POLITICAL DONATIONS

The Hon. M. PARNELL (15:15): I seek leave to make a brief explanation before asking the Minister for Urban Planning and Development a question about the issue of political donations.

Leave granted.

The Hon. M. PARNELL: A Sunday Mail article by Renato Castello of 27 April states:

Business leaders are being charged up to $1100 a head for exclusive audiences with key Rann government ministers.

A series of swish events has been organised by SA Progressive Business, an ALP fundraising group created to 'promote political communication between Labor and business'.

The article goes on to list a series of three fundraising exclusive events in a period of seven weeks, including a two-hour cocktail party featuring Premier Rann, Treasurer Foley, and minister Conlon at the Newport Quays Sale and Information Centre.

This is not the first time concerns have been raised about this type of ALP fundraising. Mike Smithson referred to it in an article in the Sunday Mail in August 2006. He said:

The unashamed grab for cash by Labor—or should it be making hay while the sun shines—has raised a few politically sensitive ethical issues.

This is not the first time that concerns have been raised about Newport Quays being used as a base for ALP fundraising, with minister Patrick Conlon coming under sustained attack in parliament over his attendance at a cocktail party at the Newport Quays Sales and Information Centre on 31 January 2006 which raised funds for Labor.

There was another event referred to in the Sunday Mail article, which states:

On May 8, a boardroom lunch with Police and Urban Planning Minister Paul Holloway, hosted by law firm Ernst & Young, will cost attendees $1100. 'Only 16 people will attend this special luncheon,' the invitation states.

My questions to the minister are:

1. Can he confirm the details of the lunch, including the cost of $1,100 per ticket?

2. Who are the exclusive 16 lucky people and, specifically, will any property developers be attending this special luncheon on Thursday?

3. What is the purpose of the meeting and what will be discussed?

4. Why is it appropriate for a political party to use exclusive access to a minister of the state to raise partisan political funds?

5. What benefit is there for South Australian taxpayers?

The Hon. P. HOLLOWAY (Minister for Police, Minister for Mineral Resources Development, Minister for Urban Development and Planning) (15:18): Within this country (and in this state, in particular) we do not have government funding of elections, so political parties raise their own money. They have been doing that since the year dot. I am sure the Greens raise money themselves for election campaigns. Something has to pay for those green triangles that we see all over the place.

Unless and until we have some system that I see members of the Liberal Party are now advocating—they did not advocate it while they were in government, of course, but now they are in opposition and their policies are so bad no-one wants to talk to them anymore. There are people like Christopher Pyne saying, 'Let's get rid of all donations.' In an ideal world, if we did have some other form of fundraising for elections, I suppose political parties would not have to do fundraising.

I make myself available to the Labor Party, as do other ministers. I have no idea what is being charged for the dinner. I have no idea who is going. I will have a look at it on—when is it, 8 May? That is in two days. When it comes on (on the 8^th) I will have a look and see who is going.

I will repeat what I have said on other occasions: if there are any property developers or other people involved with my portfolio who have a good proposal for this state and they seek to talk to me, I will be very happy to do so.

I challenge members opposite to find somebody who has not had access to my office, unless, of course, they had a matter that was currently under consideration and it would have been inappropriate for me to meet them. Apart from those occasions, I have never refused meetings with anyone who had a good proposal for this state, and I do not intend to do so.

As I have indicated before, the honourable member has a bill before the chamber relating to limiting donations, and it has one obvious deficiency: it does not stop donations across barriers. I again remind him of the case of one development at Enfield, where I met the developer and which I made a major project, namely, the Bradken foundry, whose chairman is Nick Greiner.

I note that Bradken gave a donation of $12,500 to the New South Wales Liberal Party and that, subsequently, a $12,000 donation was given to the Liberal Party. I do not care about that, that is fine; they can do that and that is great. As far as I am aware, no donation from that company has ever been given to the Labor Party. I approved that project because it was in the best interests of the workers of this state—and that is what I will continue to do.

If my party or individual members want me to talk at a dinner or something to help raise funds for the Labor Party, I will do my part as a member of the Labor Party. I think that is what all members should do. However, development decisions are totally divorced from any fundraising activity. I say again: I challenge them to find somebody with a good project whom I have refused to see. They will not find anyone.