The Albanese government is considering a range of changes in a last-ditch effort to pass its stalled electoral reform proposals after criticism from crossbench MPs that the current spending limit would crowd out new independent challengers.
The special minister of state, Don Farrell, is considering amendments to the government bill to increase spending and gifts caps, although it is unclear how much the government is willing to budge.
Under the current proposal, each electorate and independent candidate would have a cap of $800,000, while a federal political party would have a campaign cap of $90m. There would be separate caps for each state and territory based on size, and groups not running in elections would be limited to spending $11m on a federal campaign.
The bill in its current form would also cap individual donations or gifts at $20,000 and increase public funding to parties and independents from $3.35 a vote to $5.
Ahead of what could be the last sitting week before an election, Guardian Australia understands the government has looked at increasing spending caps for candidates.
Farrell has said he is consulting with the crossbench and the Coalition on reforms but the independent Goldstein MP, Zoe Daniel, derided the consultation efforts as an “illusion of due process”.
Despite potential concessions being offered by Farrell, independents remain concerned the bill would enshrine significant advantages for the major parties and “entrench” the two-party system.
On Tuesday, the crossbench senators David Pocock and Jacqui Lambie told ABC RN Breakfast it was “rubbish” an independent candidate could win by spending only $800,000 on a campaign.
Independent MPs and senators have called for the bill to be split, pledging to support part of the bill that deals with the real-time disclosure of donations, but it is understood Farrell has ruled that out.
On Monday, Pocock and Kate Chaney met with Farrell, and on Thursday they were provided with a departmental briefing, but it is understood little progress was made on negotiations.
Chaney said parties have 13 advantages, including the ability to shift campaign spending for a candidate in an unwinnable seat.
“I met with the department staff on Thursday and they confirmed that none of these 13 party advantages have been addressed in the legislation,” she told Guardian Australia.
“The big problem with it is that if you’ve got national TV advertising, that can be paid for out of [an] unwinnable seat … so parties can spend twice or three times as much as an independent just saying vote Liberal or vote Labor.”
The government was close to a deal with the Coalition in December, which independents had called a “stitch up”, before Labor pulled the bill at the 11th hour. Farrell has continued speaking with the opposition, but has since also opened up further discussion with crossbenchers.
after newsletter promotion
In November, the independent MP Allegra Spender put forward an amendment to increase the spending cap for independent candidates, not attached to a political party, by 150%.
That would mean independent candidates would have up to $1.2m to spend, rather than $800,000.
That amendment failed in the house and Spender said that since last year “Minister Farrell hasn’t been in touch with me over the summer to discuss electoral reform”.
“He couldn’t even be bothered to show up to brief the crossbench when the bills were introduced to the house last year.”
Daniel also said she had not been consulted by Farrell or his office, but had been working closely with Chaney.
She believed Farrell had not been doing adequate consultation with the crossbench.
“I think by saying they’ve consulted with the crossbench, they’re trying to create the illusion of due process,” she told Guardian Australia.
“But the outcome will be that the public will pay more for elections in return for less choice, so from a democracy point of view, it’s a complete stitch up.”