Risk of regulating political speech
Opponents argued the bill would give bureaucrats too much power over political advertising and fundraising, shifting judgments about contested campaign claims away from voters and into regulation.
Electoral Legislation Amendment (Fair and Transparent Elections)
Current status
This bill did not become law and is no longer proceeding.
Policy area
Government & democracy
What does this bill do?
Political donations over $1,000 would have to be disclosed within 7 days, so voters could see who is funding parties and candidates before they vote.
Why was it introduced?
Declining trust and gaps in election rules left voters unable to quickly see who funds campaigns, exposed them to misleading political ads, and let wealthy interests and hidden donations carry disproportionate weight. This bill lowers and speeds up donation disclosure, expands what counts as a donation, bans misleading ads, caps major donations, and gives independents similar campaign rules to parties.
Broader context
Before this bill, federal election law still allowed relatively high donation disclosure thresholds, delayed reporting and narrow definitions that left fundraising dinners, paid access events and other support less visible, while trust in politics was falling and voters were exposed to misleading campaign claims. Kate Chaney’s bill responded by pushing real-time disclosureA rule that makes donations have to be reported soon after they are received, instead of months later., a lower $1,000 threshold, wider donation rules, truth-in-political-advertising bans and caps on large donors, drew wider crossbenchMembers of parliament who are not in the government or the main opposition party. backing in mid-2024, but did not pass and was removed from the Notice PaperThe parliamentary list of business to be dealt with; if a bill is removed from it, it is no longer moving forward. in November 2024.
Key criticism
The main case against the bill was that it could let regulators police political speech and donations in ways that favour some campaigners and restrict others. That criticism was raised most clearly by the Coalition, while even supportive crossbenchMembers of parliament who are not in the government or the main opposition party. senators such as David Pocock warned reforms should not entrench incumbents or disadvantage independents and smaller parties.
Who supported it?
Kate Chaney MP introduced this bill. Speeches supporting it came from Labor, Greens, Jacqui Lambie Network, some crossbenchMembers of parliament who are not in the government or the main opposition party. members.
Introduced in House 25 Mar 2024
Failed in House 19 Nov 2024
Did not reach Senate —
Did not become law —
Did it become law?
No
The bill did not complete passage through Parliament.
Final passage
No final passage
The bill has not completed passage and is no longer proceeding.
Time before failure
239 days
From introduction to the final recorded step before the bill stopped proceeding
Meaning
What does this bill do?
-
Political donations over $1,000 would have to be disclosed within 7 days, so voters could see who is funding parties and candidates before they vote.
-
Political ads and referendum ads that mislead people about facts would be banned, giving voters stronger protection against false claims during campaigns.
-
Fundraising dinners, paid access events, membership fees and other non-cash support would be treated as political donations, closing common ways money can be hidden.
-
A single donor and linked entitiesPeople or organisations that are treated as connected for donation limits so money cannot be split up to get around the cap. would face a cap of about $1.5 million per election cycle across all parties and candidates, limiting the political weight of very wealthy donors.
-
Independent candidates could register an independent campaign entityA registered structure that lets an independent candidate be treated more like a political party for some campaign rules. that would get the same legal treatment as a registered political party for key campaign rules.
Show source excerpts
-
require real-time disclosure of donations above the disclosure threshold of $1,000 by a recipient within 7 days of the donation threshold being exceeded (real-time disclosure).
Electoral Legislation Amendment (Fair and Transparent Elections) explanatory memorandum -
prohibit misleading or deceptive electoral or referendum matter in terms of the Commonwealth Electoral Amendment (Stop the Lies) Bill 2022 presented by Zali Steggall OAM MP (truth in political advertising);
Electoral Legislation Amendment (Fair and Transparent Elections) explanatory memorandum -
By Part 4 of Schedule 1, all monetary and in-kind payments (beyond reasonable consideration for a benefit) are to be treated as a gift/donation including fundraising dinners, cash for access “business forums” and other events, as well as membership fees that benefit a political entity or candidate. Any such payments greater than $1,000 will be disclosable under the new disclosure threshold regime.
Electoral Legislation Amendment (Fair and Transparent Elections) explanatory memorandum -
A cap set at 2% of the total amount of public funding at the previous election equates to approximately $1.5 million for the next federal election (on current public funding levels) and would have been $1.4 million for the 2022 election.
Electoral Legislation Amendment (Fair and Transparent Elections) explanatory memorandum -
The Bill proposes to establish an Independent Campaign Entity that will be treated the same way as a registered political party.
Electoral Legislation Amendment (Fair and Transparent Elections) explanatory memorandum
Context
Broader context for this bill
Before this bill, federal election law still allowed relatively high donation disclosure thresholds, delayed reporting and narrow definitions that left fundraising dinners, paid access events and other support less visible, while trust in politics was falling and voters were exposed to misleading campaign claims. Kate Chaney’s bill responded by pushing real-time disclosureA rule that makes donations have to be reported soon after they are received, instead of months later., a lower $1,000 threshold, wider donation rules, truth-in-political-advertising bans and caps on large donors, drew wider crossbenchMembers of parliament who are not in the government or the main opposition party. backing in mid-2024, but did not pass and was removed from the Notice PaperThe parliamentary list of business to be dealt with; if a bill is removed from it, it is no longer moving forward. in November 2024.
- 25 Mar 2024
Kate Chaney introduces a bill to tighten federal election rules
Chaney told the House that declining trust in politics meant voters needed faster donation disclosure, protection from misleading ads and less financial influence over elections.
Hansard ↗ - 25 Mar 2024
The bill sets out lower disclosure thresholds and broader donation rules
Its explanatory material proposed cutting the disclosure threshold from $16,300 to $1,000, requiring reporting within 7 days and treating fundraising dinners, business forums and membership fees as donations.
Explanatory memorandum ↗ - 25 Mar 2024
The bill also targets false campaign claims and large donors
The package would ban misleading or deceptive electoral and referendum matter and cap the combined giving of a donor and linked entitiesPeople or organisations that are treated as connected for donation limits so money cannot be split up to get around the cap. across an election cycle.
Explanatory memorandum ↗ - 04 July 2024
A matching Senate bill shows broader crossbenchMembers of parliament who are not in the government or the main opposition party. backing for the same reforms
Senator Pocock said the Senate version had support from 29 MPs and senators, showing the push for donation transparency and fairer campaign rules had spread beyond one lower-house bill.
Hansard ↗ - 04 July 2024
Government and Coalition speeches show the bill faced resistance
In Senate debate the government said it was discussing electoral reform separately while the Coalition said it would not support changes it believed were tilted or inconsistent with free political communication.
Hansard ↗ - 19 Nov 2024
The House bill is removed from the Notice PaperThe parliamentary list of business to be dealt with; if a bill is removed from it, it is no longer moving forward.
With no further progress recorded, the bill was removed from the Notice PaperThe parliamentary list of business to be dealt with; if a bill is removed from it, it is no longer moving forward. under standing order 42 and did not become law.
Parliamentary timeline ↗
Legislative route
How did it move through Parliament?
House Senate
Introduced 25 Mar 2024
The bill was formally presented to the chamber and read a first time, which starts its parliamentary journey.
Introduced and read a first time
Second reading opened 25 Mar 2024
A minister or sponsoring member moved the second reading, opening the main debate on the bill's purpose and principles.
Second reading moved
Scrutiny of Bills review 16 May 2024
The scrutiny committee recorded that it considered the bill in Scrutiny Digest 6 of 2024.
Considered
Collected source bundleRemoved from the Notice PaperThe parliamentary list of business to be dealt with; if a bill is removed from it, it is no longer moving forward. in accordance with (SO 42) 19 Nov 2024
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
Key criticism
The main case against this bill
The main case against the bill was that it could let regulators police political speech and donations in ways that favour some campaigners and restrict others. That criticism was raised most clearly by the Coalition, while even supportive crossbenchMembers of parliament who are not in the government or the main opposition party. senators such as David Pocock warned reforms should not entrench incumbents or disadvantage independents and smaller parties.
Opposition was real but limited; most speakers cited here supported the bill or its goals.
Could favour established players
A narrower concern was that donation and campaign rules need careful design so they do not lock in advantages for major parties and sitting politicians at the expense of challengers, independents and smaller parties.
Further sources
Votes
Recorded votes
No recorded votes were found before this bill stopped proceeding.
Parliamentary debate
Who spoke, and what they said
Start here — lead voices
Sponsor speech Supports
Kate Chaney
Chaney supports the bill and says it is a practical way to advance electoral reform based on transparency, truth and limiting financial influence.
Read in Hansard ↗ Lead opposing voice Opposes
James McGrath
McGrath says the coalition will oppose the bill because it unfairly favours certain political participants and would use regulation to limit speech and participation.
Read in Hansard ↗ Lead supporting voice Supports
Larissa Waters
Waters supports the bill and says it is a comprehensive package of electoral reforms to clean up politics, including truth in advertising, lower donation disclosure thresholds, donation caps, and bans on donations from harmful industries.
Read in Hansard ↗ Lead non-major voice Supports
David Pocock
Pocock supports the bill and says it should improve trust in elections through more transparency, limits on big money and truth in political advertisingA rule that would stop ads from making false or misleading factual claims about elections or referendums..
Read in Hansard ↗All speeches by bloc
Labor
1 speaker · 1 support
Labor
1 speaker · 1 support
-
Tim Ayres Ayres supports the bill and says Labor wants to strengthen electoral transparency and accountability through lower disclosure thresholds, real-time disclosureA rule that makes donations have to be reported soon after they are received, instead of months later., and caps on donations and spending.
“The key reforms are in three areas: lowering the disclosure threshold, real-time disclosure, and caps on election donations and expenditure.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
Coalition
1 speaker · 1 oppose
Coalition
1 speaker · 1 oppose
-
James McGrath ★ McGrath says the coalition will oppose the bill because it unfairly favours certain political participants and would use regulation to limit speech and participation.
“The coalition will not support attempts to legislate amendments to the Electoral Act that are targeted at supporting certain political participants or types of political participants. Rather, the coalition contends that all parties and candidates ought to be treated equally and that legislation ought to aim to encourage political participation, not thwart it with regulation. Indeed, legislation ought to improve our democracy for all Australians, not support partisan interest.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
Greens
1 speaker · 1 support
Greens
1 speaker · 1 support
-
Larissa Waters ★ Waters supports the bill and says it is a comprehensive package of electoral reforms to clean up politics, including truth in advertising, lower donation disclosure thresholds, donation caps, and bans on donations from harmful industries.
“This bill has rules about truth in political advertising, lowering the disclosure threshold for donations so you can see who is paying whom and changing the definition of 'gift' so that fancy dinners and business roundtable subscriptions are no longer secret and are no longer hidden dark money. It includes a donations cap. It includes a ban on donations from the tobacco industry, the gambling industry, the alcohol industry and, importantly, the fossil fuel sector, something that the Greens feel very strongly about. It bans donations from people seeking contracts from the government or who have already received a contract from the government. It includes limitations on the government using publicly funded advertising in the lead-up to an election. It moves to include more senators in the territories and has a handful of other pro-democratic reforms.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
Minor parties and independents
4 speakers · 4 support
Minor parties and independents
4 speakers · 4 support
-
David Pocock ★ Pocock supports the bill and says it should improve trust in elections through more transparency, limits on big money and truth in political advertisingA rule that would stop ads from making false or misleading factual claims about elections or referendums..
“I stand to speak in support of the Electoral Legislation Amendment (Fair and Transparent Elections) Bill 2024 (No. 2), which is co-sponsored by Senators Waters, Lambie and Thorpe.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Jacqui Lambie Lambie supports the bill and says the government should back it because it would make elections fairer and more transparent, especially by limiting dark political money and giving independents and minor parties a better chance.
“If Minister Farrell was telling the truth then he should show the Australian public he's fair dinkum and back in this bill. If he doesn't, the small amount of faith Australians still have in the major parties will keep falling and voters will turn in ever greater numbers to Independents and micros. Be my guest; try your luck. I'm keen. Bring on your bill; let's see what you've got. Let's see how the public feels about that. We will fight you out there and press at every turn. And, if you think that's going to win you more seats in the next election, once again, be my guest.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Kate Chaney ★ Chaney supports the bill and says it is a practical way to advance electoral reform based on transparency, truth and limiting financial influence.
“That's why I commend this bill to the House.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗ -
Zali Steggall Steggall supports the bill and says it is urgently needed to improve integrity, transparency and accountability in elections, including truth-in-political-advertising rules and tighter donation controls.
“This bill is urgently needed to give voters that transparency and choice. It will improve accountability, it will protect voters from outright lies, it will reduce financial influence and it will level the playing field and limit excessive donations.”
Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
Record
Full record
- Status
- Not Proceeding -- Collected from the APH bill page.
- Originating house
- House of Representatives
- 25 Mar 2024
House · Introduced and read a first time
Introduced
The bill was formally presented to the chamber and read a first time, which starts its parliamentary journey.
- 25 Mar 2024
House · Second reading moved
Second reading opened
A minister or sponsoring member moved the second reading, opening the main debate on the bill's purpose and principles.
- 19 Nov 2024
House · Removed from the Notice Paper in accordance with (SO 42)
Removed from the Notice PaperThe parliamentary list of business to be dealt with; if a bill is removed from it, it is no longer moving forward. in accordance with (SO 42)
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
Senate Standing Committee for the Scrutiny of Bills
Considered
The scrutiny committee recorded that it considered the bill in Scrutiny Digest 6 of 2024.
Considered by scrutiny committee (16 May 2024): Senate Standing Committee for the Scrutiny of Bills; Scrutiny Digest 6 of 2024
Collected source bundle