Time to set some minimum funding standards?
Posted on 04 Dec 2024
Charity can make a difference in people's lives, but it doesn’t come cheap, says Community Council…
Posted on 03 Dec 2024
By Greg Thom, journalist, Institute of Community directors Australia
In the aftermath of the Albanese government’s rush to pass more than 30 pieces of legislation before Parliament's Christmas recess, sections of the not-for-profit sector could be forgiven for feeling that Santa has overlooked them.
The government was walking tall after securing the passage of a grab-bag of bills, ranging from reforms to the Reserve Bank to changes to migration rules and anti-money-laundering and counter-terrorism laws.
It was the decision to defer until next year key reforms to environment, gambling and electoral laws, however, that has some in the sector questioning the government’s priorities.
The government said the deferred legislation has not been abandoned, only put off until early next year.
However, with speculation a federal election could be held as early as March – meaning Parliament would not resume before the poll – the fate of the delayed reform agenda remains unclear.
A report led by the late Labor MP Peta Murphy into online gambling and its impact on those experiencing gambling harm was handed to the federal government in June 2023.
Frustrated advocates of responsible gambling laws have been waiting for Canberra to formally respond to the report and act on its recommendations ever since.
The Alliance for Gambling Reform was hopeful the issue would be dealt with by the end of the year but was instead left angry and frustrated.
Alliance chief advocate Rev Tim Costello has been vocal in his disappointment, calling out what he sees as a win by vested interests including media giants, sports betting companies and sporting bodies, over protecting the community from gambling harm.
“What happened is pretty simple in my view,” Costello told The Guardian after the issue was shelved until the new year.
“The vested interests cowed the PM into dishonouring Murphy’s legacy. Those vested interests start with the obscenely rich foreign-owned sports betting companies.”
Costello accused the government of walking away from serious gambling reform, despite 70% of Australians supporting a gambling ad ban.
The establishment of an independent federal environment agency was a key election commitment from Labor and one that – according to reports – was on the verge of being secured by Environment Minister Tanya Plibersek in negotiations with the Greens.
That was until an 11th hour intervention by Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, who pulled the plug.
The decision to defer passing the Nature Positive bills until 2025 left environment-focused sector organisations such as the Australian Conservation Foundation (ACF) and the Wilderness Society frustrated and disappointed.
ACF CEO Kelly O’Shanassy was scathing in her response.
“Recent YouGov polling reveals 86% of Australians want stronger nature laws. The Albanese government has squandered a golden opportunity to give Australians hope ahead of the next election,” she said.
O’Shanassy alleged the big mining and logging companies had got their way.
“In a fit of short-sightedness and greed, the Business Council of Australia and WA miners like Gina Rinehart threw nature to the wolves and sent WA Premier Roger Cook to convince the Prime Minister to kill the deal.
“Prime Minister Anthony Albanese did just that and the deal was dead.”
Wilderness Society national campaigns director Amelia Young said the lack of political action won't change the “shameful” fact that Australia is a world leader in mammal extinction, second in the world for biodiversity loss and a global deforestation hotspot.
“The Albanese government was elected on a promise to 'restore Australian's trust and confidence to environmental decision making',” she said.
“This week shows nature still comes a distant second to extractive industries in this colony called Australia.”
“The focus needs to be on the underlying causal factors which put children at risk regardless of their age.”
The government’s success at passing legislation banning under 16’s from accessing social media made headlines around the world and was chalked up as a major win for Labor.
Despite the agreed need for action to protect young Australians from the dark side of social media, the new laws have been criticised by organisations such as the Alannah & Madeline Foundation, whose leaders say they need more nuance.
Alannah & Madeline Foundation CEO Sarah Davies said that while she supported any moves to do more to protect children online, age limits on social media alone were not enough.
“The focus needs to be on the underlying causal factors which put children at risk regardless of their age,” she said.
“We should concentrate on tech companies being accountable to deliver default privacy and safety settings on their platforms and age-appropriate safety by design which prioritises the best interests of children over commercial interests.”
Concerns have also been raised at the impact the new laws, which won’t come into force for another year, will have on disabled Australians.
Children and Young People with Disability Australia (CYDA) joined other disability advocates in opposing the blanket ban outlined in the Bill, arguing social media offers people with disability a way to meet, express their identities, combat loneliness, and engage in advocacy.
CYDA CEO Skye Kakoschke-Moore called for a more nuanced approach that respects young people’s human rights to inclusion, expression and access to information.
“Social media can be a lifeline for young people with disability, providing one of the few truly accessible ways to build connections and find community,” she said.
“Cutting off that access ignores the lived reality of thousands and risks isolating disabled youth from their peer networks and broader society.”
The decision to shelve controversial changes to the nations electoral donation laws was met with relief by civil society groups including the Australian Democracy Network, the Centre for Public Integrity and the Australia Institute.
They argued that the changes, which would place caps on how much money could be spent on election campaigns, would significantly benefit Labor and the Coalition, delivering them a significant financial advantage over independents and minor party candidates.
However, it was also feared the proposed changes to the Electoral Act could disproportionately affect the ability of charities to advocate on important causes during election campaigns.
A coalition of groups including the Stronger Charities Alliance (SCA) worked hard behind the scenes to secure protection for charitable organisations from what were seen as unintended consequences of the draft legislation.
A key plank of the electoral reforms relates to the treatment of third parties – groups that campaign during elections but don’t field candidates, such as trade unions, business lobby groups, charities and NFPs.
The SCA has long argued that charities differed from other third parties because they are legally prohibited from supporting or opposing candidates in elections and instead must engage in issues-based advocacy, which is closely monitored by the Australian Charities and Not-for-profits Commission (ACNC).
The alliance said charities had advocated for improved transparency in elections but were concerned that if the new rules did not account for the unique way in which the sector operates, the changes could result in fewer community organisations participating in public debate during election campaigns.
A joint statement issued by the Australian Democracy Network, the Centre for Public Integrity, the Australia Institute and Transparency International Australia before the Bill was deferred said while it was important that the influence of big money on Australian democracy should be fixed, the government's proposed Bill should not proceed in its current form.
“It's likely that the Bill doesn't fix the problem of big money in politics that it sets out to address,” they said.
“Nominated entities risk creating major loopholes that would allow billionaires like Clive Palmer to circumvent donation caps and spend millions on the election.
“The Bill would also entrench major party and incumbency advantage, and further disadvantage independent and challenger candidates in elections.”
The Australia Institute said the breakdown in talks between the government and Coalition provided the perfect opportunity for further scrutiny of the proposed changes.
The director of the Australia Institute’s democracy and accountability program, Bill Browne, said more than 18,000 people had signed the Institute's petition demanding a public inquiry into the Electoral Legislation Amendment (Electoral Reform) Bill.
“The integrity of Australian elections is too important for the Albanese government’s proposed changes to be rushed through without scrutiny, including a thorough parliamentary inquiry,” he said.
“Politicians voting together to give political parties more money will reduce trust in government.”
One bright spot for the sector was the passing of the government’s long delayed housing package.
The legislation was held up for more than nine months by the Greens, who finally caved on their demands to add amendments such as a cap on rents after being stared down by Prime Minister Albanese.
The reforms include:
Last-minute amendments to the Bill negotiated by the crossbench included a requirement for investors to offer five-year leases for renters, barring no-fault evictions and ensuring 10% of homes build under the scheme were affordable for people in need.
The Greens also pressured the government to include an additional $500 million to cut energy bills in social housing by improving energy efficiency in return for throwing their support behind the Bill.
In a LinkedIn post, Homelessness Australia CEO Kate Colvin welcomed the changes and also paid tribute to the passionate campaigning of sector organisations such as National Shelter, ACOSS and the Community Housing Industry Association.
“And it's done – Build to Rent bill to pass with an extra $500 million for social housing energy upgrades. Thanks to everyone involved in negotiating and passing the bill and congratulations to the housing peaks who achieved this win for advocacy for better outcomes around affordable housing, tenant protections, and a handy half billion for social housing.”