Costs of $40,000 against us

Dear ,

Are you able to help with the cost of our legal battle against the ECQ?

This was an important battle to have, and it seems we were the only ones prepared to have it. Unfortunately, while we won important legal points, we weren't successful in having the orders we requested made so the judge ordered costs against us.

Last Thursday I deposited $15,000 into the commission's bank account. It hurt, and it is just the first instalment of three, taking the total amount to $40,000. We have pledges of $20,000, which means I have only $5,000 on hand towards the next $15,000 payment due in a month.

So we need to have a major fundraising drive, which you can contribute to by either going to our donation link here and using your credit card, or depositing money directly to our bank account at the ANZ BSB 014 278 Acc Number 1101 03131.

(If you are a property developer for purposes of the legislation, the judgment says you can donate towards our court costs, amongst other things).

You might recall that the reason we went to court was because we were aware that the Electoral Commission was telling property organisations, including industry bodies, that they would commit a criminal offence if they campaigned on issues during the election period, because they were prohibited donors.

We wrote a letter to the ECQ telling them that we intended to campaign in this coming state election, declaring we had taken donations from property developers and asking whether this was legal. Their response was to ask for details of our donors, meaning we had broken the law.

The result of the court case was that the judge ruled we can take donations, but we can't take them for the purpose of campaigning in the election. He also ruled that "prohibited donors", which includes property developers and organisations like the Property Council and the Urban Development Institute, can be directly involved in elections, they just can't donate to political parties.

This was a significant error by the ECQ in its interpretation of the legislation, and means the advice they were giving was wrong, and damaging to democracy. You would think they would be embarrassed enough to bear their own legal costs.

Instead they applied to the court for a costs order, despite the fact there was a clear public interest in having the matter clarified, and that we had won on a number of points.

It doesn't seem right that small organisations like ours should have to take the Queensland Government to court to force them to abide by the law, and then when it is shown not to have, it expects the other side to pay for its education.

This was not a frivolous action either. It was not like the "lawfare" launched by environmental groups merely to delay projects. (And they seem to live in a different world – look at this case where a judge adjourned hearings to liquidate the Oakey Coal Action Alliance, just so they could proceed with an environmental claim in the High Court).

These laws were put in place to deprive anyone with a significant interest in property development from a full say in our democratic processes. They were brought in against the recommendations of the CCC.

Further they scare affected groups out of playing any sort of role in government by applying criminal sanctions to any breach of the law.

We live in a state lacking a proper separation between the government and the public service. The CCC chair himself has said that public servants are under indirect pressure to keep politicians happy.

In these circumstances public servants may inadvertently interpret laws in ways which will please the government.

You may be interested to know that following-on from the court judgment the commission again demanded to know who our donors are, even though they had a judgment that said they weren't entitled to that information unless we were going to use those funds in an election campaign!

This is the same organisation that bungled the local government election counting earlier this year, and according to Sky News "recklessly caus[ed] a security risk by allowing Chinese-based coders to write critical software for the Electoral Commission of Queensland".

We are a law-abiding organisation and will be meeting our debts. But we need your help. We are $20,000 short. If you can help, please go to our donate link, or deposit directly to our ANZ account BSB 014 278 Acc 1101 03131.

Regards,

Graham Young

Executive Director