [association’s] point,” it said.
The Queensland Law Society said the retrospective nature of the donations ban – which has not yet become law, but will outlaw donations since 12 October 2017 – was problematic.
“The rule of law requires that laws are certain and capable of being known in advance,” its president, Ken Taylor, said.
“In our submission, stakeholders should not bear the repercussions of not having a system in place when at the time there was no legal requirement to do so.”
The Property Council, Urban Development Institute and Housing Industry Association all opposed the donations ban on grounds it was unfair. Each pointed out there were other industries and groups, such as mining, gambling and unions, where there was potential for corruption.
The Housing Industry Association also questioned the proposed definition of a property developer, claiming the bill before parliament was “extraordinarily broad and vague”.
The crime and corruption commission also made a submission to the inquiry, noting the government’s ban on developers applied to state and local campaigns, while the commission’s investigation and recommendations had related only to local government.
The commission’s chairman, Alan MacSporran, said a statewide ban “may be sound policy” but urged the government to undertake proper public consultation.
