follow the money. Who provides the funds that go to the little known bodies that shift money to the organisations that shift money to each of the major TweedleDee/TweddleDum parties and the second ring circus groups that swirl around them ? Businesses would love to get more access to citizens data for advertising and to create "nudge messages" that they can then sell to the sock puppets nominally in power. Since all the current Oz parties of significance operate with a materialist world view they have no distinctive doctrinal differences, ie policy. This proposal is possibly the next step in the destruction of a mostly working democracy by the legal fictions known as companies.
Whether knowingly or not, these act to make real citizens irrelevant in the political process by ensuring parties are dependent on advertising and the required large funding. This is disguised by keeping the appearance of a democratic voting system while making it a mere facade for the real rulers. (Adams Lizards anyone ?) Bit like Augustus. Stripped the old Republic away but maintained the shell of the Senate to keep the plebs quiet enough. No conspiracy required, just a moral vacuum and spin doctors/salesdroids flogging the latest technical utopia at those least likely to comprehend a pig in a poke sales pitch. Sales weasels are rewarded for selling, not solving problems.
If there is any fix, IMHO, it is <soapbox> making it illegal for any non-citizen to fund any lobbying or political activity, let alone parties. Secondly, ensure the limit for such funding from citizens is below say $5000. </soapbox>
I suggest that limiting the number of times some-one can stand for election should be limited to 5 or less to reduce political dynasties. Fanciful limitations like ensuring all candidates have had a life outside academia, politics, SIF, pressure groups and union organisations before being eligible might be worthwhile.