RNZ’s recent analysis found that businesses and shareholders connected to the government’s fast track projects have contributed more than $500,000 to National, ACT and New Zealand First.
It is impossible to say whether these companies were listed for consideration because of the donations, but allegations of possible “undue influence” are inevitable.
New Zealand’s reputation as a country with little corruption is not due to less strict regulations on political party donations. Philippa Yasbeck, author of a Helen Clark Foundation report calling for tougher rules to combat the risks of political corruption, said:
Our political honesty and integrity have evolved significantly from social norms over the decades. Politicians generally knew the behavior expected of New Zealand society. Sadly, today we are naive to think that is enough.
Some political parties seem to be largely ignoring existing rules. The Election Commission has issued warnings to several political parties for being too slow in declaring large donations.
An independent electoral review published earlier this year recommended that political parties give up access to corporate donations in exchange for more public funding. Other recommendations included setting a cap on political donations at NZ$30,000 and significantly lower standards for disclosing names of donors.
As you might imagine, political parties have different main sources of income, so they disagree on how their funds should be regulated. Labor has endorsed the proposal, but analysis shows that such a policy would hurt Labor’s income streams the most if implemented.
Significant amounts of public money are already spent on advertising for parliaments and political parties during elections, but ACT strongly opposes the principle of public funding.
New Zealanders’ thoughts
But what about public opinion? Do people believe that big donors have “undue influence”?
The latest New Zealand Election Survey, conducted after the 2023 election, included a question module that provided insight into New Zealanders’ attitudes towards potential party funding reform. The survey is a representative sample of approximately 2,000 voters.
What makes it stand out? Many people answered “I don’t know” to the question, and that’s not surprising. The laws governing political party activity in New Zealand are complex and of little relevance to most people.
Nevertheless, some clear messages emerge. In general, almost the majority were concerned about the impact of “big profits.” When asked if they agreed with the statement that “New Zealand’s government is primarily run by a few big interests,” 45% agreed and 27% disagreed.
Digging deeper into the data, about 35% of business owners agreed, compared to just under half of those who don’t own a business.
When asked whether they thought donors exerted “undue influence” on politicians, 43% agreed. Only 18% opposed it. Almost 40% had no opinion on the topic, were either unaware or neutral.
Labor, Greens and NZ First voters were heavily tilted towards ‘undue influence’, while National Party and ACT voters were evenly split between ‘undue’ and ‘not undue’.
Voters across the country also strongly chose “I don’t know.” About one-third of business owners perceive undue influence, compared to about 45% of non-employers.
The 2023 election survey also included a question about the Electoral Review’s recommendation that business groups and trade unions should be prohibited from donating directly to political parties, with 53% supporting the change but no opposition. Only 17% did.
The Independent Electoral Review also recommended capping individual donations at $30,000, with 57% agreeing and 14% opposing. Support was strongest among Left and New Zealand First voters, but a significant majority of National and ACT voters also agreed (47% and 44%).
Finally, we asked for opinions on the anonymity of “promoter donations.” A promoter is a person or group registered to advertise on an issue or for or against a political party during an election campaign. They can collect anonymous donations that are not subject to the same disclosure requirements as parties.
Just 14% of respondents believe promoter donations will continue to remain anonymous based on privacy, and 47% would like to see increased transparency. Breaking this down by party, some National Party and ACT voters preferred transparency over privacy, but many were neutral or said they didn’t know.
Reform support
These results indicate that public awareness of undue influence by donors is widespread. This perception is strongest on the left, but it also permeates groups that vote for right-wing parties and the business community.
And while there are conflicts of interest between political parties, there is significant cross-party support for the independent electoral review recommendation within the New Zealand public and business community.
Assuming that political parties in democracies should be responsive to the concerns and demands of voters, this should give us food for thought about potential party funding reform.
This article is based on a submission to the Justice Select Committee’s inquiry into the 2023 general election.
