This bill did not become law and is no longer proceeding.
Government & democracy
Donations over $1,000 would have to be disclosed within 7 days, so voters could see significant political money before they vote.
Declining trust and a sense that elections are rigged exposed gaps in donation disclosure, dark moneyPolitical money that is hidden from public view because it falls below disclosure rules or is routed through other payment types. rules and protection against misleading political ads. The bill lowers and speeds up donation disclosure, expands what counts as a donation, bans some industry donations and false ads, and adds territory senators.
Australia’s federal election laws still allowed relatively high donation disclosure thresholds, slower reporting and no federal ban on misleading political advertising, while crossbench MPs and senators spent years proposing separate fixes on donations, truth in political ads and dirty money. As trust in politics fell and concerns grew that powerful donors and incumbents had too much advantage, this 2024 bill bundled those reforms with extra territory Senate representation, drew broad crossbench backing in debate, but ultimately lapsed when the Parliament ended in July 2025.
The main criticism was that the bill would hand too much power to officials to police election claims and political donations, risking censorship and distorted campaign competition. That case was raised most clearly by Coalition senator James McGrath, while the broader debate otherwise showed support or no clear opposition from other speakers recorded here.
Senator David Pocock introduced this bill. Speeches supporting it came from Labor, Greens, Jacqui Lambie Network, some crossbench members.
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
483 days
From introduction to the final recorded step before the bill stopped proceeding
Meaning
Donations over $1,000 would have to be disclosed within 7 days, so voters could see significant political money before they vote.
Political and referendum ads that are misleading or deceptive would be banned, creating a federal truth-in-political-advertising rule.
Fundraising dinners, pay-for-access events, membership fees and other non-cash support would be treated as donations when they benefit a party or candidate.
Tobacco, fossil fuel, gambling and liquor businesses would be banned from making political donations.
The ACT and the Northern Territory would each elect three senators at every federal election, and those senators would serve six-year terms.
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) Bill 2024 (No. 2) 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) Bill 2024 (No. 2) explanatory memorandum
broaden the definition of a gift (donation) to cover all monetary and in-kind payments including fundraising dinners, cash for access ‘business forums’ and other events, as well as membership fees that benefit a political entity or candidate (broaden gift/donation definition to capture dark money);Electoral Legislation Amendment (Fair and Transparent Elections) Bill 2024 (No. 2) explanatory memorandum
prohibit political donations from entities that inflict social harm for profit, such as tobacco, fossil fuels, gambling and liquor business entities (social harm donations);Electoral Legislation Amendment (Fair and Transparent Elections) Bill 2024 (No. 2) explanatory memorandum
Three senators from each of the Australian Capital Territory and the Northern Territory will be elected at each federal election on six year terms. This harmonises arrangements for the States under Section 13 of the Constitution.Electoral Legislation Amendment (Fair and Transparent Elections) Bill 2024 (No. 2) explanatory memorandum
Context
Australia’s federal election laws still allowed relatively high donation disclosure thresholds, slower reporting and no federal ban on misleading political advertising, while crossbench MPs and senators spent years proposing separate fixes on donations, truth in political ads and dirty money. As trust in politics fell and concerns grew that powerful donors and incumbents had too much advantage, this 2024 bill bundled those reforms with extra territory Senate representation, drew broad crossbench backing in debate, but ultimately lapsed when the Parliament ended in July 2025.
Rebekha Sharkie proposes a lower federal donation disclosure thresholdThe amount a donation must pass before it has to be reported; this bill would lower it to $1,000.
An earlier private member's bill pushed to cut the threshold, foreshadowing one of the core transparency changes later bundled into this bill.
Electoral Legislation Amendment (Fair and Transparent Elections) Bill 2024 (No. 2) explanatory memorandum ↗Separate crossbench and Greens bills target donations and dirty money
Bills promoted by Senator Jacqui Lambie and the Greens showed an existing push to tighten donation rules and block harmful-industry political money.
Electoral Legislation Amendment (Fair and Transparent Elections) Bill 2024 (No. 2) explanatory memorandum ↗Zali Steggall's Stop the Lies bill puts truth in political advertisingA proposed rule that would ban misleading or deceptive election and referendum ads at the federal level. on the agenda
That earlier bill supplied the model later used here for a federal ban on misleading or deceptive electoral and referendum matter.
Electoral Legislation Amendment (Fair and Transparent Elections) Bill 2024 (No. 2) explanatory memorandum ↗Pocock's comments on the electoral matters committee report press for fairer funding rules
His comments argued any funding changes should help new entrants rather than entrench incumbents, shaping the later package's emphasis on competition and transparency.
Electoral Legislation Amendment (Fair and Transparent Elections) Bill 2024 (No. 2) explanatory memorandum ↗Senators introduce a single bill combining disclosure, truth-in-advertising and donation bans
The bill brought together lower $1,000 disclosure thresholds, seven-day reporting, broader donation definitions, bans on some industry donors and extra territory senators in one reform package.
Parliamentary timeline ↗Crossbench senators argue the bill would curb vested-interest influence and clean up federal elections
Supporters said the measure had backing from 29 MPs and senators as a response to donor influence, dark moneyPolitical money that is hidden from public view because it falls below disclosure rules or is routed through other payment types. and false political advertising.
Hansard ↗The bill lapses at the end of Parliament
Because it did not complete passage before the Parliament ended, none of its proposed federal transparency, donation or territory representation changes became law.
Parliamentary timeline ↗Legislative route
The bill was formally presented to the chamber and read a first time, which starts its parliamentary journey.
Introduced and read a first time
A minister or sponsoring member moved the second reading, opening the main debate on the bill's purpose and principles.
Second reading moved
The scrutiny committee recorded that it considered the bill in Scrutiny Digest 6 of 2024.
Considered
Collected source bundleThe bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
Key criticism
The main criticism was that the bill would hand too much power to officials to police election claims and political donations, risking censorship and distorted campaign competition. That case was raised most clearly by Coalition senator James McGrath, while the broader debate otherwise showed support or no clear opposition from other speakers recorded here.
Criticism recorded here was concentrated in the Coalition's free-speech and fairness objections.
Officials policing political speech
The strongest objection was to the bill's ban on misleading or deceptive political advertising, with critics arguing it would let bureaucrats judge contested political claims instead of leaving that to voters, the media and public debate.
Partisan advantage from the rules
Critics also argued the package could tilt the field toward some candidates by regulating donations and campaign conduct in ways they saw as politically selective rather than neutral.
Further sources
Votes
No recorded votes were found before this bill stopped proceeding.
Parliamentary debate
Start here — lead voices
Pocock supports the bill and says it would improve transparency, reduce financial influence, level the playing field and give the Territories fairer representation.
Read in Hansard ↗McGrath says the coalition will oppose the bill because it would let bureaucrats police political speech and create a partisan advantage for some candidates.
Read in Hansard ↗Larissa Waters supports the bill as a comprehensive crossbench package to make elections fairer and more transparent.
Read in Hansard ↗Jacqui Lambie supports the bill and wants the government to back it, saying it would make elections fairer and more transparent by reducing the advantage of the major parties.
Read in Hansard ↗All speeches by bloc
1 speaker · 1 support
“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 ↗
1 speaker · 1 oppose
“The coalition will always look at proposals to enhance Australia's democracy, but we will not support any proposals that will bring in a financial gerrymander or a political gerrymander or a 'tealmander' that limits the ability of one side of politics or a class of voters to participate in our Liberal democracy.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
1 speaker · 1 support
“This is a comprehensive bill. It demonstrates that the government has a pathway through this parliament, if it wishes, to actually legislate some reforms to clean up politics.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
2 speakers · 3 contributions · 2 support
Hansard records 2 separate contributions by David Pocock on this bill. They are grouped here so the speaker is listed once.
Second reading speech
Pocock supports the bill and says it would improve transparency, reduce financial influence, level the playing field and give the Territories fairer representation. He argues these reforms are needed to stop money skewing elections and to make it easier for new representatives to emerge.
“This bill lays out 12 reforms to improve transparency, reduce financial influence, level the playing field and provide fair representation for the Territories.”Read this contribution in Hansard ↗
Second reading speech
Pocock supports the bill and says it is needed to restore trust in democracy through more transparency, limits on big money and protections against lies in election advertising. He also wants the government to ensure any broader reform package does not entrench incumbents and improves territory representation.
“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 this contribution in Hansard ↗
“If this government is really serious about levelling the playing field, they would jump on board this crossbench bill today because it is fair for all.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
Record
Senate · 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.
Senate · 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.
Senate · Second reading debate
Second reading debate
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
Senate · Lapsed at end of Parliament
Lapsed at end of Parliament
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
