Wall St was down 94 overnight, its biggest fall in a month, while the local market is down 66.
Epstein’s glaring conflict of interest
|
David Epstein’s appointment as Qantas’s General Manager of Government and Corporate Affairs perfectly demonstrates the hole in the Government Lobbyist Register and Code of Conduct. Epstein will go from being the Prime Minister’s chief of staff to representing a huge Australian company that depends heavily on our legislatively-protected closed shop of an aviation sector for its profits. The chief role of Qantas’s Government relations area is to maintain pressure on the Government to resist foreign applications for access to Qantas’s domestic and international routes. The aviation area of the Commonwealth Department of Transport (these days called Infrastructure) has for decades worked to protect the interests of Qantas against foreign competitors, to the detriment of Australian travellers. This is a critical time for Qantas, and not just because of the impact of financial crisis and a slowing economy. The Government is in the midst of a major aviation review, with the goal of producing an aviation White Paper by the middle of 2009. One of the key issues is, in Anthony Albanese’s words, an international aviation policy that “balances the needs of an Australian based industry with international competitiveness.” That’s code for how much protection from competition Qantas will continue to get. The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade has already fired a shot across the bows of the protectionists in Infrastructure, calling for liberalisation in its submission to the review. A handy time to have the Prime Minister’s former COS representing you in the corridors of power. In the PMO, Epstein would have been closely involved in the decision to establish the review, and working out what the Government wanted from it. However, Epstein has not breached the Government’s lobbyist code of conduct. “Lobbying activities” under the Lobbyist Register and code of conduct apply only to third party lobbyists, not to the in-house variety like Epstein — a gap that Crikey has long lamented. Working in the Prime Minister’s Office almost certainly means you are exposed to pretty much every issue facing the Government. If the Lobbyist code of conduct was extended to in-house lobbyists, staff from the PMO would be banned from any lobbying work for twelve months. Tough, perhaps, but a relatively small price to pay for avoiding the sort of blatant conflict that Epstein now has. Undoubtedly he will handle it professionally and with full regard for the strict confidentiality requirements placed on all former staff and public servants. But it’s not good enough, especially for a Government that has proved it’s the real thing about accountability in other areas. Here’s the internal memo sent by Qantas management announcing the appointment of Epstein:
|
|
|
|














5 Comments
Thank you David. Next time I will endeavour to project myself forward in time and watch that afternoon’s QT before writing my morning’s copy. Butn I don’t quite see how the Senator’s answer makes my article “redundant”. Badly-written rubbish, perhaps. Drivel of the worst kind, yes. But redundant? Hardly.
May be useful Bernard if you check HANSARD for Minister of State Sen Faulkners answer to a question on that very subject in question time.Could well make the thrust of your article redundant.
Bernard it burns my bum to have to agree with you but you are absolutely correct. it should not be this soon after his resignation.
Is no one particularly concerned about the costs and pitfalls of people such as Epstein blurring the public and private sector lines. It’s what Burke did during the WA Inc era as Connell and Bond took that state and the nation for a ride. And when one slips through the loophole justs gets bigger. Rudd is feeling pretty comfortable with his ride so far and will make the most of the smoke and mirrors aspect to politics. As often as he tells you he’s a cut above Howard you can bet he isn’t.
Bernard it burns my bum to have to agree with you but you are absolutely correct. it should not be this soon after his resignation.