Wall St was down 94 overnight, its biggest fall in a month, while the local market is down 66.
Liberals and Fielding block our right to know
|
So who purchased access to senior Labor ministers at the ALP national conference? Which businesses paid $7500 to receive a one-on-one meeting — albeit brief — with a minister, and attend presentations from the likes of Julia Gillard and Penny Wong? The “access” available to donors at the ALP conference was, by all accounts, derisory. Indeed there were plenty of lobbyists saying before the event that they were only going to be seen, rather than have any meaningful interaction with a Minister. But that’s not the point. Under Commonwealth electoral disclosure laws, however, we may never find out — and if we do, we’ll be waiting a very long time. Courtesy of the changes made by the Howard Government in 2005, the “Business Observer” entry fee is below the reporting threshold for donations. And in any event, under the Commonwealth Electoral Act, such sums are not considered “donations” but as fees paid for goods and services. Donors don’t have to declare them. That had nothing to do with the Howard Government. Political parties are required to disclose not merely donations but fees of the sort charged in Sydney last week, if they’re over the threshold. The Federal ALP has also declared it will reveal donations and fees over $1000, rather than observe the Howard-era threshold. But under current reporting requirements, we won’t know until the 2009-10 disclosure reports are released by the Australian Electoral Commission. That will be in February 2011. Yes, February 2011. Fortunately, NSW electoral disclosure laws are much tighter. Donors are required to disclose fees as well as donations. And they have to report every six months. We’ll be able to see the NSW report covering this period around about April 2010. So courtesy of the fact that it was held in Sydney, we can learn who was buying access. But the conference might just as easily have been held elsewhere, and we would have been in the dark. John Faulkner’s electoral reform bill will lower the threshold for disclosure at the Commonwealth level back to $1000. It will impose six-monthly reporting. It won’t fix the donation/fee distinction but as political parties have to report both, it still enables transparency of the purchase of access. That bill was rejected by the Coalition and Steve Fielding earlier this year. Nick Xenophon and the Greens supported it. It will be back in the Senate next week or shortly thereafter. The Coalition rejected it ostensibly because it wanted the Government’s separate electoral reform Green Paper process completed before it considered the reforms. It has also argued that there should be less transparency about political donations because unions will target small businesses who give to the Coalition. No evidence of this has ever been produced, the AEC says. Why Steve Fielding rejected the bill is unclear. The man is hopelessly unfit for his position and the sooner he is turfed from the Senate the better for Australian public life. Despite much ado about the purchase of access and suggestions of some vague form of corruption in Queensland, Australia’s political media have shown little interest in the fate of the Faulkner bill. It’s hard to take campaigns like “Australia’s Right To Know” seriously when such a blatant act of political opportunism by the Coalition on the critical issue of electoral transparency has been ignored or considered only in the context of whether it will afford a trigger in the spurious double dissolution debate. The Coalition is right to be concerned about the advantage the ALP has from union donations. It’s a problem that will be magnified at the next election because many traditional Coalition donors will be contributing to the ALP, partly as a case of realpolitik, partly because many are pleased with the Government’s handling of the economic crisis and dismayed at the Coalition’s economic obstructionism. There are some in the commercial property sector — traditionally generous donors to the Liberals — who won’t forgive the blocking of the Australian Business Investment Partnership. The best way to solve that is to go further and ban all donations and publicly fund election campaigns. But the Coalition refuses to engage on the issue. This is the Liberal Party’s laughably short submission on the electoral reform bill. The media can’t have it both ways. Either reforms to increase transparency should be supported, or the incessant carping about corruption and access-buying should stop. |
|
|
20 Comments
My understanding of the system is that if a double dissolution occurs the quota for a senate seat is half of that required in a “normal” election. Thus a senator with a small primary vote has greater chance of re-election, especially is he/she is nicely positioned on a couple of major issues that are judged to be of concern to the majority of voters.
So the strategy is to keep on rejecting votes while positioning early for good image grabs.
Mike
Surely in the spirit of the Party that he purports to be guided by, the brainless Fielding could deduce that what the Govt is trying to do would bring a little transperancy into an area that would make it obvious to even half wits like the Senator, the amendment is a good one. Forget the stance of the Opposition, they are so busy objecting to everything they now are typical yesterdays politicians. What Fielding possibly thinks he will acheive by siding with the rabble he so often joins has no logic. But then the “Family First” rep wouldnt know logic if it bit him on the butt.
“…So who purchased access to senior Labor ministers at the ALP national conference? Which businesses paid $7500 to receive a one-on-one meeting — albeit brief — with a minister, and attend presentations from the likes of Julia Gillard and Penny Wong?…”
Good to see Mr Keane is focussing on the big issues.
“…Why Steve Fielding rejected the bill is unclear. The man is hopelessly unfit for his position and the sooner he is turfed from the Senate the better for Australian public life…”
And with such bipartisan objectivity.
Well done Sir.
The Libs resisting change I can understand even though I don’t agree. They are in opposition and seem unable to adapt to anything anywhere. It appears the opposition are more interested in protecting a status quo that may see them out of power for many years if they don’t develop some backbone on something/anything.
I’m suspicious of Fielding’s motives here. What does he have on his donation lists that he would prefer not to publicise I wonder?
Bernard Keane’s reputation as a writer should now be over - this woeful piece of writing must surely spell his death knell.
For a shock writer, whose job is to get large numbers of people writing about him (either loving him or hating him), he has attracted just 4 comments.
His style is juvenile, the ‘facts’ are either completely absent or only half reported (which gives them new meaning), and people are now bored with him.
For me, I won’t be reading him in future.
But don’t worry Bernard - you still have 3 readers.
Pedro you lame brain. Ever consider most agree with Bernard and leave it there, without comment. The blog will be a better place without your insufferable bullshit. Go pull a wave over your head.
MOST PECULIAR MAMA “…Why Steve Fielding rejected the bill is unclear. The man is hopelessly unfit for his position and the sooner he is turfed from the Senate the better for Australian public life…” “And with such bipartisan objectivity.”
Well, I agree with Bernard. This person is at best having difficulty grasping the reason why he was elected in the first place. He argues re openess and honesty, and being fair dinkum and an assortment of other glib remarks, but he’s just a mouth piece for the conservative side of politics. I hope that Labor has learnt its lesson this time, and doesn’t give, swap or in any other shape or form, assists him or his party into the Senate.
John Hatton, a retired Independent who served in the NSW Parliament, is probably one of if not the person whose high integrity is well known - in NSW anyway. Only today,he was on local ABC radio speaking of this very thing - honesty and accountability by politicians. He ‘blew’ the whistle on forms of corruption in this State some years ago, and as a caller said today, ‘could we clone him, so he’s always here’? I say ‘amen’ to that.
He pointed out, that the Shoalhaven Council(since the last local govt elections)has the position of each Councilor on its website, in particular, documentation of all donations-it’s updated each 3 months. Now, if they can do it, then what’s the problem with the rest of them. If they have nothing to hide, then they have nothing to hide.
Many of us can recall the ICAC report into Wollongong Council. People will also recall the dinners etc organized by candidates of State Labor members(Labor, but the others do it too?)and the monies are organized in such a way, that it’s just reported as part of the ALP financial reports-and it’s not every 3 months either, it’s as Bernard has written here, so the individual donars are not published. State & Federal politicians get heaps of assistance re financing their campaigns-in fact, John Hatton said he’s amazed that a ‘lone candidate’ ever gets elected, as they just can’t compete with the monies sitting members have. They just got an increase in those monies, and remember, that Howard did weeks of politiking prior to the last election(and others before it)but the Liberal Party didn’t have to pay until the date of the election is formally announced, and the ‘formal’ launch takes place. What a rort that is - we pick up the tab in the meantime. The same will apply to the ALP this time of course, unless something has changed that I’m not aware of!
PEDRO - I’ve been to the supermarket buying some essentials. I was away from my computer. People do have another life you know? You’re showing your ignorance of the facts. The situation re the huge sums of money spent on elections is a disgrace. We’re going to end up like the US, where you need millions to even bother putting your name forward to be a candidate - for any tier of govt, but the President - forget it!
It’s telling, that Malcolm Turnbull uses derogatory terms to describe Kevin Rudd, but given the chance to show some spine, not to mention any semblance of accountability to the electorate re their hard earned, he chooses to weakly and without integrity support Howard’s slimy practices.
I’d go as far as to say, bring on a double dissolution, and let’s clean the federal parliament of these dinosaurs who are politely, choosing dishonest practices over full accountability - to us. How insulting!
I remember this subject coming up in a SMH piece a few months ago. Apparently Fielding was all in favour of this legislation but changed his mind after an unnamed conservative donor gave him 100 grand. It would appear that Family First has something to hide…like what sort of people support them.
GAIL TUFT: I’m surprised that you are surprised about Senator Fielding. He got his position because of an ill-advised manoeuvre by the Labor Party. One which I’m sure they regret. His only qualification was to be a man of God. Poor God, he always ends up with the no-hopers, the clunkers and the wierdos.
Ostensibly, Fielding paid for his own ticket to travel overseas and find out how other countries have dealt with climate change. Back in Oz he said something fatuous like, the whole world had been created by God in five thousand years and he didn’t see why anyone should doubt that God would have told us if climate change was happening. This is by no means a direct quote, merely what I believe he was on about.
The real question here is…What on earth is the point of travel if one is going to go OS with a closed mind? He should have saved himself a lot of money, sat here and read his bible.
The man is an amateur. Nothing can excuse an amateur politician.
Sorry GAIL. That was meant to read…God invented the whole world five thousand years ago.
Never allow logic to get in the way of a bad idea.
Seeya in the next Bernard Keane column, Pedro!
The man is hopelessly unfit for his position and the sooner he is turfed from the Senate the better for Australian public life.
Still, it’s supposed to be a representative democracy, or an approximation of one, and if the guy gets enough votes he’s in. He was elected, not appointed. It’s up to the Australian public to decide who gets returned to the Senate. The two party dominant systems of the Anglosphere are more than a little past their prime…
But Sean, Fielding wasn’t elected in any reasonable sense of the word. He got a vanishly small primary vote (much less than 1%) which was smaller than several other very minor parties. He got a quota due to the complex preference swap system that goes on for senate ticket votes, and because he got very lucky in the duck-duck-goose counting game for the last senate spot.
Technically he was elected, but he was elected due to the preferences of Labor voters who would have been almost universally unaware of where the preferences from their votes would be flowing. Unlike say Nick Xenophon, he cannot reasonably claim to have a constiuancy or electorale mandate for anything, which makes his incompetant antics all the more frustrating.
I do feel a little sorry for him, I’m sure he never thought he’d actually be elected, and was clearly woefully prepared and clearly lacks any real support from decent team of staff and advisors. Plus I can’t see him getting a job back in Engineering once he’s shown the door from politics, given his demonstrated inumeracy when it comes to technical and scientific data…
Bogdanovist,
While there’s no way Labor can escape its responsibility for the Fielding debacle (an ill-advised attempt to save Jacinta Collins’ Senate seat), Democrat preferences were also critical to getting him over the line. It’s unfortunate that the hostility between Labor and the Greens and the Democrats and the Greens had this effect.
True, true, Bogdanovist. The real message is that a proper proportional voting system needs to be put in place that is not so dysfunctional, in both Reps and the Senate. And the smaller players struggle to recruit good advisers and pay competitively. You might say Labor’s preferencing backfired, but given that he has helped defeat transparency for all parties, perhaps some in the ALP are secretly quite happy with the arrangement, despite Senator Faulkner’s best efforts.
AND FOR ALL THE NEWS WHICH IS THE NEWS: Did anyone here see Malcolm Turnbull’s little story in Australian Story: not to mention the Tony Jones #lateline show? There was Malcolm Turnbull is in tears about him Mum nicking off to leave the family flat. Followed by a stunning exhibition of amoral-which is not a word I use lightly- behaviour in throwing the unfortunate Godwin Greech to the wolves.
Guess who the man coming to dinner was? None other than Peter the Putrid Costello. Fortuitously, he happened to be in Israel during the ‘Utegate affair’ and now he is a cheerful as a happy cricket sunning himself in the warmth of Tony Jones’ smiles and repartee.
Is it possible in Oz to draft someone into politics even though he’s officially resigned? If it is he will make lightening look slow when he moves to accept. Then we have the Mad Monk chomping at the bit in this his swan-song for the number one spot and Joe Hockey looking furtive the way only a fat man can look furtive. Hopefully Malcolm the Mad will not be given another chance.
The thought of yet another Catholic, Turnbull, Abbott, Nelson, should deter the power brokers from considering Christopher Pyne.
If nothing else all the above proves the Liberals don’t even have a valid Party, let alone a philosophy. They are doomed to spend at least ten years in the wilderness learning a simple fact. With the exception of the mal-functional family of the British royals. No one is born to rule.
Agreed Sean, the senate preference system definately needs an overhaul. The new NSW style of optional preferential above the line voting (preference groups in order) just makes complete sense. I think Antony Green has a thorough description of this and the case for using a similiar system federally over at his blog.
Arghh Venise the thought of Chrissie Pyne’s falsetto being a permanent fixture at the Opposition despatch box brings on an attack of the dry horrors. Where’s the merlot when I need it?
Venise Alstergren
Posted Monday, 3 August 2009 at 11:42 pm | Permalink
Good for you Venise! You gave me a good laugh. As one who was brought up with the catholic dogma, I saved my biggest laugh for your comments re the Mad Monk and his mates - they all make me cringe. The word ‘sleaze’ was designed with them in mind. As a friend of mine used to say about a boss we had of similar type - be carpeted but never cornered? They’re like the school bullies at some posh private school who behave badly at term’s end but always get off! Or plead their case, or offer some soppy nonsense. Or pay someone to plead their case? Oh dear!
#
RaymondChurch
“Arghh Venise the thought of Chrissie Pyne’s falsetto being a permanent fixture at the Opposition despatch box brings on an attack of the dry horrors. Where’s the merlot when I need it?”
He reminds me of the summer. Like a mozzie zapping around me while I’m watering my plants on dusk - a damned nuisance! Not all of their seats are considerred ‘safe’ are they? Please?
It’s a conservative thinggy. The more you know (about anything) the less likely you are to vote conservative. It’s a fear condition that survives on ignorance, sadly there’s enough of that around. It’s a fact, fundamentalists from all religions exsist because of their lack of knowledge, something else they don’t want you to know.