Anonymous Donations starting to flow through Electoral Commission

November 1st, 2008 at 1:00 pm by David Farrar

One of the bizarre elements of the is rather than abolishing , it routed them through the allowing a party to receive $240,000 that way, with no individual donation bigger than $36,000.

The Commssion has updated its website with details of donations received and paid out:

In September it paid out $15,000, being three donations of $5,000 each to Progressives, National and Labour.

In October it has paid out $76,000 being $72,000 to National and $4,000 to Labour. So I would guess National had two $36,000 donations made as that is the maximum.

I was initially puzzled as to why someone would make a donation of $5,000 anonymously through the Electoral Commission. You see if they donated direct to the party their name would not be disclosed publicly unless it was over $10,000. I then thought of two possibilities:

  1. They had already given $10,000 to the party directly and wanted to give additional money without disclosure. The EFA actually allows a total of $66,000 to be donated over three years to a party without disclosure – $10K a year and $36K through the Electoral Commission.
  2. They genuinely want to be anonymous – even to the party officers and staff. If you donate $5k direct to a party your name is not published publicly but the party president, secretary and a couple of others will know. So if you want total anonymity then a $5k donation through the Electoral Commission makes sense.
Tags: , ,

6 Responses to “Anonymous Donations starting to flow through Electoral Commission”

  1. Lee C (4,516 comments) says:

    Good way to buy political influence from illegally gotten money through Chinese organised crime though, innit?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. Lee C (4,516 comments) says:

    sorry.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. burt (8,272 comments) says:

    Having seen how Labour treated Owen Glenn when he decided to tell the truth it’s no surprise people donate anonymously, what is however a surprise is that they donate at all.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. Colin (85 comments) says:

    Can you give Helicopters anonymously through the Electoral Commission?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. Johnboy (16,597 comments) says:

    The most amazing thing is that anyone would be stupid enough to donate $5000 to doddery old Jim’s party. I can understand why they would want to remain anoymous in case they got taken away by the alzheimers police to the rest home with Jim.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. Chris S (111 comments) says:

    They genuinely want to be anonymous – even to the party officers and staff. If you donate $5k direct to a party your name is not published publicly but the party president, secretary and a couple of others will know. So if you want total anonymity then a $5k donation through the Electoral Commission makes sense.

    Which of course was part of the problem before. Parties being bankrolled by big money, knowing exactly who they are and what they wanted in return, but the public being unable to find out. This is the way that “Anonymous” donations should be handled, and if all anonymous donations were handled this way I would support the cap being raised.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote