The latest episode of the New Politics podcast looks at the federal government’s proposed changes to donation laws, highlighting both their potential and their pitfalls. While monthly disclosures of donations over $1,000 and increased public funding per vote mark improvements, the legislation seems tailored to benefit major political parties, sidelining smaller parties and independents. These rushed changes, spanning 221 pages of legislation, could discourage new entrants into politics and bolster the financial dominance of established players.
This contains a unhealthy mix of money, power and politics, and we question whether the changes truly address the electorate’s desire for alternatives to major parties. The reforms aim to curb excessive donations from figures like Clive Palmer while equally targeting entities like Climate 200. However, the legislation’s loopholes, including resetting donation caps post-election and allowing multiple donations to state branches, raise concerns about its effectiveness. These changes won’t be implemented until 2026, so why the rush?
We then look at the government’s broader legislative approach, particularly on climate change and immigration. With emissions targets for 2035 delayed until 2025, we critique the reactive nature of the Albanese government, which seems more focused on avoiding conflict with the Coalition than leading decisively. As the world accelerates its energy transition, Australia risks being left behind, bogged down by internal climate wars and cautious policymaking.
On immigration, the Albanese government faces backlash for capping international student numbers at 270,000 – a move tied to housing affordability debates rather than educational or economic rationale. This legislation, aimed at appeasing anti-immigration sentiment, has drawn criticism from both the Australian Greens and the Coalition. Why does a Labor government insist on negotiating with the Coalition, which consistently opposes Labor’s proposals, rather than a favourable crossbench? It doesn’t make sense and these are missed opportunities to achieve meaningful reform.
We look the controversial Deportation Powers bill, which introduces draconian measures for refugee policy. This is Labor attempting to outdo the Coalition on tough immigration stances, perpetuating a 26-year trend of harmful refugee policies.
Finally, we explore the double-standards in the Senate censure of Senators Lidia Thorpe and Ralph Babet. Thorpe’s protest against King Charles drew disproportionate media attention compared to Babet’s racist, homophobic, and violent rhetoric. This imbalance reflects systemic biases in media coverage, which tend to target Indigenous voices challenging the status quo while minimising the actions of far-right figures.
Share this post