Feb 3, 2014

Political donations: how Labor got crushed by the Liberal money machine

New political donation data shows how generous donors were to the Liberal Party as it closed in on victory. But we have to wait for the donations that came once Kevin Rudd returned (briefly) to power.

Bernard Keane — Politics editor

Bernard Keane

Politics editor

The annual data dump of political donations has landed, providing an extraordinarily belated glimpse of who is propping up political parties. But the Australian Electoral Commission still isn’t telling us who backed the campaigns on the eve of the federal election — the data stops on June 30; anything after that won’t be released for another 12 months.

The disclosures — released as a searchable form by the AEC — shows that the Liberal Party easily out-raised Labor, garnering over $56 million at the federal and state level during the year, plus nearly $17 million from the Liberal National Party in Queensland, and another $1.8 million from the Country Liberals in the Northern Territory. In contrast, the ALP nationally raised $54.7 million — up from the $49 million recorded in 2011-12 but still dwarfed by the Coalition and well below the $80 million-plus the ALP raised in 2010-11, a year with federal, New South Wales and Victorian elections. The Nationals raised over $8 million across the country as well, just slightly more than the Greens.

Free Trial

Proudly annoying those in power since 2000.

Sign up for a FREE 21-day trial to keep reading and get the best of Crikey straight to your inbox

By starting a free trial, you agree to accept Crikey’s terms and conditions


Leave a comment

14 thoughts on “Political donations: how Labor got crushed by the Liberal money machine

  1. John64

    It’d be interesting to see if money always follows (or in this case, leads) the eventual winner and whether that can be used to predict the election outcome (in much the same way people talk about the betting market and polling).

  2. Jimmyhaz

    I imagine there would be some correlation, but it would be a weak link at best. The pre-election fundraising massively favour Romney in 2012, but he was still put to the sword come election day.

  3. AR

    Not.A.WORD can I say of this iniquity.

  4. Scott

    Jimmyhaz…not true.

    If you look at the nytimes 2012 election page, you actually have more money being raised by the democrats ($1072 million) than by the Republicans ($992 million).
    Being the standing President gives you a fair bit of clout in the fund raising game.

    Generally the winner has more money.

  5. Scott

    “The Greens, as usual, relied heavily on public funding; their only major individual donation was $100,000 from IT businessman Norman Pater”

    What you forget to mention of course is where he gets his money from…WA Mining companies, being the founder of Scope Systems. The Greens getting money from mining? Who would have thought it.

  6. Sharkie

    937 words on political donations and “bribe” wasn’t used once.

  7. Electric Lardyland

    Just a bit surprised that there’s not more mining industry money on the Coal-ition side. Maybe more will show up in the July to September period, when these figures are released next year. Then again, Gina did do her bit by buying a large chunk of Channel 10 and having Andrew (so not Usain) Bolt installed on his comfortable little propaganda perch. And I do remember the odd critical of the then government ad, being paid for by the mining industry. And not forgetting the funding of those right wing think tanks and astroturf organisations. Then there’s the Australian tours of various climate change deniers.
    Actually, better stop there, before this becomes a very long post.

  8. Jimmyhaz

    Huh, thanks for that Scott. Hard to believe that given the controversy over the Citizens United SC decision. Do you happen to have a link to those numbers, and a breakdown of there origin? The numbers I’m pulling are slightly different, although still favouring the Democrats.

  9. Jimmyhaz

    Never mind, I found it. Clearly I was thinking of the National Committee’s and PAC’s as the sole source of fundraising for the candidates.

  10. Kevin Herbert

    Scott: you’re talking as though there’s really 2 major political parties in DC, when in fact there’s only one..which comes in 2 colours & is controlled by the 5 lobby groups who dominate the Congress.
    As for the Presidency, it’s now considered by most informed pundits, as only a middle power in the original C Wright Mills power pyramid.

    Also: I wonder how many $12099 donations the Libs received from various special interest groups. I hear they received more 1500 such donations mainly from the one group.

    Finally, I wonder why PM Abbott’s first call after the election victory was to the odious Bibi Netanyahu….bit strange wasn’t it.

Share this article with a friend

Just fill out the fields below and we'll send your friend a link to this article along with a message from you.

Your details

Your friend's details