Last week, The Juice Media published a YouTube video, Honest Government Ad | How to rig elections.
It pointed out how little difference there is with the two major parties: Labor and the Liberal-Nationals coalition.
The lack of difference on the following don’t appear to be in contention: both parties support tax cuts for the rich, the endless spending on armaments (i.e. nuke subs), outlawing peaceful protests, screwing refugees and whistleblowers, giving their mates plum jobs and ‘doing whatever Santos tells us to do’.
Juice Media made the point that excluding other political voices appears, by far, the overriding bond that both parties share.
Another point was that the Labor and the Liberal-Nationals coalition allegiances to large tax-dodging corporations provides them with the war chest to keep the corporate media manipulation/charade/hypnosis/clown show operational. And in control.
It takes a lot of cash to say ‘look over there’ while cheerfully destroying the joint.
Anyway, Juice Media’s source was recommendations from the Joint Committee on Electoral Matters around the ‘Conduct of the 2022 federal election and other matters’.
They examined the interim report, which appears to be somewhat different from the final report, which was released last week.
According to the final report, some of the committee recommendations around preserving the two party oligarchy were dropped, and instead more transparency is proposed.
It’s enough to make the average entitled political tyrant MP choke over their Dom Perignon Rose Gold Methuselah.
Final recommendations
The final recommendations include ‘real time’ disclosure requirements for donations to political parties and candidates; lowering the donation disclosure threshold to $1,000; amending the definition of ‘gift’ in the Electoral Act; introducing donation caps for federal election donations; and the introduction of measures to govern truth in political advertising.
Would such recommendations, if enacted, instil more confidence in the political process?
UK comedian David Mitchell makes the point that one way to reform politics is paying politicians ‘a lot more’, while making sure they ‘can’t do anything else, and that includes after they retire’.
This, he says, would ensure the unfair influence of lobbyists is massively reduced. Yet he admits it’s an unpopular manifesto that will never be put into action.
Whether political donations are in the public interest is the key.
With the election of the independent Teal candidates in 2022, it proved that when enough individuals donate to a political cause, it paves the way for political reform.
Pointing out the inherent corruption of politicians being paid for favours just doesn’t seem as effective, does it? After all, corruption exists, and will always permeate, throughout all levels of society, from low-level public servants to national leaders.
Hans Lovejoy, editor
For four decades The Echo has printed the stories some people loved, some people hated, and some pretended not to read. If you want us to keep telling the truth, the real truth, not the sugar-coated version. We’ll need your support to keep the presses rolling. 
