The Queensland government has threatened to bring One Nation into the crosshairs of tougher electoral funding laws after revelations of James Ashby’s proposal that the party could “make some money” by inflating campaign expenses.
It comes after a longer secret recording of a One Nation meeting in which Ashby made the suggestion last year reportedly did not bear out Pauline Hanson’s claim it was “knocked on the head there and then”.
The matter has been referred to the Australian federal police, Queensland police and the electoral commission of Queensland by federal Labor senator Murray Watt, who has questioned whether there have been electoral law breaches or even a criminal conspiracy to commit fraud.
Hanson and Ashby, her controversial chief adviser, moved into damage control after the recordings were leaked, with Ashby saying it was a “silly idea” that came up in a “brainstorming session” on how to pass on some campaign costs to candidates, but was never carried out.
Hanson said she welcomed any further scrutiny but it could “only be a criminal case if it was enacted but it wasn’t enacted”.
The Queensland premier, Annastacia Palaszczuk, told parliament on Tuesday that “serious allegations had been raised about attempts by senior figures within the One Nation party to submit false expense claims to the [ECQ]”.
“If the independent investigation of these allegations reveals gaps in our electoral laws that political parties could use to defraud taxpayers, then I will fill those gaps,” Palaszczuk said.
She added that “political parties need to know that any changes I make will also be retrospective”.
In the recording, Hanson tells the group to consider “what is the best financial outlook for us … at the end of the day”, before Ashby asks about the process for candidates making expense claims from the ECQ.
Ashby then says: “Well, we don’t need a middle man, we can make money out of this. We buy the corflutes for $5, we sell them to them [candidates] for $11.”
When officials, including then party secretary Saraya Beric, express doubt about the practice, Ashby says: “Yes we can. That’s what the Liberal party do.”
Ashby later gives the example of the party telling candidates it will cover $2,500 of a campaign materials package that costs $5,000 – but that $2,500 of this is “profit, the fat” for One Nation, with the EQC reimbursing the whole sum.
In his letter to Queensland police, Watt said it was “possible that the actions revealed may amount to a conspiracy to commit a crime” under the Queensland criminal code.
He raised with the AFP and the ECQ the possibility of a state Electoral Act offence of “knowingly lodging a claim that contains false or misleading information”.
The prime minister, Malcolm Turnbull, also said he would take advice from the AFP, and his attorney general and justice minister, on the matter.
A recording of the meeting, obtained by the Courier-Mail and ABC, which ran for more than two hours, reportedly does not contain any reference to Ashby’s idea being quashed.
But it indicates initial agreement to allow candidates to source their own printing in certain circumstances.
Ashby has defended the value of a $3,500 campaign package that emerged for One Nation candidates, which includes some products from his own printing business.
Any electoral law changes would be the second time a Queensland Labor government has passed reforms in response to allegations against Hanson and One Nation.
In 2008, the then Labor government passed reforms that tied election funding to campaign spending reported by candidates or parties.
Then premier Anna Bligh told parliament that “evidence of that expenditure for an election [is] to stop any candidate making a financial gain from the electoral funding system”.
“That is to stop the accusations that we are now seeing in the public arena against One Nation and the Pauline Hanson party,” she said.
Watt told Guardian Australia: “The Queensland government has already once had to tighten state electoral laws to stop past One Nation attempts to rort the system.”
“I would fully support any action they take now if new loopholes are being exploited.”
