Finlayson Christopher: Electoral Finance Bill — In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
Finlayson Christopher: Electoral Finance Bill — In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
[Volume:644;Page:13545] 
CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON (National) 
: 
 I will take a call just to focus on clause 25A(2). This was inserted by the majority of Justice and Electoral Committee members over the objections of National members and states: “If an anonymous party donation exceeding $1000 is received by a party’s financial agent the financial agent must within 20 working days of receipt of the donation pay to the Electoral Commission the amount of the donation … less $1000.” That is the way the clause will work. 
But it is important to note that my Supplementary Order Paper suggests that the amount in question should be $4000 and I want to tell the Committee how I reach that figure. The officials’ advice for anonymous party donations was that something between the figure of $2000 and $5000 should be permitted. We have gone for $4000 for the simple fact that it is somewhere between $2000 and $5000. But it is important to recount just what exactly the Ministry of Justice advice said. The ministry’s advice was that there are strong reasons for setting the cap on anonymous donations at a somewhat higher level for political parties than for candidates and third parties. 
The reasons are reasonably straightforward. First the bill allows political parties obviously to spend significantly more on campaign expenditure than third parties and candidates. Setting the same threshold for donations across the board does not recognise this obvious fact. Secondly there are legitimate arguments around freedom of speech and privacy. Political parties traditionally obtain a certain level of support through donations and the argument essentially is that individuals should be able to give monetary support to a particular political party directly without being identified. The third matter—and it is obviously one that the National Party has been stressing time and time again in the course of this debate as we confront this bureaucratic nightmare—is the bureaucratic cost in compliance to political parties which also needs to be considered. In terms of cost to the Public Service the Electoral Commission has to handle all these anonymous donations and it imposes a bureaucratic cost that can be circumvented if parties receive a higher proportion of donations directly. That is also a factor that impacts on the cost to political parties. 
So for those reasons—[ 
Interruption 
]—and I hear Mr Woolerton squawking. It was the ministry’s advice not my advice I say to Mr Woolerton that the Committee should consider the threshold for anonymous donations to third parties and candidates at a lower level than that for political parties. That is why we have gone for that figure of $4000. 
I will say something next about clause 25C because it raises an important practical matter that the Minister may want to reflect on. Mr Ryall has spoken about the “Owen Glenn clause” clause 25C(1)(a) referring to that Labour Party luvvy from Rose Bay in that very safe Liberal seat of Wentworth held by the excellent Malcolm Turnbull. When I made that comment last week of course Mr Chauvel interjected and said: “Not for much longer”. Well I think Mr Chauvel will recognise that it is still a good safe Liberal seat. But I do not want to upset Mr Chauvel unnecessarily. 
Another provision needs to be referred to and that is subclause (b). I will focus on subclause (b) which deals with body corporates “incorporated outside New Zealand;”. My understanding is that a number of companies are incorporated in Australia although they may be based in New Zealand. I am not sure about Sky City; I have an idea that it may well be incorporated in Australia but that it gives to a number of political parties in New Zealand. I am just concerned that if one takes the interpretation “body corporate incorporated outside New Zealand” it could unwittingly catch a number of companies that are based in New Zealand and that currently give to both the National Party and the Labour Party and it could limit the amount they are able to give. So that is why we make that change.