Stay up to date with the latest from the QCCL
“Restrictions on political expenditure are plainly restrictions on freedom of speech. However, restrictions on electoral expenditure are akin to the rules of debate in a meeting which restrict the length of speeches and provide for rights of reply. This feature of expenditure caps makes them more acceptable than donation bans or caps.”
Read MoreThe government's role as an intellectual arbiter of the truth in social and political debate must be constricted, if not completely denied. This is based on a deep skepticism about the good faith of those controlling the government. That skepticism flows from the fact that decisions about what is true or false, when made by those in power, are bound up with political perspectives of those in power. In that regard the government is not impartial when it comes to contested disputes about the facts underlying political life. This is not meant to be some conspiracy theory. It derives from the fact that in the words of Lord Acton “All power tends to corrupt.”
Read MoreRestrictions on electoral expenditure are akin to the rules of debate in a meeting which restricts the length of speeches and provide for rights of reply. In the context of political speech, the restrictions are essential to fairness, in that the arms race between various political players is continuously increasing the cost of elections, which results in an increasing number of people being excluded from the political process. Capping expenditure would also help to create closer financial equality between candidates at elections
Read MoreThe expenditure cap for third parties should strike a fair balance between respect for freedom of speech and association, and the importance of preventing third parties exercising disproportionate influence in elections and being used to circumvent expenditure caps. The current proposal is that each third party can spend the same amount as all the mayoral candidate caps combined. This is absurd. This system permits every third party the same influence, in expenditure terms, as all the mayoral candidates combined. It is hard to see how this system would not inevitably lead to the exact outcome the system purports to be trying to avoid – that being the complete drowning out of other election participants’ voices.
Read MoreA law requiring people to register with the Council before they can exercise their right to express a political opinion on their own private property is fundamentally repugnant to the whole concept of freedom of speech” says Michael Cope President of the QCCL
Read MoreRestrictions on electoral expenditure are akin to the rules of debate in a meeting which restrict the length of speeches and provide for rights of reply. This feature of expenditure caps makes them more acceptable than donation bans or caps.
Read MoreA Human Rights Act is not a panacea, ultimately only an active citizenry can protect our rights and liberties. However, the Act will provide a new tool that citizens of this State can use to protect themselves
Read MoreVoter Identification Laws Should be Rejected: Last week the Queensland Government introduced a Bill which will require voters to produce identification before voting at state elections. Michael Cope, President of the QCCL, said today, “Voter identification laws will unjustifiably disenfranchise the elderly, the young, the poor and the disadvantaged.”
Read More
