In a significant revelation, it has come to light that Adani donated over $600,000 to Queensland’s Liberal National Party (LNP) prior to the 2024 state election, yet this information remained undisclosed for an entire year. The donations, which were officially reported to the Australian Electoral Commission on 2 February 2026, have sparked criticism regarding loopholes in federal electoral laws that allowed such concealment.
Discrepancies in Disclosure Laws
According to Queensland’s electoral regulations, state-level donations should be disclosed within a timeframe of seven days, or as quickly as 24 hours in the week leading up to an election. Despite this requirement, Adani’s substantial contributions were not revealed until well after the electoral process had concluded. The company’s donations consisted primarily of three large amounts: $166,667 on both 13 and 19 September, and $166,666 on 24 October, alongside an additional $100,000 on 23 October—just days before the election took place on 26 October.
The total of $621,500 was distributed in ten payments throughout the 2024-25 federal reporting period, with the final donation made on 12 May 2025, shortly after the federal election day. This timing raised questions as to whether these funds were indeed intended for federal purposes, as stipulated under s302CA and 314B of the Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918.
Criticism from Political Rivals
The Queensland Greens have been vocal in their condemnation of the situation, with state MP Michael Berkman labelling it an exploitation of a “gaping loophole” in the donation legislation. Berkman argued that Queensland voters were deprived of the opportunity to make informed decisions due to the concealment of these funds. He further advocated for the banning of corporate donations, stating, “If this isn’t an argument for banning corporate donations, like the Greens have been calling for, then I don’t know what is.”
Clancy Moore, the chief executive of Transparency International Australia, echoed these sentiments, expressing concern over the potential misuse of federal donations for state election campaigning. He characterised the failure to disclose such significant donations as a major flaw in the current system, highlighting the urgent need for reforms aimed at enhancing transparency in political funding.
Responses from Adani and the LNP
In response to the criticisms, an LNP spokesperson affirmed that the party had adhered to all disclosure requirements. Similarly, representatives from Bravus Mining and Resources, previously known as Adani Mining, stated that they fulfilled their obligations under the law and had previously contributed to various political entities to support democratic processes. Despite this, they noted that their contributions to state-based party accounts had ceased for several years.
It is worth mentioning that the LNP and Bravus recently reached an agreement to resolve a lengthy legal dispute related to a deal that allowed the mining company to defer royalty payments established during the previous Labor government. Former treasurer Cameron Dick accused the agreement of providing a “financial windfall of at least $500 million” to the company, raising further questions about the financial ties between corporate entities and political parties.
Forthcoming Changes to Electoral Laws
Notably, new legislation introduced under the Albanese government is set to take effect in July, aiming to improve the timeliness and transparency of political donations. While some reforms have been welcomed, critics argue that more comprehensive changes are needed to safeguard electoral integrity.
Adani’s donations were made under the name “Adani Mining Pty Ltd,” even after the company rebranded its Australian operations to Bravus in 2020. This distinction, combined with the timing and manner of the donations, continues to fuel discussions about the intersection of corporate influence and political funding in Australia.
Why it Matters
This incident underscores the ongoing challenges surrounding political donations and transparency in Australia. With the potential for corporate funding to influence electoral outcomes, the need for robust regulatory frameworks is more pressing than ever. As the nation prepares for the implementation of new laws, the scrutiny of past donations serves as a crucial reminder of the importance of transparency in fostering a fair and democratic electoral process. The implications of this case extend beyond Queensland, resonating throughout the broader Australian political landscape, where the integrity of democracy is at stake.
