The Queensland MP who quit the LNP over its changes to electoral donation and advertising laws said the current donation laws were "not only unnecessary" they were "actively eroding" public trust.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
The former member for Stafford, Chris Davis, whose resignation led to a historical swing against the government in the July by-election, told a Transparency International debate late last week that he had been "ruthlessly ready" to take the long view on election donation and spending laws "and was dealt with equally ruthlessly".
Dr Davis developed a reputation for speaking out against government policy he believed was "ill-advised", including the doctor contracts dispute.
He polled his electorate ahead of the parliamentary vote on changes to the Crime and Misconduct Commission and found the majority of respondents were against the changes.
While he ultimately decided to give the new corruption watchdog a chance, he resigned in late May after criticising the government's changes to the electoral donation laws.
The government has defended the change, which means donations under $12,400 do not have to be declared, as being in line with federal government requirements. It also lifted the electoral spending cap, meaning political parties can spend as much as they want in any electorate in the next election.
Dr Davis said he believed that could prove damaging to democracy.
"Modern politics has become a big business with high stakes for consumers and providers," he said.
"It is fiercely competitive with parties eager to see their particular policies and leaders favoured by voters.
"Expensive advertising is perceived as critical in positioning one's product ahead of the competition.
"Political strategists recognise the ability of advertising to bypass our logical brain and appeal to our emotions. Advertising can persuade us to do things that are contrary to our personal interests, such as overeat, overspend, drink and gamble. Much of this is justified with the mantra that we are free to make bad choices.
"The line has been drawn with some advertising, such as smoking.
"Paid political advertising is regarded as essential in Australian politics, despite little evidence of its effectiveness, and certainly none that I know of that shows it helps inform logical decisions.
"There is no obligation for truth in such advertising. Democracies where it is banned tend to have governments that score more highly on trust.
"Brian Eno, adviser to deputy UK PM Nick Clegg, as observed that – 'when governments rely increasingly on sophisticated public relations agencies, public debate disappears and is replaced by competing propaganda campaigns, with all the accompanying deceits.
"Advertising isn't about truth or fairness or rationality, but about mobilising deeper and more primitive layers of the human mind.
"...We nevertheless persist with this probably deleterious activity, so perpetuating a further hazard – namely party and candidate reliance on significant funding from wealthy third parties. Such third parties generally have no obligations to their stakeholders that are not synonymous with the public interest, thereby creating the risk and reality of corruption of due diligence and due process in democratic government.
"...I stand by my view that political advertising may well contribute to perverse outcomes for voters, whilst the obligations inherent in funding the advertising create a further moral hazard for our democracy."
