Shadow Assistant Minister for Competition, Charities and Treasury – Opinion Piece – The West Australian – Our Democracy Is In Decline

Media Coverage, Updates and Videos, Opinion

SENATOR DEAN SMITH SHADOW ASSISTANT MINISTER FOR COMPETITION, CHARITIES AND TREASURY SENATOR FOR WESTERN AUSTRALIA OPINION PIECE – THE WEST AUSTRALIAN 22 October 2024 OUR DEMOCRACY IS IN DECLINE Former US president Ronald Reagan once commented that “freedom is a fragile thing … it is not ours by way of inheritance; it must be fought for and defended constantly by each generation”. True words remind us that our way of life is never guaranteed. Democracy, both in Australia and elsewhere, is not a finished product. It is vulnerable by nature, and that means we have an ongoing responsibility to ensure that Australian democracy is as robust as possible. The former Coalition government met this standard — during almost a decade of Liberal-National administrations, Australia was consistently ranked in the top 10 most democratic nations in the world by The Economist Democracy Index. Labor has single-handedly undone this record. Australia ranked equal ninth in 2021, but after one year of the Albanese Government, we plummeted six places to 15th and sit at equal 14th in the most recent rankings. Given our neighbours in New Zealand are ranked second in the world, Australians have a right to wonder what is going wrong here. Exploring the metrics used by The Economist provides a fuller picture. While Australia has maintained perfect scores for some categories, such as our electoral process, we have been marked down significantly in others. On the metric of “political participation” we have fallen from 7.78 to 7.22, and on “political culture” dropped from 8.75 to 7.50. Thankfully, our voting system and our democratic institutions are doing fine. What is under strain is our democratic culture, the extent to which Australians are encouraged to participate in the political system and the openness of our public debate. This decline in our democratic health is deeply concerning. But this isn’t the fault of the Australian people, nor is it the result of manipulation from a bad faith actor overseas. It is the direct result of the way Labor governs. And it isn’t new: imposing an oversized, cumbersome and overreaching government on the Australian people is part of their DNA. Labor’s tendency to push bad laws that undermine freedom is confirmed by the historical record. In 2012, the last it was in power, Labor introduced new “self-regulation” media laws that would have left the Australian press vulnerable to interference from the Government. Then News Limited chief Kim Williams called the proposed legislation “Soviet-style” because of the dramatic changes they would have made to freedom of the press. Mr Williams went on to say that the way Labor tried to rush it through Parliament, in just one sitting week, with limited public consultation, was like putting “a gun to the head of the Parliament, our industry, and the Australian public”. Fortunately, that Bill failed. But many are now feeling a sense of déjà vu. The Albanese Government is steaming ahead with its own controversial “misinformation and disinformation” legislation. And, rather than trusting the robustness of our parliamentary process to weed out bad ideas, or fashion them into better ones, Labor is again attempting to ram these new laws through Parliament as quickly as possible. Australians were given barely a week to make submissions to a Senate inquiry on the Bill. Probably because when it tried to launch similar laws last year, more than 20,000 submissions were received opposing them. Australians must not be any less vigilant this time around. Labor’s Bill seeks to establish unprecedented powers for the communications minister — powers that would allow them to personally order misinformation investigations and hearings on terms of their own choosing. It would also create a two-tier standard for free speech, with different rules for different people. If a statement is made by an academic or comedian, for example, it can be counted as legitimate, but if that same statement is made by another Australian, it could be considered ‘misinformation’ and therefore ‘harmful’. And the statement wouldn’t need to be intentionally deceptive or malicious to be illegal, meaning it could be used to stifle the genuinely held opinions of fair-minded Australians. It stems from the loose definitions of ‘harm’ and ‘serious harm’ caused by speech, which would include remarks considered damaging to the environment or the economy. Say someone comments online that they don’t believe in Climate Change: that could be considered misinformation, harmful to the environment, and eligible to be censored. I am no climate science denier, but that doesn’t mean I think people who hold an opposing view should be suppressed. In a democracy, we settle differences through evidence and open discussion, not censorship. The Law Council of Australia takes a similar view, noting in its submission on the Bill that the definitions are “overbroad”, and that the concepts of ‘harm’ and ‘serious harm’, “each involve value judgements that are likely to be contestable and politically sensitive”. This is especially the case when you consider the way Labor wants to enforce these new free speech caveats. They propose a punitive system of fines, levied by the unelected officials at the Australian Communications and Media Authority, that will pressure social media companies to delete user content that could be considered misinformation or disinformation. Meta, Twitter, TikTok, and others will not be fined for censoring too much to meet the Government’s nominated standard, but they will face significant penalties for not censoring enough. For the most part, these companies care less for the free speech of Australians than they do about their bottom line, so it is no stretch to imagine them setting up an algorithm that automatically censors posts online without nuance. We cannot allow this scenario to become our reality. The fact we are no longer a top ten democracy, a distinction we have held since The Economist began its index in 2006, is a national embarrassment and needs to be immediately reversed. But if this Bill is passed, it would further the weakening of our democracy. There can be no doubt that misinformation and…

Shadow Assistant Minister for Competition, Charities and Treasury – Media Release – Urgent Support for Food Donation Bill While Labor Sits on Treasury Advice

Media Releases

SENATOR DEAN SMITH SHADOW ASSISTANT MINISTER FOR COMPETITION, CHARITIES AND TREASURY SENATOR FOR WESTERN AUSTRALIA MEDIA RELEASE 22 October 2024 URGENT SUPPORT FOR FOOD DONATION BILL WHILE LABOR SITS ON TREASURY ADVICE Charities and industry bodies have described the need for a Bill incentivising food donations to hungry Australians as urgent and called on Federal Parliamentarians to put politics aside and back it. They appeared in Canberra this morning at a public hearing into the Tax Laws Amendment (Incentivising Food Donations to Charitable Organisations) Bill 2024. Introduced by Senator Dean Smith as a Private Senator’s Bill in July, the Bill features a tax incentive for companies that donate, rather than dump, excess food and is aimed at reducing both millions of tonnes of annual food wastage and pressure on food relief charities facing unprecedented demand. The Salvation Army’s Donna Fraser told the hearing “…people think the issues are real but lack urgency. It is very real and very urgent.” Questioned by Labor on the value of the Bill, Australian Food and Grocery Council CEO Tanya Barden said that “Parliament needs to take a good, hard look at itself” and described the Bill as “an easy win, an opportunity that should really have the support of all parties across the Parliament.” The Bill builds on a concept originally designed by Foodbank Australia, and which it and its partner organisations – Second Bite and OzHarvest – have long advocated for. Foodbank and AUSVEG, who also appeared today, stressed that many producers find it more economically viable to dump excess, but edible, food than harvest and transport it to a charity. CEO of Foodbank Brianna Casey described the tax incentive’s power to “shift the dynamic” in favour of food donation at a time where record numbers of Australians are experiencing food insecurity. KPMG tax experts, who economically modelled the original Foodbank concept, added their support for the Bill, recommending enhancements to capture donors operating as trusts or partnerships, and raising thresholds that reflect producers’ high turnover but low margins. Academics who had previously expressed reservations about the Bill both confirmed after hearing evidence from other witnesses that it now has their support. But Assistant Charities Minister Andrew Leigh was once again exposed for ignoring calls from the sector to progress this critical issue from the Government’s side. Even worse, it was revealed by Treasury officials that they had been requested by Labor to provide a comprehensive briefing on the Bill. It means that information that could further improve the Bill, or which Labor could –and should – use to draft and pass its own equivalent legislation, is gathering dust on Minister Leigh’s desk. Meanwhile, the charities he is meant to represent work overtime to support Australian households in crisis. The inquiry is due to publish its findings in a report in mid-November. ENDS

Shadow Assistant Minister for Competition, Charities and Treasury – Media Release – Not For Profits Slam Dismissive Government Over Bungled Tax Regulation Rollout

Media Releases

SENATOR DEAN SMITH SHADOW ASSISTANT MINISTER FOR COMPETITION, CHARITIES AND TREASURY SENATOR FOR WESTERN AUSTRALIA MEDIA RELEASE 22 October 2024 NOT FOR PROFITS SLAM DISMISSIVE GOVERNMENT OVER BUNGLED TAX REGULATION ROLLOUT Not for profit organisations have vented their frustration at the Australian Taxation Office and Labor’s implementation of new tax requirements, labelling the Government “dismissive” and “out of touch”. A Senate Economics References Committee inquiry into the issue, established by Senator Dean Smith, held a public hearing in Canberra today – with witnesses including the ATO, Australian Charities Not for Profits Commission, the Law Council of Australia, Community Council of Australia and representatives of negatively impacted not for profits. The regulations require non-charitable not for profits to lodge an annual return to confirm their tax exemption eligibility. Representatives of Agricultural Shows Australia, Stonnington Scottish Country Dancers and various Landcare Groups told the hearing how the administrative burden caused by poor implementation have put the survival of their much loved community organisations in jeopardy. Their volunteer office bearers were, at best, forced to seek professional advice and, at worst, considering winding up their operations. The Australian Multicultural Action Network noted the reliance on paper forms and lack of an accessible online portal, both characteristics of the ATO’s rollout, presented a difficult learning curve for new members. Very few agreed with the ATO’s claim that the burden will ease considerably in future years thanks to a form with pre-filled details, arguing the high volunteer turnover common in the sector will require most of the work to be updated annually. The Community Council of Australia said organisations had repeatedly told the Government how damaging failed implementation the new requirements would be, but their concerns went unheard. “You call that a consultation, I call that a dismissive approach to our sector”, CEO David Crosbie told ATO officials. It’s a broader sign of the Albanese Government’s negligent approach towards the not for profit sector, who it meets with but whose message it fails to understand and act upon. The hearing was told relevant Minister Andrew Leigh has so far ignored both a letter of concern from the Law Council of Australia and requested assurances by the Community Council of Australia. In bizarre contrast to evidence from the sector and peak bodies, the ATO highlighted various initiatives being taken to “simplify and streamline” the process, noting it was “proud” of progress so far. Senator Smith observed to ATO officials that there was “a complete misfit between what the not-for-profit sector is telling us … and what the ATO is doing”. Clearly, there is an unsustainable disconnect between the ATO’s perception of their responsiveness to the sector and the sector’s experience. It is incumbent on Andrew Leigh and the Albanese Government to address that disconnect. The Senate Inquiry is due to report at the end of this month. ENDS