We recommend amending clause 7(3) to remove the provision for political parties and not-for-profit entities to apply to the fund.

This amendment would narrow the scope of the fund so that only an individual disabled person would be eligible. We consider this appropriate in order to target the fund’s limited resources most effectively. Under the bill as introduced, the fund would be directed three ways, which could spread the available funding quite thinly, and limit its usefulness. There would also be difficult operational questions about how the funds were apportioned between the three groups. Removing these provisions would help by streamlining the fund and making it easier to implement.

We note that excluding political parties from applying to the fund could help to signal the fund’s neutrality, separate from any political affiliation. Although we propose that not-for-profit entities be excluded, we note that these services have been core providers of disability assistance, and the fund may help to alleviate the burden on them.

We also recommend amending clause 8 to make it clear that any payment from the fund should not be treated as an election expense or party donation. This is to ensure that the fund is apolitical, and to avoid giving State funding to a political party. It would also make clear that payments are not to be used for general campaigning costs; they are specifically for accessibility costs not faced by others.

We recommend adding new clause 8A to ensure that any payment from the fund would be exempt from income tax.

We suggest including a further regular review by providing for the Electoral Commission to consider the funding provided under the Act in the regular report it prepares following a general election. To do this, we recommend inserting clause 12 to amend section 8 (1) of the Electoral Act 1993. This would add a requirement for the Election Access Fund Act to be considered in the Electoral Commission’s standard report on a general election.

We propose some adjustments to the one-off review provided for in the bill as introduced. This review would be initiated by the responsible Minister and would review the effectiveness of the Act, and the performance of the fund after its first use. We recommend amending clause 9 to tighten the timeframe for the Minister to arrange this review, and to give further details on what the review should entail. We propose that this review be within 6 months after the release of the Electoral Commission’s report.

We believe both of these reviews are necessary to test whether the fund is meeting its full potential. This would also give a clear pathway for reviewing and expanding the scope of the legislation in the future.

Many submitters suggested that local elections should also be covered by the fund. We acknowledge the importance of making all aspects of political participation accessible, but think that the first use of the fund should focus on general elections. We suggest that the possibility of extending its coverage be considered in the first review.

We hope and expect that local elections will be covered eventually, but this should be managed after the fund has been tested and reviewed.