Continuing in the spirit of Cate Speaks

Federal ICAC Now Party


Social Media: FacebookTwitter
Previous Names: none
Slogans: Australia’s Anti-Corruption Party
Themes: A Federal ICAC. Now.
Electorates: Upper House: New South Wales, Queensland and West Australia
Lower House: none
Preferences: not yet available
Previous Reviews: New Party

Policies & Commentary

So, Federal ICAC Now! or FIN only has one issue they are running on. Did you spot it? 🙂

More seriously, the issue they’re running on is an important one and it’s a serious enough concern to enough voters in recent polls that it’s likely that FIN will attract a few votes. Maybe even enough to get the sixth spot in a Senate race. Which would be a problem.

FIN’s anti-corruption wishlist, aside from supporting the version of the ICAC that the Greens have come up with (which will be covered in more detail when we do them), is pretty solid. They want:

  • Real-time political donation disclosure
  • a five-year moratorium during which no retiring elected official can be appointed to any government funded position
  • former ministers prohibited from employment in any commercial sector formerly under the authority of that minister or engaging in any lobbying activity regarding any aspect of their previous portfolio/s
  • limits on donations to political parties by corporations, trade unions, lobby groups and other entities
  • strengthened whistleblower protections

These are all reasonable measures, although the lack of much detail regarding them is a little worrying. Single-issue parties are not typically known for nuance, and FIN seems no exception.

However, it’s what they plan to do in the event of literally any other issue at all coming before them in the Senate that’s the real concern:
When elected, FIN parliamentary representatives(s) will, regardless of which party forms government, vote on any bill by the following method:

  • Each proposal will be closely scrutinised for possible corrupt content. FIN parliamentary staff will be carefully selected and FIN will utilise external consultants to assist in this regard where necessary. If the possibility for corrupt conduct is identified the bill would be rejected until that possibility is removed.
  • If no adverse matters are identified, any proposal would then be considered against the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Australia was a signatory when this succinct 30 article Declaration was adopted by the UN in 1948. It remains both relevant and in effect. If the possibility for contravention of the Declaration is identified the bill would be rejected until those contraventions are remedied. You can read the bill here
  • If these two conditions are satisfied, FIN representatives will refer the matter to its members before a decision is made.

Now, don’t get me wrong, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights is one of my all-time favourite Declarations, but there are a lot of situations that it wouldn’t be great for – it’s not particularly good on, for example, environmental issues, nor the intricacies of international trade, or even who we should buy submarines from. Which means that, in these situations, the party too easily becomes a rubber stamp for whoever’s in power. I’d rather see a small party that pushes back across a wider range of issues – and given that their ICAC policy is literally the policy of the Greens, why not just vote for them instead?

I’m in sympathy with your goals, my fine FINny friends (by the Hoary Hosts of Hoggoth, am I in sympathy with your goals), but I want a party with more vision. Federal ICAC Now will be landing somewhere around the middle of my ballot, with the other parties and candidates I feel meh about.

Just a reminder that Maz and I lack the necessary Eurovision knowledge to choose the songs that Catherine liked to include, but we’d love to see what you suggest in the comments below 🙂


  1. Chakae D'Ellencourt

    Looks like you’ve left IMOP as a previous name accidentally, The NSW Candidate, Ross Jones, is an investigative journalist,,138, the Qld candidate, Kerin Payne, works in assets management for mining companies, and makes it sound vaguely greener in his candidate bio by mentioning electrical conversion and the WA candidate, Matt Count, a young tradie who travels extensively all seem to have no previous affiliations at all, just parties Ross Jones is particularly against so his preferences are guessable. I’m inclined to take them at face value, which feels very odd.

    • Loki

      You’re quite correct, fixed now and thank you for letting me know. I must admit that I didn’t look particularly hard at the individual candidates, due to the small likelihood of them actually getting in.

Leave a Reply

© 2024 Something for Cate

Theme by Anders NorenUp ↑

Discover more from Something for Cate

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading