How Kimberley Kitching voted compared to someone who believes that the federal government should increase transparency requirements for political parties (for example, requiring full and prompt disclosure of any political donations on easy-to-search public websites)

Division Kimberley Kitching Supporters vote Division outcome

12th Nov 2018, 3:49 PM – Senate Motions - Political Donations - Increase disclosure requirements

Show detail

The majority voted in favour of a motion introduced by Greens Senator Larissa Waters (QLD), which means it succeeded. Motions like these don't make any legal changes on their own, but can be politically influential as they represent the will of the Senate.

Motion text

That the Senate—

(a) notes that:

(i) disclosure of donations made to political parties is only made public by the Australian Electoral Commission once a year, on 1 February, for the preceding financial year,

(ii) there is up to an 18 month delay between when a donation is made and when it is publicly disclosed, and at minimum a 7 month delay,

(iii) since 2012, the major parties have received approximately $100 million in donations from corporate entities,

(iv) the voters in the electorates of Braddon, Fremantle, Longman, Mayo and Perth will have to wait until 1 February 2020, some 18 months after the by-election date, before they know who funded those campaigns,

(v) the voters in the electorate of Wentworth will have to wait almost 16 months before they know who funded political parties' by-election campaigns, and

(vi) under current legislation for federal elections, voters go to the ballot box without any information about how their local candidates and political parties have funded their campaigns – the identity of donors or amounts donated; and

(b) calls on the Federal Government to require all donations of $1000 and above to be disclosed in close to real-time on an easy-to-search public website, to ensure voters have access to information about who is bank-rolling political campaigns before they vote.

absent Yes Passed by a small majority

16th Aug 2018, 12:06 PM – Senate Motions - Donations to Political Parties - Disclosure

Show detail

The majority voted against a motion introduced by Greens Senator Richard Di Natale (Vic), which means it failed.

Motion text

That the Senate:

(a) notes:

(i) the growing prominence of business events that enable direct and private access to senior members of Parliament, such as the Australian Labor Party's Business Observer Summit, the Liberal Party's Millennium Forum and The National's National Policy Forum, and

(ii) the failure of Australia's political donation laws to require the disclosure of payments for these events because there is contractual consideration, they are therefore not classified as a 'gift' under the Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918 that would mandate public disclosure;

(b) acknowledges that political donations enable access and influence policy decisions made by political parties and that these events are shrouded in secrecy; and

(c) resolves that, in the interest of good government, political parties should voluntarily disclose the attendees of these events and the amount of money provided by these businesses to political parties during these events.

absent Yes Not passed by a modest majority

How "never voted" is worked out

Normally a person's votes count towards a score which is used to work out a simple phrase to summarise their position on a policy. However in this case Kimberley Kitching was absent during all divisions for this policy. So, it's impossible to say anything concrete other than that they have "never voted" on this policy.