As Labor inches closer to electoral reform [on campaign funding and truth in political advertising], a 'consensus' approach looks far from certain

I'm uneasy about truth in political advertising laws. Neither ACMA nor the AEC want to touch it, so who would be in charge of regulating it? What kinds of statements would be banned?

I'd love to see the kinds of lies and hateful campaigning we've seen from the LNP and their allies be stopped. But I just don't know that I trust anyone to be in charge of that and not be corrupted to silence harsh but accurate claims. The right still goes on about "Mediscare" as though it hasn't always been LNP policy to cut cut cut our healthcare system.

The same with campaign finance reform. Ideally, we want parties with large amounts of small donations to be protected, while reducing the ability for individual large donors like Gina Rinehart to unduly influence politics. But how would that work if third-party campaigners could run the campaign instead, in the way that Clive Palmer has spent big on advertising in a way that doesn't officially support the LNP, but has the effect of undermining Labor and the Greens to the LNP's benefit regardless? And how do individuals' donations vs businesses' vs interest groups work? This video from constitutional scholar Anne Twomey suggests it may be doable, but it's a fine line to walk. We need extreme transparency in terms of what goals are being aimed at with the laws, and then a lot of careful expert scrutiny as to whether any specific draft laws will adequately achieve those goals.