tag:theconversation.com,2011:/id/topics/ministerial-code-of-conduct-39263/articlesministerial code of conduct – The Conversation2021-02-18T04:54:08Ztag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1555532021-02-18T04:54:08Z2021-02-18T04:54:08ZTo fix the culture in Canberra, we need to take a sledgehammer to male privilege<p>As the government looks for ways to address the toxicity of Australia’s parliament for the women who work there, it’s important to consider the underlying issue that pervades Australian politics: male privilege.</p>
<p>In making public allegations of rape by a colleague, former parliamentary staffer Brittney Higgins identified what needs to be done to protect women in the future — a review of the <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/C2014C00540">Members of Parliament (Staff) Act</a> and an independent body to handle complaints.</p>
<p>The precarious nature of staffers’ employment has been <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/no-rights-at-work-mps-staffers-are-the-uber-drivers-of-the-political-process-20210215-p572mg.html">identified as a key issue</a> in the power imbalance that can leave employees vulnerable to bullying and abuse, with nowhere to turn.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/why-political-staffers-are-vulnerable-to-sexual-misconduct-and-little-is-done-to-stop-it-155300">Why political staffers are vulnerable to sexual misconduct — and little is done to stop it</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>But these matters have been aired before, most recently in November, when the Four Corners report <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/4corners/inside-the-canberra-bubble/12864676">Inside the Canberra Bubble</a> put the spotlight on the behaviour of two senior Cabinet ministers, Alan Tudge and Attorney-General Christian Porter.</p>
<p>In a workplace of lawmakers, why is it so hard to make changes to the way parliament operates? And how can we implement the necessary policy reforms to improve gender equality?</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1362225036241887232"}"></div></p>
<h2>Unpacking privilege: what our research finds</h2>
<p>Our research points to male privilege as the key stumbling block - and shows how it entrenches women’s disadvantage.</p>
<p>In a <a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/gwao.12639">new paper</a>, we examined two male-dominated workplaces in Australia — politics and construction. Instead of focusing on women’s under-representation in these fields, we looked at it from the viewpoint of men’s over-representation and privilege. </p>
<p>In both sectors, male privilege acts as a barrier to the attraction, retention and progression of women. We found this playing out in three different ways.</p>
<p><strong>1) A culture of denial</strong></p>
<p>In the construction sector, the culture of denial keeps women from being recruited into jobs. When asked about the lack of gender diversity in the sector, men typically respond by saying, “Women don’t want to work in the jobs that we work in”.</p>
<p>In politics, the culture of denial often takes the form of “turning a blind eye”. In many cases of sexual assault, including this latest matter relating to Higgins, senior staff have been made aware of complaints of sexual harassment and abuse, but none responded appropriately. </p>
<p>In the majority of these cases, women who have been victimised leave their jobs, further entrenching those in power who fail to take these matters seriously. </p>
<p><strong>2) Perceptions that rules are neutral and applied objectively</strong></p>
<p>In both of these male-dominated arenas — construction and politics — there is a narrative that rules and procedures are gender-neutral and applied objectively. However, this prevents any serious questioning of the rules themselves.</p>
<p>The fact there are no codified rules or sanctions in parliament to address sexual harassment and assault is just one example of how this plays out. Both professions are geared around men’s expectations and the view that their experiences are universal.</p>
<p><strong>3) Backlash and resistance to keep the gender status quo in place</strong></p>
<p>There’s no shortage of <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-05-11/david-leyonhjelm-defamation-case-appeal-sarah-hanson-young/12234094">examples</a> of the <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/apr/05/julia-gillard-warns-of-backlash-from-gender-equality-critics">backlash</a> to the growing presence of women in Australian politics. </p>
<p>In a 2019 speech about the Liberal Party’s “women problem”, former Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/mar/09/far-too-blokey-turnbull-says-liberal-party-has-gender-inequality-problem">admitted</a> that reform was needed to recruit more women. </p>
<p>At the same time, he anticipated that moves towards quotas would be made difficult by backlash at the grassroots level from Liberal Party members. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/384946/original/file-20210218-23-14f0zfh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/384946/original/file-20210218-23-14f0zfh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=350&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/384946/original/file-20210218-23-14f0zfh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=350&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/384946/original/file-20210218-23-14f0zfh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=350&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/384946/original/file-20210218-23-14f0zfh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=440&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/384946/original/file-20210218-23-14f0zfh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=440&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/384946/original/file-20210218-23-14f0zfh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=440&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Male over-representation was perhaps no more evident than in Tony Abbott’s cabinet in 2013.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Daniel Munoz/AAP</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>It’s time to stop tinkering around the edges</h2>
<p>In response to Higgins’ allegations, Prime Minister Scott Morrison has initiated <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/answer-for-your-conduct-former-staffer-says-ministers-must-explain-actions-on-alleged-rape-20210217-p573f0.html">three inquiries</a>. They will focus on a new code of conduct for Coalition MPs, a mechanism to enable staff to make complaints externally and the working culture of parliament more broadly. </p>
<p>Leaving aside concerns about the independence of these inquiries, what is most important is they get to the heart of the structural issues that keep male privilege intact. </p>
<p>There are some good examples overseas of steps to support this kind of institutional change.</p>
<p>The first step would be the introduction of an independent reporting system for all parliamentary members and staff – one that protects the anonymity of the person reporting a complaint and is enforceable with sanctions.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/is-canberra-having-a-metoo-moment-it-will-take-more-than-reports-of-mps-behaving-badly-for-parliament-to-change-149819">Is Canberra having a #metoo moment? It will take more than reports of MPs behaving badly for parliament to change</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>In New Zealand, the parliament is also grappling with these issues. The 2019 <a href="https://www.parliament.nz/en/visit-and-learn/how-parliament-works/office-of-the-speaker/corporate-documents/independent-external-review-into-bullying-and-harassment-in-the-new-zealand-parliamentary-workplace-final-report/">Francis report</a> found widespread bullying and harassment in the parliamentary workplace there, as well as allegations of sexual assault and racism. </p>
<p>The parliament is making progress on implementing the recommendations of the report, including a <a href="https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/political/421956/mallard-releases-code-of-conduct-following-bad-behaviour-in-parliament">code of conduct to make parliament a safer workplace</a>. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/384934/original/file-20210218-18-dy7gfr.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/384934/original/file-20210218-18-dy7gfr.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/384934/original/file-20210218-18-dy7gfr.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/384934/original/file-20210218-18-dy7gfr.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/384934/original/file-20210218-18-dy7gfr.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/384934/original/file-20210218-18-dy7gfr.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/384934/original/file-20210218-18-dy7gfr.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">New Zealand’s current parliament is the most diverse in the nation’s history, with nearly 50% of seats held by women and 21% by Māori MPs.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Nick Perry/AP</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>In the UK, Professor Sarah Childs, a gender and politics expert, published a comprehensive <a href="https://www.bristol.ac.uk/media-library/sites/news/2016/july/20%20Jul%20Prof%20Sarah%20Childs%20The%20Good%20Parliament%20report.pdf">report</a> on women’s representation and inclusion in parliament in 2016. It provides a blueprint for reform, with recommendations including cross-party agreement on unacceptable and unprofessional behaviour in the House of Commons.</p>
<p>In 2019, the Inter-Parliamentary Union, a global organisation of national parliaments, <a href="https://www.ipu.org/resources/publications/reference/2019-11/guidelines-elimination-sexism-harassment-and-violence-against-women-in-parliament">also published guidelines</a> on eliminating sexism and gender-based abuse from parliaments. </p>
<p>It detailed five important elements for handling complaints. Such systems must be </p>
<ul>
<li><p>confidential</p></li>
<li><p>responsive to the complainants</p></li>
<li><p>fair to all parties</p></li>
<li><p>based on a thorough, impartial and comprehensive investigation and </p></li>
<li><p>timely.</p></li>
</ul>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/view-from-the-hill-linda-reynolds-feels-the-lash-after-scott-morrison-says-he-was-blindsided-by-rape-allegation-155400">View from The Hill: Linda Reynolds feels the lash after Scott Morrison says he was blindsided by rape allegation</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>The male privilege in Australia’s parliament has given its members such a sense of exceptionalism, they seem to think the standards of the corporate office or roadworks site should not apply to their workplace.</p>
<p>But there’s no reason why conduct that would be banned on a construction site should be treated any differently inside Parliament House. Whether a woman wears a hardhat or a lanyard, both have an equal right to safety at work.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/155553/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The male privilege in Australia’s parliament has given its members such a sense of exceptionalism, they think the standards of the corporate office should not apply to their workplace.Louise Chappell, Scientia Professor, UNSW SydneyNatalie Galea, Postdoctoral fellow, UNSW SydneyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1207612019-07-22T13:35:20Z2019-07-22T13:35:20ZView from The Hill: Senate decides Pyne and Bishop have a few more parliamentary questions to answer<p>Martin Parkinson, secretary of the Prime Minister’s department, <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-07-22/christopher-pyne-julie-bishop-new-jobs-do-not-breach-standards/11330262">has cleared</a> Christopher Pyne and Julie Bishop of breaching the government’s code of ministerial standards with their post-politics jobs. But it’s doubtful the average voter would take such a literal or generous view of their conduct.</p>
<p>Scott Morrison had flicked to Parkinson the row over the part-time positions the two high flyers have taken that clearly overlap their previous portfolios, when the rules provide for a longer separation period.</p>
<p>Pyne, former defence minister, is advising EY, which operates in the defence area. Bishop, former foreign minister, is joining the board of <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/jul/04/palladium-aid-sector-concerned-about-rise-of-private-contractor-employing-julie-bishop">Palladium</a>, a global group working in aid and development.</p>
<p>The code says: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>Ministers are required to undertake that, for an eighteen month period after ceasing to be a Minister, they will not lobby, advocate or have business meetings with members of the government, parliament, public service or defence force on any matters on which they have had official dealings as Minister in their last eighteen months in office.</p>
<p>Ministers are also required to undertake that, on leaving office, they will not take personal advantage of information to which they have had access as a Minister, where that information is not generally available to the public.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>The government on Monday was quick to gag an embarrassing opposition move in the lower House calling for Parkinson to probe further into the circumstances of Bishop, who told him she didn’t have any contact with Palladium while foreign minister. A video had been posted by the company, labelled “Australia’s Foreign Minister, Julie Bishop, commends Shared Value and Palladium’s Business Partnership Platform”. (Government sources said later that the video - in which Bishop did not use Palladium’s name - was a congratulatory one about a Foreign Affairs initiative.)</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/JVFyRnjRbiU?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<p>In the Senate, the government lacked the numbers to prevent the conduct of Pyne and Bishop being <a href="https://www.afr.com/news/politics/national/scomo-ey-to-be-called-to-inquiry-into-pyne-bishop-jobs-20190722-p529hs">referred to a committee</a>. The motion from Centre Alliance’s Rex Patrick won support from Labor, Greens and non-Greens crossbenchers, passing 35 to 29. The committee has three opposition members, two government senators and a One Nation representative. Pyne and Bishop will be invited to appear and could be required to do so.</p>
<p>The greyest area of the post-ministerial employment provision is the stipulation not to take advantage of private information acquired as a minister.</p>
<p>Parkinson says in his report to Morrison: “a distinction should be drawn between experience gained through being a minister and specific knowledge they acquire through performing the role. It is the latter which is pertinent to the Standards”.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/why-christopher-pyne-and-julie-bishop-fail-the-pub-test-with-their-new-jobs-119875">Why Christopher Pyne and Julie Bishop fail the 'pub test' with their new jobs</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>In practice, however, this can fade into a distinction without a difference. As Parkinson also says: “It is not reasonable to think that former Ministers can or will ‘forget’ all information or knowledge gained by them in the course of their ministerial roles”.</p>
<p>Pyne initially said he would be “providing strategic advice to EY, as the firm looks to expand its footprint in the Defence Industry”. EY initially talked up his role but then quickly qualified it in the face of the controversy.</p>
<p>Parkinson spoke to both Pyne (who had already issued a long public written explanation) and Bishop.</p>
<p>In Parkinson’s account, Pyne seems to have done a lot of talking with EY about what he can’t do. EY is paying, of course, for what he can do.</p>
<p>Parkinson says he considers Pyne “has put in place mechanisms to ensure that, whilst his engagement with EY will appropriately draw on his 26 year experience as a parliamentarian, he will not impart direct or specific knowledge known to him only by virtue of his ministerial position”.</p>
<p>Bishop, who will have been out of the ministry for a year next month, has said little publicly about her non-executive directorship. She told Parkinson she had yet to attend a board meeting and that “Palladium does not expect her to engage on any Australian based projects”.</p>
<p>Patrick suggested the terms of reference given to Parkinson were limited - designed to fix a “political problem”.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/grattan-on-friday-a-kinder-gentler-senate-at-least-for-now-119902">Grattan on Friday: A kinder, gentler Senate - at least for now</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>This is not new ground. Former trade minister Andrew Robb took up employment (annual remuneration of $880,000) with the Chinese Landbridge Group soon after he was trade minister. He has strongly rejected criticism of his action (and since left the group).</p>
<p>Two former ministers with responsibility for resources, the Liberals’ Ian Macfarlane and Labor’s Martin Ferguson quickly accepted positions with the sector. Stephen Conroy, a former communications minister overseeing online gambling laws, came under fire on becoming a lobbyist for the gambling industry – he points out this was three years after he was a minister.</p>
<p>Going back further (when the ministerial code of conduct did not include a post-separation provision) <a href="https://insidestory.org.au/first-termers/">Peter Reith segued</a> from the defence portfolio into advising defence contractor Tenix.</p>
<p>The Senate inquiry, reporting by September 10, will look at “action taken by the Prime Minister and the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet to ensure full compliance by former Ministers” with the relevant section of the ministerial standards. </p>
<p>At the end of his letter to Morrison, Parkinson highlights the impotence of a PM once members of his team are out in the wide world.</p>
<p>“While there are certain actions available to you when considering the conduct of a current serving Minister, and a possible breach of the Standards, there are no specific actions that can be taken by you in relation to former Ministers once they have left the Parliament”.</p>
<p>Either some way should be found to make the code enforceable or, if that is too hard, let’s skip the hypocrisy and admit it is no more than an exhortation to departees to act properly – complying with not just its letter but its spirit.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/120761/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Michelle Grattan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Former ministers Christopher Pyne and Julie Bishop are among many who have accepted jobs post-office in breach of ministerial code of conduct - but they will face a senate inquiry.Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of CanberraLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/926912018-03-01T11:58:28Z2018-03-01T11:58:28ZGrattan on Friday: What was that about making Parliament House a better workplace for women?<p>New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern – who flew into Sydney on Thursday night for a 24-hour visit – admits she’d struggle if she were operating in the Australian political environment.</p>
<p>In an interview with The Conversation, Ardern said that while politics in her country is very robust: “I have observed and thought, gosh there is another level there in Australia”.</p>
<p>We’ve seen yet again this week how low that level can fall.</p>
<p>When on Wednesday cabinet minister Michaelia Cash delivered her extraordinary threat to “name every young woman in Mr Shorten’s office over which rumours in this place abound”, she didn’t just insult identifiable individuals – she also further debased our already degraded political system.</p>
<p>Imagine if someone had said, out of nowhere and with no supporting substance, that they were ready “to expose rumours that surround senator Cash”. Cash would be justifiably outraged. She’d say: “What are you talking about?” She’d want an apology.</p>
<p>And yet when Cash – a former minister for women, incidentally – was challenged, she initially offered only the most qualified withdrawal: “If anyone has been offended by my remarks, I withdraw”.</p>
<p>It wasn’t until Thursday afternoon that she withdrew her comments “unreservedly”. There was no apology to the women.</p>
<p>Anyway, while withdrawals and apologies should be made when politicians behave badly (Thursday saw Kim Carr apologise for likening a Liberal senator to a member of the Hitler Youth), they shouldn’t be regarded as get-out-of-jail cards for what ought not have been said in the first place. They often do not repair the damage of the original smears, which leave their rents in the political fabric.</p>
<p>Politicians may agree, at the level of generality, that their discourse should be more civil; the tone of parliament should be raised. Yet in practice, they simply refuse to change.</p>
<p>Let’s not romanticise the past – the gutter was always there. But equally, let’s not allow this crop of politicians off the hook, even if today’s media blitz does mean we see more of the appalling moments than we used to.</p>
<p>Ironically, it appears the trail from Cash’s remarkable outburst goes back to Malcolm Turnbull’s controversial attempt to impose a stricter standard in ministerial offices, by an addition to the ministerial code of conduct.</p>
<p>As part of his morals lecture delivered at the height of the Barnaby Joyce affair a fortnight ago, Turnbull announced his ban on ministers having sexual relationships with members of their staff.</p>
<p>In Wednesday’s Senate estimates committee hearing, Cash – who last year got into political trouble when her then-staffer told the media about a planned raid on the Australian Workers’ Union office – was being quizzed about her current staff.</p>
<p>Two new female appointees to senior positions are from other ministers’ offices.</p>
<p>It is claimed Cash believed Labor senator Doug Cameron was about to go down the route of insinuation and that she was being protective of her staff.</p>
<p>Cameron categorically denied he had any such intention, saying he was seeking to probe “the web of influence from Michaelia Cash’s office into agencies that are pursuing working people and the trade union movement”.</p>
<p>Cash was doubly guilty: of apparently misjudging what Labor was on about, and of a lack of restraint and nous. Even if she did genuinely misinterpret the questioning, her tit-for-tat was a slur on one lot of women to shield other women.</p>
<p>Turnbull, defending Cash in parliament, accused Cameron of “bullying” her. Cash also invoked the bullying line. It was clutching at straws. Both Cameron and Cash are hardened political brawlers.</p>
<p>Cash’s frequent political tactic is to default to aggression. In this case it was counter-productive as well as egregious. Just as the government was sloughing off the debilitating Joyce saga, and trying to exploit Bill Shorten’s shilly-shallying on Adani, it was again diverted.</p>
<p>The incident has shown the unintended consequences of the sex ban, which shines unwanted – and what’s likely in most cases to be irrelevant or misleading – light on staff moves between ministerial offices.</p>
<p>In terms of managing individual offices, such a ban seems common sense. But when it comes to political management across government, it encourages gossipy speculation. Once again Turnbull, who found himself in a corner, went too far, potentially subjecting staff who move offices to rumour-mongering.</p>
<p>Ardern says she didn’t feel such a code was necessary in New Zealand. But she added diplomatically that she was not passing judgement on what happened here. </p>
<p>“You’re always meeting the demands that are on you as a leader at that given time, and so certainly I watched and it was a really difficult situation in Australia that’s been going on over this last period,” she said. That’s something of an understatement.</p>
<p>Among those who rallied to defend Cash, Peter Dutton headed off in a particularly distasteful direction – Labor figures’ personal pasts.</p>
<p>“I think there’s a frustration on the Coalition side at the moment,” he said on radio. “We’ve sat there taking a morals lecture from Bill Shorten in relation to Barnaby Joyce over the last few weeks, and people know there is a history of problems in Bill Shorten’s personal life, Tony Burke’s personal life, and to be lectured by the Labor Party really sticks in the craw,” he said.</p>
<p>“I think if we’re being honest, there’s a general frustration within the parliament that you’ve got people like Shorten and Burke and a couple of others on the other side who are being virtuous and I’m not sure they’ve got great grounds to be virtuous.”</p>
<p>There are two obvious points to make here.</p>
<p>The headline “morals” lecture in the Joyce case came from the prime minister.</p>
<p>And the “frustration” the Coalition feels is less because of any Labor moralising and more because the government is killing itself with its own mistakes.</p>
<p><strong>POSTSCRIPT:</strong></p>
<p>I had cause to look back at some clips from the 1984 election and came across this from The Age:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>The National Party leader, Mr Sinclair, when questioned again yesterday about his former relationship with a Sydney businesswoman, asked why the past of the prime minister, Mr Hawke, was not being raised in the election campaign.</p>
</blockquote><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/92691/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Michelle Grattan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Politicians may agree, at the level of generality, that their discourse should be more civil. Yet in practice, they simply refuse to change.Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of CanberraLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/919812018-02-22T19:11:27Z2018-02-22T19:11:27ZTurnbull’s ‘sex ban’ speech reveals that politics is still not an equal place for women – but it is changing<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/207455/original/file-20180222-152369-p63k27.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Malcolm Turnbull announces changes to the Ministerial Code of Conduct in the wake of the Barnaby Joyce affair.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP/Lukas Coch</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>The appropriateness of Malcolm Turnbull’s trenchant criticisms of Barnaby Joyce’s “shocking error of judgement” and his announcement of a ban on ministers having sex with staffers has already been <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/insiders/sunday-18-february-full-program/9459164">widely debated</a>.</p>
<p>However, when he made those <a href="https://www.pm.gov.au/media/press-conference-parliament-house-canberra">statements</a>, Turnbull also raised much broader issues about the position of women in parliament that are worth discussing in more depth.</p>
<p>Turnbull <a href="https://www.pm.gov.au/media/press-conference-parliament-house-canberra">acknowledged</a> that there were “some very serious issues about the culture of this place, of this parliament” that involved gender.</p>
<p>He stated: “Many women … who work in this building understand very powerfully what I am saying”. Consequently, the old <a href="https://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Parliamentary_Library/pubs/BN/2012-2013/Conduct#_Toc325623491">Ministerial Code of Conduct</a> needed to be revised because it didn’t adequately reflect the values “of workplaces where women are respected”.</p>
<p>Turnbull went on to <a href="https://www.pm.gov.au/media/press-conference-parliament-house-canberra">say</a>: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>I recognise that respect in workplaces is not entirely a gender issue, of course. But the truth is, as we know, most of the ministers, most of the bosses in this building if you like, are men and there is a gender, a real gender perspective here.</p>
</blockquote>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/x8S8FBAqPic?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<p>Turnbull is crafting an image of <a href="http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/08164649.2012.759311">“protective masculinity”</a>, of a fatherly protectiveness toward potentially vulnerable women, which he hopes will appeal both to social conservatives and feminists.</p>
<p>Leading Liberal Party social conservatives such as <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-02-18/scott-morrison-joins-insiders/9459106">Scott Morrison</a> have supported his ban. As has been <a href="http://www.afr.com/leadership/malcolm-turnbulls-metoo-moment-20180215-h0w5us">pointed out</a>, Turnbull’s position also references the challenging of conventional gender power relations in the workplace by movements such as #MeToo. (Though it should be noted that both some social conservatives and feminists may have reservations about the specific measures Turnbull advocates.)</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/fischer-calls-for-quick-resolution-of-nationals-crisis-while-joyce-is-determined-to-fight-to-the-death-92060">Fischer calls for quick resolution of Nationals crisis, while Joyce is determined to fight to the death</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>It was an acknowledgement of gendered power relations in parliament that more socially conservative predecessors such as <a href="http://www.annesummers.com.au/speeches/the-end-of-equality/">John Howard</a> or <a href="http://www.australianreview.net/digest/2012/04/gleeson_johnson.html">Tony Abbott</a> would have been unlikely to make. Indeed, Turnbull’s broader statements also raise feminist issues that may cause some tensions with social conservatives in the longer term. </p>
<p>For example, why, as Turnbull acknowledges, are most of the ministers in parliament male? </p>
<p>Turnbull was pulled up when he <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-10-11/fact-check-are-there-more-women-in-federal-cabinet-than-ever/9033650">mistakenly claimed</a> to have the most female cabinet ministers of any Australian government so far. It was <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-10-11/fact-check-are-there-more-women-in-federal-cabinet-than-ever/9033650">pointed out</a> that, at best, his record equalled Kevin Rudd’s, and that number has actually dropped since the <a href="https://theconversation.com/ley-goes-and-turnbulls-reforms-pave-way-for-fewer-expenses-scandals-71273">resignation of Sussan Ley</a>.</p>
<p>Indeed, Rudd had a higher percentage of female cabinet members – 30% compared with Turnbull’s initial 27% that dropped to 24% after Ley’s resignation, and to 22% when Turnbull expanded his cabinet from 21 to 23. Furthermore, there is only one female minister out of the seven in the <a href="https://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Parliamentary_Library/Parliamentary_Handbook/Current_Ministry_List">Turnbull government’s outer ministry</a>.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/207217/original/file-20180221-5552-1s399i7.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/207217/original/file-20180221-5552-1s399i7.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/207217/original/file-20180221-5552-1s399i7.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/207217/original/file-20180221-5552-1s399i7.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/207217/original/file-20180221-5552-1s399i7.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/207217/original/file-20180221-5552-1s399i7.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/207217/original/file-20180221-5552-1s399i7.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Malcolm Turnbull poses with female ministers in December 2017.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP/Lukas Coch</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Turnbull should be praised for having both a female foreign minister and defence minister, since these are senior portfolios not traditionally held by women.
Nonetheless, Peter Van Onselen has written tellingly regarding the apparent gender bias in Liberal cabinet selections, and the serious female talent that has been overlooked as a result, in both the <a href="https://www.theaustralian.com.au/opinion/columnists/peter-van-onselen/abbott-should-put-more-women-in-a-reshuffled-cabinet/news-story/d0a5a745f390d093236b448f33f76bc3">Abbott</a> and <a href="https://www.theaustralian.com.au/opinion/columnists/peter-van-onselen/did-merit-prevent-promotion-of-linda-reynolds-julia-banks-and-sarah-henderson/news-story/a6ffb8ef36148e9ea150b6f4b769dd96">Turnbull</a> cabinets. </p>
<p>Despite this, the situation has obviously improved markedly under Turnbull. </p>
<p>Julie Bishop <a href="https://www.mamamia.com.au/julie-bishop-on-sexism-at-work/">has talked</a> about her experience of being the only woman in Abbott’s first cabinet, and of how she’d put forward excellent ideas that were ignored, only to have a male colleague repeat the same idea and be lauded for it. </p>
<p>It was, she said, a form of unconscious bias that resulted in “almost a deafness”. Clearly cultural change and more respect for women in the workplace were needed there. </p>
<p>Furthermore, it isn’t just a case of the majority of ministers being male – so are the <a href="https://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Parliamentary_Library/FlagPost/2016/August/The_gender_composition_of_the_45th_parliament">majority of politicians</a>.</p>
<p>Women are seriously <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-11-27/liberal-party-lack-of-women-costing-votes/9175150">underrepresented</a> among Liberal MPs. As of November 2017, only 22% of Liberal politicians were women (with Labor’s proportion then being 45%). </p>
<p>Consequently, it isn’t just the culture in ministers’ offices that needs changing. Some female Liberal politicians, such as senator Linda Reynolds, <a href="https://www.lindareynolds.com.au/dame-elizabeth-couchman-2015-scholarship-award-address/">have drawn attention</a> to the need for broader cultural change in the Liberal Party to ensure more female politicians are recruited and women’s abilities are recognised. </p>
<p>Some have <a href="https://theconversation.com/how-the-liberals-can-fix-their-gender-problem-85442">even suggested that</a>, given merit is clearly not being recognised in candidate pre-selection, the Liberal Party should consider introducing quotas like Labor has done. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/how-the-liberals-can-fix-their-gender-problem-85442">How the Liberals can fix their gender problem</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Parliamentary culture in general <a href="https://theconversation.com/tony-abbott-and-women-how-both-sides-have-played-the-gender-card-10019">remains highly gendered</a>, with women often bearing the brunt of sexist attitudes. The culture is also one that has often rewarded particularly macho conceptions of masculinity that can disadvantage some men as well as women. </p>
<p>No wonder women can become the target or collateral damage, often aided and abetted by highly gendered <a href="http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/10361146.2017.1374347">media coverage</a>. The problems are not just confined to the Coalition, pervading most if not all parties, although some are doing better than others. </p>
<p>Indeed, while it has substantially increased its number of female politicians, Labor sometimes falls back on some of its old habits in regard to gender. These include appointing exceptionally capable female candidates to try to improve Labor’s image after male politicians have made a mess of things — a scenario that former premiers <a href="http://john.curtin.edu.au/lawrence/biography.html">Carmen Lawrence</a> and <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-06-05/joan-kirner-former-labor-premier-of-victoria-state-funeral-held/6523212">Joan Kirner</a> knew well. </p>
<p>Think of <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-01-17/kristina-keneally-expected-to-make-run-for-dastyari-senate-seat/9337144">Kristina Keneally</a> replacing Sam Dastyari in the Senate – although at least she is guaranteed her spot, unlike <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2018/feb/20/i-will-be-unemployed-if-i-lose-ged-kearney-and-labors-uphill-fight-to-save-batman">Ged Kearney</a>, who is faced with the difficult task of trying to retain Batman for Labor against the Greens following <a href="https://theconversation.com/early-byelection-test-for-shorten-after-david-feeney-quits-parliament-91073">David Feeney’s departure</a>. </p>
<p>However, clearly things are changing, and the gendered nature of parliamentary politics is under challenge. Turnbull’s acknowledgement of gendered power imbalances in parliament reveals that, even if he avoided discussing his own party’s contribution to them.</p>
<p>All states in Australia, other than South Australia, have now had a female premier, with some having had more than one. While Australia’s first female prime minister, Julia Gillard, regularly had <a href="https://theconversation.com/tony-abbott-and-women-how-both-sides-have-played-the-gender-card-10019">her gender used against her</a>, Australians will be watching the progress of New Zealand’s third female prime minister, Jacinda Ardern, with great interest. Perhaps, one day, we will even stop discussing her <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-01-19/annabel-crabb-jacinta-ardern-pregnant/9344218">baby</a> and her <a href="https://www.theaustralian.com.au/opinion/strewth/julie-bishop-does-the-soft-shoe-shuffle-after-jacinda-ardern-meeting/news-story/02acc5a77dec5311305030ab09858326">shoes</a>.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/91981/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Carol Johnson receives funding from the Australian Research Council.</span></em></p>Malcolm Turnbull’s acknowledgement of gendered power imbalances in parliament reveals that the gendered nature of politics is under challenge.Carol Johnson, Professor of Politics, University of AdelaideLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/922102018-02-21T12:12:17Z2018-02-21T12:12:17ZBarnaby Joyce wields the tea towel in the government’s soap opera<p>As Malcolm Turnbull heads for his time with Donald Trump, which carries its own challenges, he has left behind a very untidy-looking ship of state.</p>
<p>Treasurer Scott Morrison and former prime minister Tony Abbott are trading blows over immigration.</p>
<p>Barnaby Joyce, supposedly on “leave”, is out in the media as part of his fightback against those – including Turnbull – who would like him out of the deputy prime ministership. In an at-home-in-Armidale <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/we-ve-been-forced-out-barnaby-joyce-and-vikki-campion-s-first-interview-20180221-p4z158.html">interview with Fairfax Media</a>, Joyce has spoken about his unborn son, and former staffer and now partner Vikki Campion has produced details of how much she was paid when she moved offices. </p>
<p>The interview took place in the controversial townhouse that Joyce received rent-free from businessman and friend Greg Maguire – which Joyce rather disparagingly describes as “a bachelor’s pad” (and is looking to leave for security reasons).</p>
<p>Abbott’s interventions don’t carry the weight they used to – he isn’t able to cause as much trouble as he once did. Still, when he steps out it is almost always unhelpful to the government.</p>
<p>In a speech on Tuesday he called for immigration to be cut to 110,000, down from about 190,000, criticising the present rate at a time of “stagnant wages, clogged infrastructure, soaring house prices and, in Melbourne at least, ethnic gangs that are testing the resolve of police”.</p>
<p>Treasurer Scott Morrison went out with the <a href="https://www.3aw.com.au/slashing-immigration-wont-solve-problems-treasurer-tells-3aw/">takedown on Wednesday</a>. Morrison said he was immigration minister under Abbott and “the permanent immigration intake we have today is exactly the same as it was when he was prime minister. I don’t recall at any time there was any discussion that that should be lowered.”</p>
<p>The “actual facts” were that “the level of permanent migration to Australia has been the same since about <a href="https://www.homeaffairs.gov.au/ReportsandPublications/Documents/statistics/australian-migration-trends-2011-12.pdf">2011, 2012</a>. There has been no change”.</p>
<p>Morrison declared the Abbott policy would cost the budget about A$4 billion to $5 billion over the next four years. “If you did what Tony Abbott suggests, then you would only reduce the proportion that was skilled migration and you’d have a bigger proportion which was family migration which ultimately gets more dependent on welfare.”</p>
<p>Abbott, who has ready and regular access to radio and TV outlets to amplify his voice, was <a href="https://www.2gb.com/captured-by-his-department-tony-abbott-returns-fire-at-treasurer/">quickly on 2GB</a> declaring: “Scott’s problem is he’s been captured by his department”. In case anyone wasn’t paying attention, “Let me repeat that. That is Scott’s problem – he has been captured by his department.”</p>
<p>Morrison was “echoing the standard Treasury view” but “his view is wrong”, Abbott said. Treasury was always in favour of more migration, but “we cannot let the Treasury’s accounting rules determine what is in our long-term and medium-term best national interests. I mean, we can’t let the tail wag the dog.”</p>
<p>Turnbull can hope the latest iteration of the immigration debate will be over by the time he returns for next week’s sitting of parliament. But he knows the Joyce affair will still be live – and that goes to the heart of his government’s future.</p>
<p>The feeling in the Nationals (though it regularly changes) is that Joyce can hang on to his position for now – <em>if</em> nothing further comes out during what will be an extremely testing week of parliament, especially Senate estimates.</p>
<p>Ahead of parliament sitting, Joyce is putting his side of the story publicly, turning in particular to Fairfax Media because News Corp has spearheaded the charge against him.</p>
<p>In the interview with him and the pregnant Campion, Joyce tells Fairfax: “I don’t want to say have sympathy for me. I just want people to look clinically at the facts and basically come to the conclusion he is not getting a gold star for his personal life, but he has made a commitment, he is with her, they’re having a child, and in a 2018 world there is nothing terribly much to see there.”</p>
<p>“This should be a very simple story – a bloke whose marriage broke down is in a relationship with another person and they are having a child. Now it seems to have gone into some sort of morality discussion. That’s between me and my God. I can understand how Natalie can be angry, absolutely, but how it’s other people’s business, I don’t know.”</p>
<p>With the circumstances and terms of Campion’s employment an issue in the controversy, Fairfax reported that she showed payslips indicating she was paid about $133,000 a year in Joyce’s office, $138,000 when she was moved to minister Matt Canavan’s office, and $135,000 when employed in the office of then Nationals whip Damian Drum. The speculation had been she was paid up to $190,000.</p>
<p>The couple told Fairfax that Canavan and Drum didn’t know about their relationship when Campion went to work for them; Joyce said he hadn’t breached the ministerial code of conduct.</p>
<p>Pressed on when Turnbull first knew, Joyce said: “He never asked any direct questions and to be honest, if I believed it was private, I wouldn’t have told him either”.</p>
<p>Speaking of his unborn son, Joyce said he was “deeply annoyed … that there is somehow an inference that this child is somehow less worthy than other children, and it’s almost spoken about in the third person.</p>
<p>"I love my daughters. I have four beautiful daughters and I love them to death. And now I will have a son. I don’t pick winners, I’m not gonna love one more than another, but I’m not going to love one less than another either.</p>
<p>"I don’t want our child to grow up as some sort of public display. I have to stop it from the start. It’s a fact we are having a child, it’s a fact it’s a boy, it’s not more or less loved than any of my other children.”</p>
<p>The article reported that the only thing Campion would say on the record was that their son’s middle names would be those of her two brothers, who had given support that had “meant so much”.</p>
<p>Campion would not be photographed. Joyce posed with a tea towel. The saga has truly become a soap opera.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/92210/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Michelle Grattan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Barnaby Joyce, supposedly on ‘leave’, is out in the media as part of his fightback against those who would like him out of the deputy prime ministership.Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of CanberraLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/919192018-02-16T03:09:39Z2018-02-16T03:09:39ZWelcome to the new (old) moralism: how the media’s coverage of the Joyce affair harks back to the 1950s<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/206709/original/file-20180216-131021-qboshf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">The Barnaby Joyce saga has been an example of 'shake-the-tree' journalism at its worst.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP/Lukas Coch</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>The Barnaby Joyce saga has given a great boost to what might be called “shake-the-tree” journalism: you shake the tree by running a sensational story and see what falls out.</p>
<p>The <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-02-07/mps-defend-joyces-right-to-privacy-after-partner-on-front-page/9403988">Daily Telegraph’s original public-interest case</a> for publishing the first story of Joyce’s relationship with ex-staffer Vikki Campion was weak when weighed against the privacy intrusions on Joyce, his estranged wife, his daughters, and Campion.</p>
<p>However, that story has resulted in the emergence of three genuine public-interest justifications.</p>
<p>The first is whether Joyce breached the <a href="https://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Parliamentary_Library/pubs/BN/2012-2013/Conduct">ministerial code of conduct</a> by employing his partner in his office. On this he has prevaricated, saying that his partner was not so employed. Here he was clearly referring to his wife, not Campion. In the circumstances, this was a distinction without a difference.</p>
<p>The second matter of public interest concerns the expenditure of <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/pm-s-office-says-vikki-campion-jobs-did-not-breach-rules-because-she-was-not-barnaby-joyce-s-partner-20180211-p4yzzp.html">public money on jobs</a> said to have been found for Campion when her presence in Joyce’s office became untenable. Her salary is reported to be about A$190,000.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/grattan-on-friday-turnbulls-excoriation-of-joyce-has-changed-the-game-but-how-91948">Grattan on Friday: Turnbull's excoriation of Joyce has changed the game, but how?</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>The third is whether the Prime Minister’s Office was informed of this or whether Joyce misled them by omission.</p>
<p>Once the story came out in The Daily Telegraph, the media as a whole piled into a story they had all known about for months. And they have done so with a kind of shamefaced gusto, making up for lost time.</p>
<p>How much better it would have been if someone – anyone – in the Canberra gallery had succeeded in establishing at least one of those substantial public-interest justifications and broken the story framed around that.</p>
<p>Instead, the story that broke was coloured by the salacious moralism beloved of tabloid newspapers since time began.</p>
<p>It featured a large picture of Campion, heavily pregnant, a gross violation of privacy if ever there was one.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/206717/original/file-20180216-131003-4d7c7t.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/206717/original/file-20180216-131003-4d7c7t.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=338&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/206717/original/file-20180216-131003-4d7c7t.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=338&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/206717/original/file-20180216-131003-4d7c7t.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=338&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/206717/original/file-20180216-131003-4d7c7t.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=425&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/206717/original/file-20180216-131003-4d7c7t.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=425&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/206717/original/file-20180216-131003-4d7c7t.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=425&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The Telegraph breaks the story in a gross violation of privacy.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">www.dailytelegraph.com.au</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Here it was: the fruit of sin. The impregnated mistress, to borrow some of the vulgar moralising language that has disfigured the coverage.</p>
<p>The photo has been defended by The Daily Telegraph’s editor as proving the truth of the story that Barnaby Joyce had got his staffer pregnant. It proves nothing of the sort. It shows a woman pregnant. It says nothing about paternity.</p>
<p>Then on Valentine’s Day, The Daily Telegraph was at it again, this time with a page-one picture taken in 2016 in which Joyce and Campion are sitting next to each other at an official function.</p>
<p>Campion is in the foreground and Joyce, according to the caption, “eyes off” his media adviser. The headline says: “Bad look”.</p>
<p>There are many ways of interpreting this picture and headline. One of them is that Joyce had sexual designs on Campion back then, which from the caption is clearly the main message The Daily Telegraph wished to convey, regardless of truth or context.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/206716/original/file-20180216-131013-1xgvwkv.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/206716/original/file-20180216-131013-1xgvwkv.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=380&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/206716/original/file-20180216-131013-1xgvwkv.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=380&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/206716/original/file-20180216-131013-1xgvwkv.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=380&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/206716/original/file-20180216-131013-1xgvwkv.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=478&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/206716/original/file-20180216-131013-1xgvwkv.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=478&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/206716/original/file-20180216-131013-1xgvwkv.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=478&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The Daily Telegraph’s February 14 splash.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">www.womensagenda.com.au</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>But the picture is also about Campion. Although she is oblivious of the glance from Joyce, the reader is given the opportunity to inspect her as the “other woman”: we get a good look at her face, her figure and her legs.</p>
<p>Put the “bad look” headline with that, and the reader is invited to draw negative conclusions about her appearance and her character.</p>
<p>This judgemental tone, redolent with sexual possibilities and consequences, is a throwback to the busybody moralising of the 1950s and 1960s.</p>
<p>Then – before the sexual revolution and the rise of second-wave feminism – it was a staple of middle-class morality to take a gossipy and often hurtful interest in marital breakdowns and pregnancies out of wedlock.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/grattan-on-friday-is-barnabys-baby-a-matter-of-public-interest-or-just-of-interest-to-the-public-91507">Grattan on Friday: Is Barnaby's baby a matter of 'public interest' or just of interest to the public?</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>So why is this throwback happening?</p>
<p>Professor Alison Dagnes, a political scientist at Shippensburg University in Pennsylvania and editor of a textbook on <a href="https://www.bloomsbury.com/us/sex-scandals-in-american-politics-9781441186904/">sex scandals in American politics</a>, proposes a theory that goes like this: there is a well-documented loss of trust in institutions, one consequence of which is that the public is inclined to regard all politicians as scumbags.</p>
<p>Digital technology has equipped everyone with a camera and social media has provided everyone with the means of publishing. This has created a competitiveness of unprecedented intensity among media.</p>
<p>Scandals pique everyone’s interest, even among those who are not usually interested in politics. So any scandal that shows politicians to be the scumbags we suspect, guarantees lots of “likes” and “shares” on social media, generating a frenzy in traditional media and opening up the scandal to instant and reiterative public judgements.</p>
<p>This, in turn, adds to public distrust in institutions.</p>
<p>To this theory might be added two more possible factors.</p>
<p>The first is the shift in norms of privacy induced by social media and the ubiquity of mobile phones with cameras. Old understandings of the boundaries between private and public have been obliterated and new ones have not yet taken their place.</p>
<p>The second is people’s sense of entitlement to pass judgement on matters of which they have personal experience: intimate relationships, the primary school curriculum, the quality of driving on the roads. This is not new, but it is a powerful driver of attitudes.</p>
<p>Doubtless there are other factors, but whatever they are, Western society does appear to be in the grip of a new moralism, and the tabloid media are adept at making the most of it.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/91919/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Denis Muller does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Media reporting of the Barnaby Joyce affair would have been so much better if journalists had established substantial public-interest justifications before breaking the story.Denis Muller, Senior Research Fellow in the Centre for Advancing Journalism, The University of MelbourneLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/919482018-02-15T13:02:54Z2018-02-15T13:02:54ZGrattan on Friday: Turnbull’s excoriation of Joyce has changed the game, but how?<p>In the most spectacular manner, Malcolm Turnbull has publicly trashed his relationship with Barnaby Joyce.</p>
<p>The results of what one Nationals source described as Turnbull’s “roll of the dice” at Thursday’s extraordinary news conference are unpredictable.</p>
<p>Turnbull gave his deputy prime minister no notice of the swingeing attack he would launch on Joyce’s extramarital affair with his former staffer, Vikki Campion, now his pregnant partner.</p>
<p>Joyce had made a “shocking error of judgement”, Turnbull said, which had “set off a world of woe” for all the women affected and “appalled all of us”.</p>
<p>Turnbull was announcing he was putting a <a href="https://theconversation.com/turnbull-announces-sex-ban-and-signals-joyce-should-consider-his-position-91922">sex ban</a> into the ministerial code of conduct. He’d consulted his colleagues on that. But it was the excoriation of Joyce that came out of the blue, stunning the Nationals.</p>
<p>After a week-and-a-half of political hell, Joyce was already in about as bad a place as one can imagine a politician might be, short of the dock of a courtroom.</p>
<p>Turnbull all but disowned him – as far as a Liberal prime minister can do with the leader of the Coalition’s minor party. It was clear Turnbull would just like Joyce to stand down.</p>
<p>Joyce had already been <a href="https://theconversation.com/barnaby-joyce-dumped-as-acting-prime-minister-next-week-91915">dispatched on gardening leave for next week</a>, when he was due to be acting prime minister. Turnbull said he had “encouraged” him to take leave.</p>
<p>That in itself said it all. If Joyce is too much of a political handicap to undertake the routine duties of acting prime minister, it is hard to argue he’s up to being deputy prime minister.</p>
<p>Within the Nationals Joyce shored up his position on Wednesday to give himself a chance of rehabilitation. But after Turnbull’s character reference, he might as well wear a sandwich board saying: “I’m a terrible person”.</p>
<p>After days of the opposition and media trawling through the work arrangements for Campion, and the free accommodation in Armidale Joyce got from a local businessman, Turnbull says Joyce has given him “an unequivocal assurance” he hasn’t breached <a href="https://www.pmc.gov.au/resource-centre/government/statement-ministerial-standards">ministerial standards</a>.</p>
<p>With abundant caution Turnbull quotes Joyce’s word, rather than his own judgement, and there’s been no independent assessment.</p>
<p>Maybe Joyce has been within the code. But now Turnbull has made it clear – after initially wanting to keep away from Joyce’s private life – that he believes the Nationals leader has breached decent moral standards and he has decided to call him out on that.</p>
<p>A week ago, Turnbull was describing the Joyce imbroglio as “a deeply personal matter relating to Barnaby Joyce and his family”. On Thursday he radiated absolute disgust at the sordid saga.</p>
<p>Turnbull’s approach went from initially staying solid with Joyce by saying as little as possible to letting him have it with both barrels.</p>
<p>It went from dismissing a proposal from crossbencher Cathy McGowan for a “conversation” about workplace relations in parliament to slapping on a sex ban that doesn’t even exempt a minister who’s single.</p>
<p>What changed? The story had gone from something potentially containable to a cluster bomb damaging the whole government, and presumably feeding into the next Newspoll.</p>
<p>In particular, it threatened a dangerous backlash among women. Turnbull has pitched the ban on sexual relationships between ministers and their staff with a heavy gender emphasis. “Most of the ministers, most of the bosses in this building” were men, he said.</p>
<p>The ban is similar to that <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/feb/06/house-passes-bill-to-ban-relationships-between-lawmakers-and-their-staff">recently passed</a> by the US House of Representatives, although that is legislated and this is not.</p>
<p>Remember Julie Bishop’s reaction to the American ban – “we wouldn’t want to cross the line so that the moral police were able to dictate what happens between consenting adults”. Turnbull has put his policeman’s helmet on.</p>
<p>Joyce started Thursday deeply wounded. He ended the day bleeding even more heavily. The stories won’t let up. He faces the firing line again when the House of Representatives resumes the week after next. He’ll also be pursued in Senate estimates.</p>
<p>His office is inundated daily with slews of media questions; he lives with the knowledge that fresh damaging information could destroy him.</p>
<p>Imagine his political life from now. Travelling regional Australia’s back blocks will be downright embarrassing, as he wonders what those women offering cups of tea are thinking.</p>
<p>As well, he’ll be dealing with the demands of his new domestic circumstances – including the glare of publicity around the baby, arriving within weeks – as well as the legacies of leaving his old home life.</p>
<p>The Nationals are in an appalling situation.</p>
<p>They’ve stuck by Joyce – they think he’s the best they’ve got and their default position is loyalty. They’ve given him time. But logically, they should bring forward their assessment of the chances of his getting back on his feet. </p>
<p>Assuming they are slight, the party would be better to face the fact quickly and give a new leader – who’d likely be the little known Michael McCormack, a junior minister – maximum time before the election.</p>
<p>But that’s where Turnbull’s “roll of the dice” comes in. The Nationals this week were prickly about perceived meddling from the Liberals. They don’t like outside interference. How will they react to Turnbull’s assault? Will they dig in further behind Joyce?</p>
<p>And then there’s Joyce himself – stubborn and presumably desperate. He’s not so far shown any sign of giving in under political and personal pressure that would drive most leaders out. He’s relying on being able to keep his grip on the parliamentary numbers.</p>
<p>“He’s not like everyone else – he’s a different cat,” says a colleague.</p>
<p>Joyce is fighting like a cornered tiger to hang onto the position he coveted for so long. It’s not clear whether Turnbull’s denunciation has harmed or helped his chances. Or how, in the immediate future, he and Turnbull can work together.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/91948/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Michelle Grattan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>In the most spectacular manner, Malcolm Turnbull has publicly trashed his relationship with Barnaby Joyce.Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of CanberraLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/870562017-11-08T11:56:55Z2017-11-08T11:56:55ZPriti Patel: exit highlights weakness of Theresa May’s government<p>Priti Patel has been forced to resign as secretary of state for international development. The move followed days of speculation and revelations in the wake of an apparently undisclosed meeting with the prime minister of Israel, during a holiday in the country. She also attended several other off-the-books meetings on the trip. The meetings, apparently held without the knowledge of Downing Street or the Foreign Office, have projected an image to the world of an uncoordinated British international policy.</p>
<p>Meanwhile, the UK foreign secretary, Boris Johnson, has <a href="http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/boris-johnson-nazanin-zaghari-ratcliffe-iran-refuse-apology-prison-sentence-a8042296.html">apologised</a> if his comments concerning Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe have been “misconstrued”, following concern that his <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-41896225">remarks</a> about her could cause her prison sentence in Iran to be increased. </p>
<p>When combined with the departure of <a href="https://theconversation.com/westminster-harassment-this-is-not-just-about-sex-its-about-power-86860">Michael Fallon</a> as defence secretary and the appointment of <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/nov/02/gavin-williamson-profile-an-ambitious-chop-your-head-off-type-of-man">Gavin Williamson</a> – a close ally of Theresa May, the prime minister – in his place, the government is giving off the whiff of terminal decline. Despite all this, it’s not yet in free fall.</p>
<p>There is no mistaking the gravity of the situation facing May’s government. Each of these issues has the potential to fuel a narrative of decline that could seriously harm her premiership. Consequently, the only solution available to May is to impose her authority on her Cabinet by seizing the initiative. To do that she needs to dismiss those who are making life difficult for her. If they remain in place, there is a risk of them becoming reminders of her lack of authority. That lack of authority is a legacy from the ill-fated <a href="https://theconversation.com/uk/topics/uk-election-2017-37907">general election</a> held earlier in the year.</p>
<p>It is a question of both prime ministerial strength and also her leadership of the Conservative party. Both need to be reasserted in order to prevent ministers from acting in a way which would – under normal circumstances – have led to their dismissal. If she follows this convention, she will demonstrate strength over her government and prove that the ministerial code of conduct still applies, despite the problems facing her administration. Put simply, she needs to stamp her authority on her ministers.</p>
<h2>Avoiding an election</h2>
<p>Needless to say, Labour will be seeking to exploit the situation. Its strategy so far has been to attack the government on issues of competence over foreign policy (Johnson/Patel) and also over Brexit (David Davis). These attacks have a single purpose – to undermine confidence in the government and trigger a general election.</p>
<p>This political strategy has become possible because of the galvanising around Jeremy Corbyn, who suddenly appears to be leading a competent shadow government. But let’s not forget the problems Corbyn faces. Simply because his leadership is not currently being challenged does not mean Labour is a united party. Rather they are as divided (possibly more so) than the Conservatives on key issues such as <a href="https://theconversation.com/corbyns-brexit-strategy-may-have-paid-off-after-all-in-2017-election-80024">Brexit</a>, Trident, antisemitism, and attacks against so-called Islamic State. In short, Labour is hiding its divisions in order to appear united, while focusing on exploiting the problems May faces. This is to be expected of an opposition party.</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"928339710216491014"}"></div></p>
<p>It’s for May to pull it together. So far, her judgement remains under question. Her leadership can be reasserted if she demonstrates strength of purpose. She has allowed Patel to resign. Potentially sacking Johnson too will allow her to distance herself from them.</p>
<p>Failing to take decisive action would not just damage the Conservative party, but also the country at a time when the UK faces difficult questions over Brexit and its position in the world. Regardless of what Remainers/Brexiteers think of the issue, it will do harm to the UK if the government of the day is unable to foster a convincing image of competence and statecraft while negotiating with the European Union.</p>
<p>The days ahead will be vital for the survival of May’s credibility and, possibly, the government. The danger for May is if she is unable to act like the prime minister from a position of strength then questions over her leadership risk coming into play at a very dangerous point in the Brexit cycle.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/87056/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Andrew S. Roe-Crines does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The writing was on the wall for the international development secretary as soon as she got on that aeroplane.Andrew S. Roe-Crines, British Politics Lecturer, University of LiverpoolLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/870372017-11-07T15:45:28Z2017-11-07T15:45:28ZPriti Patel in Israel: a funny way to bring accountability to aid spending<p>In yet another difficult moment for the British government, <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-41853561">Priti Patel</a>, the secretary of state for international development, has been found to have conducted secret meetings with government officials while on a private holiday in Israel. This even included an encounter with Israel’s prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu.</p>
<p>Some of these discussions reportedly centred on Britain <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/nov/07/priti-patel-wanted-to-send-aid-money-to-israeli-army-no-10-confirms">providing financial support</a> to humanitarian operations of the Israeli army in the Golan Heights. Patel has received heavy criticism for her actions, and has since issued an apology. But the incident raises questions about her suitability for this role. </p>
<h2>From DfID sceptic to defender</h2>
<p>Patel, a leading figure of the Brexit campaign, arrived to the Department for International Development (DfID) in July 2016. She had a reputation as a strong sceptic of foreign aid. Back in 2013, she even called for DfID to be <a href="http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/new-international-development-secretary-priti-patel-called-for-department-for-international-a7137331.html">abolished</a>. Colleagues and I have <a href="http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1467-923X.12369/abstract">argued</a> that Patel represents a vision for international development that puts trade interests at the fore.</p>
<p>DfID is one of the world’s largest aid agencies and has an excellent reputation for being a transparent and progressive aid provider. However, it <a href="https://theconversation.com/why-diverting-more-uk-aid-to-fund-costs-of-hosting-refugees-would-be-a-mistake-76608">has been under seige</a> since 2015, when the government enshrined in law the target of spending 0.7% of gross national income on aid. So while most other government departments have been facing significant cutbacks, DfID has been expanding. </p>
<p>Perhaps realising the difficulty of changing the culture of a large organisation, or perhaps “going native” by gaining a deeper appreciation of DfID’s work, Patel has made several U-turns on her previous positions. She has emerged as a <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/jun/18/exclusive-priti-patel-insists-uks-aid-influence-is-massive">defender of DfID</a>, as well as the global role and influence that development aid allows for the UK. In October, <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2017/oct/24/no-foreign-office-takeover-of-international-aid-budget-says-priti-patel">she came out strongly against rumours</a> of the Foreign Office taking over DfID’s budget.</p>
<p>Patel’s secret Israeli negotiations are in stark contrast to the image she has been painting of herself, as well as the culture of transparency at DfID. She has <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/oct/03/uk-ethical-code-to-stop-fat-cats-profiteering-from-aid-budget">promoted an ethical code</a> to ensure that “fat cats”, understood as companies, charities and international organisations engaged in implementing UK-funded aid projects, stop reaping excessive profits. Patel has said that she is a “<a href="https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/jun/18/exclusive-priti-patel-insists-uks-aid-influence-is-massive">no-bullshit person</a>” when it comes to accountability and getting results. Inflated contracts and high expert fees have indeed been seen by many as <a href="https://theconversation.com/fixing-aid-we-cant-turn-off-the-tap-at-the-first-sign-of-corruption-33769">problems</a>, and an emphasis on better value for money and greater transparency at DfID have been welcome. </p>
<p>It’s difficult to square carrying out negotiations in secret with this emphasis on transparency. What’s more, Patel, who is a known supporter of Israel, seems to have been using her position as the international development secretary to promote her own agenda.</p>
<p>Nonetheless, she may well emerge from the scandal untarnished. After the <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-41838682">resignation of Michael Fallon</a> as defence secretary, Prime Minister Theresa May is eager to avoid any more changes in her government which would imply her own weakness. To some, especially on the right wing, Patel may even be able to paint a picture of herself as a maverick promoter of British interests within May’s indecisive government.</p>
<p>Still, Patel’s actions may have long reaching consequences. In the Arab world, and more broadly among Muslim countries, this incident will not be helpful. While governments are likely to turn a blind eye as long as UK aid keeps flowing, the secret negotiations will fuel conspiracy theories about Western support to Israel. Extremists will be more than happy to promote these.</p>
<p>The scandal also raises questions about the competence and credibility of the British government and its members. If what we know about Patel’s negotiations are true, she made promises that Britain couldn’t have delivered anyway. Israel is a rich country and so not eligible for aid from DfID. Nor does Britain even acknowledge Israel’s presence in the Golan Heights – so it can’t support any actions there. The otherwise welcome initiatives against “fat cats” will also suffer if the very minister initiating them herself engages in ethically dubious actions.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/87037/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Balazs Szent-Ivanyi does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>When the DfID minister held secret meetings with government officials while on holiday, she seems to have forgotten about her quest to stamp out dodgy dealings in development spending.Balazs Szent-Ivanyi, Lecturer in Politics and International Relations and Deputy Director Aston Centre for Europe, Aston UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/785502017-06-20T20:01:12Z2017-06-20T20:01:12ZAustralia’s lobbying laws are inadequate, but other countries are getting it right<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/171966/original/file-20170602-25700-eae015.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Australia can learn much for Canada's lobbying regulations.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Reuters/Chris Wattie</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Lobbying is a necessary component of representative democracy, yet poses one of its greatest threats. </p>
<p>Interest groups must be free to have a say. But the disproportionate influence of a few over many serves to seriously undermine democratic ideals, and comes at great cost to the taxpayer.</p>
<p>Given its importance, lobbying is an area that requires thoughtful laws that ensure as much transparency as possible, and prevent officials from abusing their power. In Australia, such laws are inadequate or missing. But other countries have taken important steps, and Australia can learn from their efforts.</p>
<h2>Australia’s lobbying laws</h2>
<p>For the most part, Australia has a <a href="http://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Parliamentary_Library/pubs/rp/rp1415/LobbyingRules#_Toc395015251">system of ill-enforced state and federal codes</a>, administered by partisan bodies.</p>
<p>At the federal level, there is the Ministerial Code of Conduct, and the Lobbying Code of Conduct. Both are weak. </p>
<p>The ministerial code ostensibly prohibits ministers from joining the industries they were responsible for in their portfolio for 18 months. Yet when Ian Macfarlane retired from parliament to head the Queensland Resources Council, having been industry and science minister just before retirement, and formerly the resources minister, the Prime Minister’s office found <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2016/sep/27/ian-macfarlane-says-he-cleared-new-mining-industry-job-with-pms-office">there was no conflict</a>. </p>
<p>This is the stuff of farce. Macfarlane clearly breached the wording and spirit of the code, but its application is subject to wholly partisan arbitration. There’s also an enforceability issue here: the ministerial and lobbying codes contain no details on the punishment for breaches.</p>
<p>As a result, while a lobbyist might be deregistered, there are few theoretical consequences for a former minister. In practice, the proliferation of revolving doors suggest there are <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-revolving-door-why-politicians-become-lobbyists-and-lobbyists-become-politicians-64237">no consequences at all</a>.</p>
<p>There is also the <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/C2016C00753">Australian Criminal Code</a>, which prohibits the bribing of government officials. But enforcing this law is difficult: a violation requires the parties involved to have acted “dishonestly” and as part of a clear quid pro quo arrangement.</p>
<p>The law is <a href="https://www.afp.gov.au/what-we-do/crime-types/fraud/fraud-and-anti-corruption">enforced by the Australian Federal Police</a>. In theory, significant fines and jail sentences are associated with breaches. However, it is nearly impossible to prove a quid-pro-quo arrangement, especially given the potential for delayed benefits offered by the “revolving door”. And the AFP lacks the necessary resources to do its job. </p>
<p>In reality, Australia’s lobbying codes are political red herrings: existing so governments may claim, falsely, there are safeguards against improper lobbying. </p>
<p>But, with the exception of state-based anti-corruption bodies (themselves lacking the necessary tools), the ability to police lobbying in Australia is almost nonexistent.</p>
<h2>Lessons from overseas</h2>
<p>Countries with similar common law and parliamentary traditions to Australia offer clear lessons on how to better police lobbying – most notably Canada.</p>
<p>For instance, the non-government sector in the US and UK does a better job of examining the pitfalls of lobbying, and helping voters to make more informed choices. </p>
<p>In the US, organisations such as the <a href="https://www.opensecrets.org">Centre For Responsive Politics</a> exist to provide as much information and transparency as possible. And, in the UK, The Guardian has a <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/politics/lobbying">dedicated and regularly updated section</a> on lobbying. </p>
<p>Both of these organisations help voters make more informed choices, and better understand the nature and scope of the problem. But transparency does not appear to be enough: clear, enforceable laws are critical. </p>
<p>Even the US has more robust lobbying laws than Australia. While Donald Trump has <a href="https://pursuit.unimelb.edu.au/articles/the-creeping-influence-of-lobbyists-in-washington">done little to “drain the swamp”</a>, his <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2017/01/28/executive-order-ethics-commitments-executive-branch-appointees">executive order</a> more effectively limits the revolving door. And it is legally enforceable and punishable by fines or jail.</p>
<p>But perhaps the best example of meaningful laws is that of <a href="https://lobbycanada.gc.ca/eic/site/012.nsf/eng/h_00008.html">Canada</a>, which still has many problems with lobbying, but has taken important steps to combat it. </p>
<p>Like Australia, Canada has made <a href="http://laws.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/L-12.4/">corruption-based forms of lobbying illegal</a>, but it has gone further in minimising the difficulties in enforcing these laws posed by the revolving door. It has also taken important steps to improve transparency and accountability, with an independent Ethics Commissioner responsible for the oversight of <a href="http://ciec-ccie.parl.gc.ca/EN/Pages/default.aspx">breaches of lobbying and financing laws</a>. </p>
<p>This has meant that potential breaches of lobbying laws <a href="https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/the-price-trudeau-pays-for-failing-to-address-cash-for-access-scandal/article33357738/">by a prime minister</a>, for example, are overseen by an impartial outsider, rather than their own department.</p>
<p>Further, Canada recognises “in-house” and “consultant” lobbyists. Australia’s code of conduct only recognises the latter. This is a critical distinction: in Australia, paid outside lobbyists are subject to the code, CEOs and billionaires aren’t. </p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"581059591951134720"}"></div></p>
<p>Canada’s recognition of the different types of lobbyists evolved over time. Initially, Canada only made laws dealing with consultant lobbyists, but it realised how inadequate this proved to be, and updated its laws. </p>
<p>Canada’s lobbying regulation is far from perfect, but it at least has teeth. Australia can avoid much of Canada’s long history of legislative redrafting by using its experience to get it right the first time.</p>
<h2>Important first steps</h2>
<p>The problems of lobbying are as old as democracy. Complaints about lobbying date back at least to Plato, who noticed that a skilled orator can best an expert in public debate. </p>
<p>Much later, in 1850, the US senator Thomas Benton <a href="https://archive.org/stream/thomashartbenton00meigrich/thomashartbenton00meigrich_djvu.txt">registered his own complaints</a>. He was being lobbied to help fund the construction of a private company’s ship. He resisted, but hinted he might be amenable provided one important condition was met. Once built, insisted Benton to a lobbyist, the ship should be used to “take all such rascals as you out of the country.”</p>
<p>Benton’s words capture the sentiments of many Australians today, and reflects the trend toward <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-08-11/poll-data-reveals-waning-interest-in-politics/5662568">increased distrust and dissatisfaction in our political system</a>. Yet Benton’s remedy is a touch too drastic. Instead, Australia should seek the harm-reduction approach, and drastically bolster its lobbying laws.</p>
<p>The problems of lobbying are endemic to all democracies, yet other countries are taking steps to combat these problems, and offer lessons on how to catch up. </p>
<p>Decades of improving the legal framework around lobbying already exists in other countries. Australia can learn from them.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/78550/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>George Rennie does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Countries such as Canada offer Australia clear lessons on how to better police lobbying.George Rennie, Lecturer in American Politics and Lobbying Strategies, The University of MelbourneLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.