tag:theconversation.com,2011:/uk/topics/arthur-sinodinos-1417/articlesArthur Sinodinos – The Conversation2020-06-02T07:08:49Ztag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1398692020-06-02T07:08:49Z2020-06-02T07:08:49ZScott Morrison intervenes over Washington police assault of Australian TV crew<p>Scott Morrison has asked the Australian embassy to investigate the assault by police of an Australian Channel 7 news crew during the Washington demonstrations.</p>
<p>The embassy, which is headed by ambassador Arthur Sinodinos, is to provide advice on registering Australia’s “strong concerns” with the responsible local authorities in Washington.</p>
<p>Cameraman Tim Myers and 7 News’ US correspondent Amelia Brace were reporting live as police cleared protesters ahead of President Trump going from the White House to a nearby church.</p>
<p>Footage shows Myers being bashed with a riot shield.</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1267599965309763584"}"></div></p>
<p>Brace said later: “I actually managed to get a rubber bullet to the backside and Tim got one in the back of the neck so we’ll have a few bruises tomorrow but we’re perfectly safe”.</p>
<p>“You heard us yelling that we were media … but they don’t care. They are being indiscriminate at the moment,” she said. </p>
<p>Morrison wasn’t aware of the assault when he and Trump spoke on Tuesday; Trump had contacted Morrison to formally invite him to the G7 meeting in September.</p>
<p>After hearing of the incident, Morrison contacted Channel 7 to assure the network of the government’s support if it wished to lodge a formal complaint with the police through the embassy.</p>
<p>Anthony Albanese, speaking earlier, said Sinodinos “should be certainly making representation on behalf of these Australians who effectively have been assaulted”. </p>
<p>In their conversation, the Prime Minister told Trump he would be pleased to attend the G7 meeting. It is the second consecutive year Australia has been invited – last year French host, President Macron, extended an invitation.</p>
<p>A spokesman for Morrison said participation would “give Australia another significant opportunity to promote our interests during highly uncertain times in the global economy. It’s important for Australians that we are there”.</p>
<p>The G7 group of large advanced economies includes - apart from the US - Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan and the United Kingdom. Its discussions cover economic, security and other issues.</p>
<p>But this meeting, which has been delayed from July to September, is surrounded by controversy. Trump wants to have Russian President Vladimir Putin there. Russia was expelled from the then G8 some years ago after its invasion of Crimea.</p>
<p>While Trump would like Russia readmitted as a member of the group, this is strongly opposed by the UK and Canada – although their stand would not necessarily rule out Putin’s attending the September meeting.</p>
<p>At the weekend Trump said he did not think the G7 “properly represents what’s going on in the world. It’s a very outdated group of countries.” He flagged inviting Russia, South Korea, Australia and India. </p>
<p>The PM’s spokesman said Morrison and Trump canvassed in their conversation the “distressing situation” in the US - which has seen the country wracked by violent protests in the wake of the death at police hands of the unarmed African-American man George Floyd - and “efforts to ensure it would be resolved peacefully”. </p>
<h2>Australian downturn might be less than expected: Reserve Bank</h2>
<p>On the home front, Reserve Bank Governor Philip Lowe on Tuesday said it is possible the depth of Australia’s downturn will be less than earlier expected. </p>
<p>In a statement after Tuesday’s Reserve Bank Board meeting, which as anticipated kept rates unchanged, Lowe stressed the nature and speed of the recovery “remains highly uncertain”.</p>
<p>The economy was going through its biggest contraction since the 1930s depression, he said. </p>
<p>But “the rate of new infections has declined significantly and some restrictions have been eased earlier than was previously thought likely. And there are signs that hours worked stabilised in early May, after the earlier very sharp decline. There has also been a pick-up in some forms of consumer spending”. </p>
<p>Lowe said while the pandemic would likely have lasting effects on the economy, most immediately “much will depend on the confidence that people and businesses have about the health situation and their own finances”.</p>
<p>The bank’s statement comes ahead of Wednesday’s national accounts for the March quarter, and the government’s imminent announcement of help for the residential sector.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/139869/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>Scott Morrison has called upon the Australian embassy to investigate the assault of a Channel 7 news crew by Washington riot police.Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of CanberraLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1235962019-09-17T07:19:29Z2019-09-17T07:19:29ZPolitics with Michelle Grattan: Arthur Sinodinos with some reflections and advice<p>Arthur Sinodinos will soon leave the Senate, and early next year take up the position of Australian ambassador in Washington. A former staffer and one-time public servant as well as a former minister, in this podcast Sinodinos reflects on the challenges of pursuing reform, has some advice for ministerial staff in dealing with the public service, and warns about dangers for democracy and science posed by a polarised media. </p>
<p>A strong ally of Malcolm Turnbull, Sinodinos tells Michelle Grattan that the former prime minister was “prepared to make a stand for what he believed was right - and unfortunately there were others who didn’t seem to be too comfortable with that”. </p>
<p>On the current controversy about Liberal MP Gladys Liu and her past ties to groups with links to the Chinese regime, he says: “I think she’s trying to … make sure that she’s got her memory intact, as it were. And then I’m sure she will as necessary provide further information”.</p>
<p>On the contrast between the roles of staffer and politician: “One of the biggest differences is that when you’re the politician and the front person, the minute you say something … you own it, Whereas when you’re the adviser you give all the advice in the world but there’s not quite the same level of responsibility”. </p>
<h2>Transcript (edited for clarity)</h2>
<p><strong>Michelle Grattan:</strong> Arthur Sinodinos, can we start with your transition from being a senior staffer to a politician, albeit via a time in the business sector. What are the big differences between those two roles? </p>
<p><strong>Arthur Sinodinos:</strong> Well I think one of the biggest differences is that when you’re the politician and the front person, the minute you say something, it’s out of your mouth … you own it. Whereas when you’re the adviser, you give all the advice in the world but there’s not quite the same level of responsibility [as] when you actually have to go out there and say things and take the rap for them. And that is one of the big differences. And that does influence the way people approach the job. For example let me give you a story about the American ambassador. He was one of a number of people in the Reagan administration who allegedly told Reagan around 1987/88, don’t use that phrase “Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall”. But it was Reagan’s instinct to use that phrase. Now they were being risk averse, or minimising risk for him, but he had the instinct, and this is what it takes at the end of the day. You have to also go on your own instinct as the front person when something needs to be said or when you need to push the button and change tack on something. </p>
<p><strong>MG:</strong> You’re also a one time public servant. The bureaucrats these days often feel pushed around by ministerial staff. Do you think these staff too often become arrogant and feel everything is political, so therefore good policy is compromised? </p>
<p><strong>AS:</strong> I mean the practice we had in the Howard Government - after some early hiccups when a number of secretaries were fired - was to recognise that staffers and public servants have complementary roles and that the place operates best when there’s a bit of a team in place and each understands and respects the role of the other. And I think that’s always important. And my advice to young staffers or people starting out in staffing who maybe haven’t worked in the public service is get to understand the public service. They’re also your stakeholders and it’s important for people to work together. The public service is a great resource and it’s like any workforce, you’ve got to motivate them. And that’s important to get the best out of them. </p>
<p><strong>MG:</strong> You were one of Malcolm Turnbull’s closest supporters. Indeed you came back, I think, when you were on sick leave to support him in that last week. Looking back on the Turnbull government, do you think that there was any advice you could have given to help avoid the collapse of his prime ministership?</p>
<p><strong>AS:</strong> Unfortunately, I don’t think any advice would have saved Malcolm’s prime ministership in the end. There were just forces at work who I think were just determined to blast him out and unfortunately a series of events came together which brought that to a head. What I do admire about Malcolm is that the irony is in a sense he was blasted out over climate change twice. The first time in 2009 and the second time over the National Energy Guarantee and in a sense it’s admirable that he was prepared - even though at the end he was prepared to defer the National Energy Guarantee for a while - he was still prepared to make a stand for what he believed was right. And unfortunately there were others who didn’t seem to be too comfortable with that. There’ll be debates going on for years about whether Malcolm had the right political instincts. Well my view is these days what you need is authenticity and he was authentic in his own way, but unfortunately he wasn’t allowed I think to do the job that he could have done.</p>
<p><strong>MG:</strong> You’ve been at the political coalface now in one role or another over some four decades. How do you think politics has changed in that time and has it changed for better or for worse?</p>
<p><strong>AS:</strong> I think politics in many ways is much faster now. The media cycle is certainly faster - the 24/7 cycle. I think it’s also much easier for parties to be fragmented because it’s much easier for individuals to get a platform, partly through the way the media itself is fragmented.
One of the dangerous trends has been that the media itself has become a battleground. We used to look to the media to be the journals of record and today much of the media gets dragged into the actual fight and this is a danger for democracy in my view. It’s a danger for science which is increasingly being trampled in the public arena, and I think it’s a danger when we have a situation where people can essentially choose their own facts. And choose media outlets which feed their own version of reality and feed their confirmation bias. I think that’s dangerous for democracy going forward.</p>
<p><strong>MG:</strong> Well the media gets dragged in, or does it opt in? Has it decided to get involved more as participants? Obviously always media were participants, but there’s an increasing trend now.</p>
<p><strong>AS:</strong> Yes there is an element of that. And what that does is every action has an equal and opposite reaction. So if some start to go more one way others start to go the other way as if to try and bring back some balance. But the result of that is that overall it tends to create a greater feeling of partisanship.</p>
<p><strong>MG:</strong> Well let’s cut to the chase here. Do you think News Corp has become particularly partisan?</p>
<p><strong>AS:</strong> I think they have a particular business model, particularly Sky, and that’s attracted a particular viewership. But that also has meant that other outlets, I’ve noticed with the ABC and others, have tended to therefore have to take stronger stands on certain things because they feel they’re pulling against a shift in the other direction. And so that’s the point - that these forces tend to sort of create this more partisan field out there.</p>
<p><strong>MG:</strong> What is that business model?</p>
<p><strong>AS:</strong> I think the business model is to try and corner a particular part of the market and become the champions of that part of the market.</p>
<p><strong>MG:</strong> The conservative right-wing part?</p>
<p><strong>AS:</strong> Yes. As opposed to just trying to cover the field as a whole. </p>
<p><strong>MG:</strong> Do you think it’s harder to get reform these days? As part of the Howard advisory team you were at the centre of the tax debate. Are things more difficult now?</p>
<p><strong>AS:</strong> Often we seem to act as if things are more difficult now and yet I just think if people are prepared to stand up on something and explain it and indicate clearly why people will benefit from something I still think it’s possible to get things through. But we seem to have somehow spooked ourselves overall that somehow the more difficult reforms are not possible these days. I think reform is still possible but it requires a lot of work and because there are many more outlets and many more bases to cover and more stakeholders to consider - and stakeholders who have their own capacity to do research and whatever - that does require a lot of groundwork to be done. Part of the reason the tax reform got through in 1998 was that there had been a whole year of actually putting the thing together and then a commitment at the political level to not only work out the technical arguments, but to try and anticipate the political arguments and have responses to them so that when we were ready to go on that GST reform we thought we had, in terms of the arguments, every base covered.</p>
<p><strong>MG:</strong> The Coalition’s obviously riding high at the moment, but do you think it needs to do more to build resilience for the long term? That is, for the next election, and what should it be doing?</p>
<p><strong>AS:</strong> The impression I get from what the Prime Minister has said particularly in the party room is that he knows that while we’re doing well at the moment relative to Labor, that Labor are not going to lie on the mat forever. There’s just this dynamic in politics that the pendulum swings one way and then it swings back. And so I think he’s very conscious of building resilience, and I think the way he’s doing that first of all is by trying to be stable and certain when it comes to policy. I think he’s sending out very clear signals as to what his priorities are, particularly in terms of who he’s working for. And also I think in terms of the economy he’s indicating that while we’ve put certain measures in place to help get the economy through the current softness that we’re experiencing, they’re prepared to contemplate further measures. For example, in the budget next year an investment allowance has been raised.</p>
<p><strong>MG:</strong> The government’s been surprisingly aggressive I think towards big business at the moment - criticising it for social activism and for not being supportive enough of government policies. Do you think this is a sound strategy or will it just alienate the business sector, and what’s driving it?</p>
<p><strong>AS:</strong> I think what needs to happen is business needs to sit down with the government and work out in terms of where the government is going, the government’s reform priorities, the sort of areas that need to be addressed. In terms of how to explain things to people, how it’s best to do that. I think what Ben Morton and others were saying is that every day as politicians we’re out there trying to persuade the “quiet Australians” to do things they might not necessarily immediately see in their interest. We want business and others to understand the challenge of that and not leave that just for us but to work as partners in that process. And business is vital to the Australian economy. Big business, small business. No one denies that. The question is how we work together to get the sort of outcomes that everybody wants.</p>
<p><strong>MG:</strong> You speak of Ben Morton’s speech and he’s assistant minister to the prime minister and he’s part of Scott Morrison’s inner circle. So this has the Prime Minister’s imprimatur, but it’s almost as though he was thinking that big business should be an extension of the government. That’s not how things work these days. </p>
<p><strong>AS:</strong> Now I think what he was saying is that, look we have certain objectives as a government. When you are dealing with government, please address those objectives when you’re asking for things from government. And I’ve often said this to people who are asking things and come to Canberra looking for things. Always understand who you’re dealing with, always adopt the language of the government of the day, understand where they’re coming from, and pitch yourself accordingly. And I think Ben is essentially saying that, and by putting it out in those stark terms, I think what he’s doing is saying look there’s a bit of a line in the sand here, we’ve all got to get on with this now, and please come to the table and contemplate what we’re saying and why we’re saying it. Please listen.</p>
<p><strong>MG:</strong> The government’s bringing in its so-called “big stick” legislation this week which would allow at the extreme for the divestment of parts of companies in the case of energy companies that weren’t playing ball. What happened to dry economics in the Liberal Party?</p>
<p><strong>AS:</strong> Well I’ve never had the same reaction as some people to say divestment is not something that should ever be considered by the Coalition. It was a feature or has been a feature of the US anti-trust regime for decades and decades. So in the land of the free and the home of the brave, it’s been a feature of the landscape for a long time. So it’s not inconsistent with free market economics. It’s something that deals with areas where there’s excessive concentration and where firms are therefore able to exert market power and do things which frustrate, if you like, the more competitive operation of markets. So I think it has to be seen in that context. The other thing is, to some extent we’ve been driven to take those, what are perceived as extreme measures because there is such a mess in the energy sector and we need to find a way through in terms of making sure that when we take measures to reduce the cost of electricity those measures flow through to consumers and that companies with market power do not take some of those savings for themselves.</p>
<p><strong>MG:</strong> But of course you could have got out to this mess by endorsing the NEG.</p>
<p><strong>AS:</strong> Well look this is like the Irish question. You wouldn’t start from here but here is where we are, and we’ve ended up in a particular situation and we’re trying to work our way through. And what I think Angus Taylor’s tried to do since the election is essentially find ways. And now he’s doing, as I understand it, more talks with the states around how do we facilitate the transition in the energy sector and how do we create a bit more certainty around power supplies and all the rest of it. And I think that’s going to be important to providing a bit of investment certainty and help underpin lower prices.</p>
<p><strong>MG:</strong> Don’t you think that if Bob Hawke [had] brought in the big stick legislation, John Howard would have cried “the socialists are here”?</p>
<p><strong>AS:</strong> Well it depends on the context at the time and I think the context we’re in now has led as I say to these sorts of measures being undertaken.</p>
<p><strong>MG:</strong> On another issue of the day, Gladys Liu has obviously still a lot of questions to answer. Shouldn’t she just call a press conference and answer them?</p>
<p><strong>AS:</strong> As I understand, what’s happening is she is going through her history of donations and getting her information in order. I think she’s trying to sort of make sure that she’s got her memory intact, as it were. And then I’m sure she will as necessary provide further information. She has come under a lot of pressure very early on in her career and even seasoned politicians under the microscope of someone like an Andrew Bolt probably would have had problems. But I think she’ll be able to explain all of this. And certainly I think the treasurer, the prime minister, the minister for home affairs, standing by her is a clear indication that they are confident that there is nothing there that would suggest that she’s somehow been compromised.</p>
<p><strong>MG:</strong> How serious do you think this issue of Chinese interference in Australian politics is? We’ve heard for example from Andrew Hastie saying people often underestimate the broad threat of China. We heard from Duncan Lewis, the outgoing head of ASIO, when he said this is a real problem. He didn’t mention the Chinese of course, diplomatically, but we all know what he was talking about.</p>
<p><strong>AS:</strong> There’s no doubt that there is foreign interference going on and there’s no doubt that the security agencies are reporting to government about the extent of that interference. Certainly in the cyber space, there’s a lot of activity going on and it’s not just from one country. It’s from a number of countries and non-state actors as well. So that is the fact. The challenge for us as a country is, how do we accommodate the rise of China within our region while maintaining some sort of global rules based order? And that requires us to work with the Americans in terms of our traditional alliance relationship to ensure they have a presence in the area. It means encouraging all sides of the debate to come back to the table to a global rules based order as a way of resolving disputes. We don’t want China to fail - a failing China or a stumbling China is a bigger problem than a prosperous and successful China that is taking its place rightfully within the Asia Pacific. But we have these teething problems because they’re the rising power. The Americans, particularly since the 1990s have been seen as the hyper power and they’re having to accommodate the rise of China. And we just have to stand up in the areas where we feel there is overreach, whether they are strategic areas or technological areas. But what we’ve got to do is not throw the baby out with the bathwater. We’ve got a strong relationship with the Chinese. We have a big Chinese community in Australia. We mustn’t make them feel at any stage that they are somehow viewed as a fifth column or whatever. It’s important for us to maintain the relationship and develop it while also at the same time seeking to do what we can to diversify our trading opportunities in the region and our strategic options. </p>
<p><strong>MG:</strong> There are a lot of problems though at the micro level, if you like to put it like that. For example are our universities becoming too dependent on Chinese students?</p>
<p><strong>AS:</strong> Well I think that the universities do have to look at how dependent they are on international education, and certainly the incentives provided by governments over a long period in the way we’ve operated have certainly encouraged that dependence as well. But I think the universities understand that they can’t be too dependent on just one source of international students and I think they’re taking action to diversify. And certainly that should be encouraged.</p>
<p><strong>MG:</strong> Now I want to turn to the United States, to your future.</p>
<p><strong>AS:</strong> Yes. </p>
<p><strong>MG:</strong> Scott Morrison will be in Washington at the end of this week. He gets on very well with the president. But are there any risks for Australia in this closeness?</p>
<p><strong>AS:</strong> Well I think there are no risks as long as we are always very clear about the fact that while our interests are very close they’re not completely identical, given where we are in the Asia Pacific. And we have to keep explaining to our friends and allies what our national interest is. And our interest is, as I said before, in how we accommodate the rise of China in a way which maintains or seeks to restore as far as possible a global rules-based order.</p>
<p><strong>MG:</strong> We’ve signed up to the Middle East operation to protect sea lanes. Are there dangers here though? Firstly we see the situation in the Middle East turning even nastier than previously. And secondly does our involvement compromise the Australian government’s efforts on behalf of Australian citizens who are held in Iran?</p>
<p><strong>AS:</strong> Well it may be a hard thing to say but foreign policy can never be hostage just to the fear that your people may be taken hostage or there will be attacks on your soil. As we saw with 9/11. Your foreign policy can’t be hostage to those considerations. It has to be a foreign policy in your interest and certainly it’s in our national interest for these seaways and laneways to be as open as possible and that’s a principle we’re prepared to stand up for and that’s what we’ve done with the Straits of Hormuz. And it’s true, the Middle East situation is always fragile and as we can see from recent events with the drone attack on the Saudi oilfields, it’s always subject to potential escalation. But precisely because it’s such a strategic part of the world and there’s such strategic significance, us doing things and standing up for principles like freedom of navigation is very important.</p>
<p><strong>MG:</strong> Can I ask you finally about how you’ll approach the job of ambassador, which is a hard one in a place like Washington where you have to be across a whole lot of stakeholders and power is more diffused and so on. Joe Hockey engaged in golf diplomacy, including with the president. I don’t think you play golf?</p>
<p><strong>AS:</strong> I’m not much of a golfer but I used to play. I’m a bad golfer and maybe that’s a good thing.</p>
<p><strong>MG:</strong> Are you taking any lessons?</p>
<p><strong>AS:</strong> No.</p>
<p><strong>MG:</strong> But if golf’s not your go, what will be your way of operating?</p>
<p><strong>AS:</strong> I think the most important thing is to establish personal relationships, whether it’s with the relevant people in the administration or in the congress. Understanding what our national interest is and what we’re actually seeking to pursue there. Identifying some priority areas to pursue. Some of those will come out of the state visit to the US that the Prime Minister’s undertaking now. There’s talk about rare earth minerals, for example, they’re critical minerals. There’s talk around what we do further in space. I’m interested in the whole science and innovation space and what we can do more there. I think the infrastructure space, there’s a lot we can help each other with.
So I’m happy to identify those priorities as well as the more broader issue which is the traditional diplomatic function of representing our interests in the US. And so I’ll go wherever is required, do whatever is required to do that. But everyone does this in their own way. So I think Joe’s done a great job and I have to sort of work out my modus operandi essentially when I get there I think.</p>
<p><strong>MG:</strong> Well you’ll be going into an election year so that’s quite difficult. How do you balance your contacts with the incumbent team and the challenging team?</p>
<p><strong>AS:</strong> Look I think people in the administration would understand that being an election year you do want to have contact with the other side. I mean one of the things that Joe has done is maintain fruitful contacts with both sides of politics because apart from anything else they’re both represented in congress.</p>
<p><strong>MG:</strong> And he said that one of the ways he got in early with the Trump administration was that he reached out to that team during the campaign.</p>
<p><strong>AS:</strong> Yes that’s correct.</p>
<p><strong>MG:</strong> Is that a proper way of operating?</p>
<p><strong>AS:</strong> Well during election years often ambassadors will be observers at the conventions and they’ll get to meet people from both sides, and I think that’s important because as I say ultimately both sides are also in the congress and that’s where a lot of legislation affecting Australia gets done.</p>
<p><strong>MG:</strong> And you’ll be doing it too? </p>
<p><strong>AS:</strong> Yes.</p>
<p><strong>MG:</strong> And do you go to America with some network already in place of contacts from from your previous lives?</p>
<p><strong>AS:</strong> Well I’ve been there through the Clinton era and through the George W. Bush era. There’ll be some contacts still there but there’s probably quite a few that I’ll have to now sort of restart or start anew.</p>
<p><strong>MG:</strong> Well as Malcolm Turnbull might have said, it’s a most exciting time to be there.</p>
<p><strong>MG:</strong> Thank you very much Arthur Sinodinos. All the best for your new life and your new career. </p>
<h2>New to podcasts?</h2>
<p>Podcasts are often best enjoyed using a podcast app. All iPhones come with the Apple Podcasts app already installed, or you may want to listen and subscribe on another app such as Pocket Casts (click <a href="http://pca.st/BVa3#t=3m34s">here</a> to listen to Politics with Michelle Grattan on Pocket Casts).</p>
<p>You can also hear it on Stitcher, Spotify or any of the apps below. Just pick a service from one of those listed below and click on the icon to find Politics with Michelle Grattan.</p>
<p><a href="https://itunes.apple.com/au/podcast/politics-with-michelle-grattan/id703425900?mt=2"><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/233721/original/file-20180827-75984-1gfuvlr.png" alt="Listen on Apple Podcasts" width="268" height="68"></a> <a href="https://www.google.com/podcasts?feed=aHR0cHM6Ly90aGVjb252ZXJzYXRpb24uY29tL2F1L3BvZGNhc3RzL3BvbGl0aWNzLXdpdGgtbWljaGVsbGUtZ3JhdHRhbi5yc3M"><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/233720/original/file-20180827-75978-3mdxcf.png" alt="" width="268" height="68"></a></p>
<p><a href="https://www.stitcher.com/podcast/the-conversation-4/politics-with-michelle-grattan"><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/233716/original/file-20180827-75981-pdp50i.png" alt="Stitcher" width="300" height="88"></a> <a href="https://tunein.com/podcasts/News--Politics-Podcasts/Politics-with-Michelle-Grattan-p227852/"><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/233723/original/file-20180827-75984-f0y2gb.png" alt="Listen on TuneIn" width="318" height="125"></a></p>
<p><a href="https://radiopublic.com/politics-with-michelle-grattan-WRElBZ"><img class="alignnone size-medium wp-image-152" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/233717/original/file-20180827-75990-86y5tg.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=268&fit=clip" alt="Listen on RadioPublic" width="268" height="87"></a> <a href="https://open.spotify.com/show/5NkaSQoUERalaLBQAqUOcC"><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/237984/original/file-20180925-149976-1ks72uy.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=268&fit=clip" width="268" height="82"></a> </p>
<h2>Additional audio</h2>
<p><a href="http://freemusicarchive.org/music/Lee_Rosevere/The_Big_Loop_-_FML_original_podcast_score/Lee_Rosevere_-_The_Big_Loop_-_FML_original_podcast_score_-_10_A_List_of_Ways_to_Die">A List of Ways to Die</a>, Lee Rosevere, from Free Music Archive.</p>
<p><strong>Image:</strong></p>
<p>AAP/ Mick Tsikas</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/123596/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>As Arthur Sinodinos prepares to leave the Senate for his new role as Australian ambassador to the US, he sits with Michelle Grattan to reflect on his time in politics.Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of CanberraLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/725762017-02-07T10:52:01Z2017-02-07T10:52:01ZPolitics podcast: Arthur Sinodinos on the government’s headwinds<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/155834/original/image-20170207-30925-1fifdfs.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption"></span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Pat Hutchens/TC</span>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/">CC BY-SA</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>At the beginning of the parliamentary year, the government is beleaguered on several fronts. But Arthur Sinodinos, one of the Coalition’s most experienced operators and the newly appointed minister for industry, innovation and science, is determined to be optimistic.</p>
<p>“You can’t rule any possibilities out, including the possibility that the government actually goes from strength to strength as we go forward,” Sinodinos says.</p>
<p>“Yes, there are testing headwinds, including the international environment, but we’re going to be very keen to prosecute the case for economic growth, for jobs, for why international trade is a good thing for everybody, not just one country.”</p>
<p>Speaking with Michelle Grattan on the day of senator Cory Bernardi’s exit from the Liberal Party, Sinodinos has a sharp observation for his former colleague.</p>
<p>“What I’d say to senator Bernardi is that if you want to influence the party, you’ve got to be inside the party. You can’t do it from outside.”</p>
<p>Assessing Bernardi’s prospects as a force outside the Liberals, Sinodinos says “we’ll wait and see what happens”. “But he’s got some pretty formidable players out there, like Pauline Hanson, who has a very high profile and a lot of street cred as an outsider.”</p>
<p>“I would expect on most things that he would support Coalition policy. He was actually elected on a Coalition platform and I think if he’s going to keep faith with those voters, he should support Coalition positions.”</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/72576/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>At the beginning of the parliamentary year, the government is beleaguered on several fronts. But Arthur Sinodinos is determined to be optimistic.Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of CanberraLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/717002017-01-23T19:16:35Z2017-01-23T19:16:35ZNew science minister needs to maintain momentum and push the innovation agenda<p>The science sector will watch with interest today as Arthur Sinodinos is sworn in as Australia’s new <a href="http://minister.industry.gov.au/">Minister for Industry, Innovation and Science</a>.</p>
<p>Sinodinos will be the fourth science minister in three years. This is the kind of instability that would typically raise a red flag, especially for a sector like science where training, work programs, infrastructure requirements and outcomes all have timeframes much longer than election cycles, let alone cabinet reshuffles.</p>
<p>There is plenty to be positive about, though. In December 2015, then science minister Christopher Pyne laid significant foundations for science policy in Australia with the <a href="https://theconversation.com/expert-panel-what-the-national-innovation-statement-means-for-science-51902">National Innovation and Science Agenda</a> (NISA). This was a very important policy statement coordinating many parts of government. </p>
<p>It also included a very welcome ten-year commitment to operational funding of the National Collaborative Research Infrastructure Scheme (<a href="https://theconversation.com/au/topics/ncris-15242">NCRIS</a>) as well as a suite of new measures spanning international science engagement, translation and commercialisation of research, and <a href="https://theconversation.com/au/topics/women-in-science-217">gender equality in STEM</a>.</p>
<p>Greg Hunt took the science minister baton after the 2016 election. He started strongly with a powerful speech to the science sector outlining his plans to establish a ten-year science and innovation strategy and to increase public and private spending on research and development (R&D) as a percentage of GDP. </p>
<p>Hunt pledged to support the second and the third waves of the NISA and to increasing the engagement between the science and technology sectors, government and industry.</p>
<p>Hunt together with Bill Ferris AC, the new <a href="http://www.minister.industry.gov.au/ministers/pyne/media-releases/new-chair-innovation-australia-drive-change">Chair of the Office of Innovation and Science Australia</a> conducted a performance audit of Australia’s science and innovation system to inform the development of the 2030 plan for innovation, science and research. </p>
<p>He also laid out his vision for the <a href="https://theconversation.com/au/topics/csiro-2705">CSIRO</a> as Australia’s premier science and innovation agency with a new statement of expectations to the board. He asked Australia’s chief scientist <a href="https://theconversation.com/chief-scientists-address-to-the-national-press-club-the-voyage-of-science-and-innovation-55645">Alan Finkel</a> to work with the sector to develop a roadmap for Australia’s national research infrastructure.</p>
<p>Now Sinodinos takes over the reins and his task until the next election will be to advance an agenda that is designed to fuel Australia’s future growth.</p>
<h2>Challenges and opportunities ahead</h2>
<p>Sinodinos has big shoes to fill, but early indications are positive. His <a href="http://www.arthursinodinos.com.au/news/media/2017-january-18-statement-by-senator-the-hon-arthur-sinodinos-ao/">first statement</a> following the announcement of his appointment noted his “keen appreciation of the importance of innovation and science policies, including the role of national institutions such as CSIRO, in delivering economic growth and development”.</p>
<p>The draft <a href="https://www.education.gov.au/2016-national-research-infrastructure-roadmap">National Research Infrastructure Roadmap</a>, due for finalisation early this year, recognises the importance of research in delivering economic growth and development, as well as advances in basic science. </p>
<p>For example CSIRO’s new <a href="http://www.csiro.au/en/Research/Facilities/Marine-National-Facility/RV-Investigator">research vessel, Investigator</a>, is an extraordinary tool for mineral exploration. It will provide crucial information to support our fisheries, along the way discovering entirely new species and previously unmapped volcanoes and faults on the sea floor around our continent.</p>
<p>But the infrastructure roadmap also calls for the development of a roadmap investment plan, a capital fund that will need to be adequate to support new and upgraded research infrastructure to meet Australia’s needs.</p>
<p>This may provide Sinodinos with his first real challenge, not least because it is partly out of his control. The <a href="https://www.education.gov.au/education-investment-fund">Education Investment Fund</a>, which was established by Labor in 2008-09 to support research programs and infrastructure of this kind, has been dormant for nearly two years. It has already been slated for “repurposing” to fill a <a href="http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/health/37bn-hole-in-ndis-funding-after-transfer-of-education-money-fails/news-story/c1245559a618008c53242bc01d520d4c">A$3.7 billion hole</a> in funding for the <a href="https://www.ndis.gov.au/">National Disability Insurance Scheme</a>.</p>
<p>If legislation enabling this transfer passes the Senate, then the government will need to find an alternate way to support research infrastructure. If not, the credibility of the NISA, and its central role in the prime minister’s economic agenda, will be called into very serious question.</p>
<p>The <a href="https://theconversation.com/explainer-the-national-collaborative-research-infrastructure-strategy-ncris-38837">27 projects funded by NCRIS</a> are excellent examples of the tools that provide a strong basis on which Australia’s future can be built. This infrastructure underpins advances in fields as diverse as genetics, nanotechnology, astronomy and agriculture, all of which will drive Australia’s future.</p>
<p>If Sinodinos can defend and champion the nation-building role of research infrastructure within cabinet and secure the necessary financial commitment, then he will win the support and respect of many of those watching today.</p>
<p>What the sector needs now is certainty that the programs initiated by Christopher Pyne and Greg Hunt, and the momentum they have been building, will continue under Sinodinos. This is both for scientists working on basic research problems, where the pathways to commercial or social outcomes are still unclear, and for innovators taking on the risk of taking technology to market.</p>
<p>It has been good to see CSIRO re-affirmed as Australia’s flagship science and innovation agency, with Hunt’s <a href="http://www.csiro.au/en/About/Leadership-governance/Minister-and-Board/Statement-of-Expectations">Statement of Expectations</a> for CSIRO. It was a landmark in the sector and provided reassurance that the Turnbull government understands CSIRO’s contribution to Australia’s future growth. This is something that the new minister also acknowledged in his first statement.</p>
<p>CSIRO’s influence extends beyond Australia. Science is a global pursuit, and Sinodinos needs to build on the international outlook that Hunt brought to the portfolio. The previous minister’s efforts to build international links, including stronger ties to South East Asia and the United States, will reap rewards for Australia.</p>
<p>Sinodinos will inherit a portfolio with a firm direction and a strong drive. Australia’s science and innovation sector is well positioned. It needs a firm hand at the helm and strong leadership to keep things on track. </p>
<p>If the new minister can reinforce the message that innovation, science and technology are the real drivers of change we will see Australia not only growing, but making a real global impact.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/71700/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Professor Les Field is the Secretary of Science Policy, Australian Academy of Science. He receives funding from the Australian Research Council and is Senior Deputy Vice-Chancellor at UNSW.</span></em></p>The new minister for science has some challenges ahead, but there is an opportunity to build on the foundations laid by his predcessors.Les Field, Secretary for Science Policy at the Australian Academy of Science, and Senior Deputy Vice-Chancellor, UNSW SydneyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/645472016-08-30T07:04:39Z2016-08-30T07:04:39ZAfter Operation Spicer, what more needs to be done to clean up political donations in NSW?<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/135903/original/image-20160830-28244-1m2hxfv.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Former police minister Mike Gallacher is one of a number of current and former MPs to be caught up in Operation Spicer.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP/Joel Carrett</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>The New South Wales Independent Commission Against Corruption (ICAC) has handed down <a href="http://www.icac.nsw.gov.au/docman/investigations/reports-1/4865-investigation-into-nsw-liberal-party-electoral-funding-for-the-2011-state-election-campaign-and-other-matters-operation-spicer/file">its report</a> on illegal political donations from property developers during the 2011 state election, dubbed Operation Spicer. </p>
<p>In Operation Spicer, ICAC investigated allegations that the NSW Liberals used associated entities to disguise donations from donors banned in the state, such as property developers, in exchange for favouring the interests of the donors. The money was channelled back to state campaign coffers. </p>
<h2>What does the report recommend?</h2>
<p>ICAC confirmed the NSW Liberals used two entities, the Free Enterprise Foundation and Eightbyfive, to “launder” banned political donations from developers and channel the money back to the NSW election campaign. </p>
<p>ICAC was hampered by a <a href="http://www.hcourt.gov.au/cases/case_s302-2014">High Court challenge</a> to its jurisdiction, which meant it was unable to make findings of corrupt conduct for breaches of electoral laws. </p>
<p>Nevertheless, ICAC found former Labor MP Joseph Tripodi engaged in serious corrupt conduct. He misused his position as a MP to improperly provide an advantage to property developer Buildev, which wanted to create a fifth coal terminal at the port of Newcastle. Tripodi helped Buildev with this, and leaked confidential government information in the hope he could secure future personal benefit from the company.</p>
<p>ICAC recommended the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) charge former energy minister Chris Hartcher for an offence of larceny. ICAC found Hartcher had stolen A$4,000 of donations to the NSW Liberal Party for his own personal use. He had also orchestrated a scheme where banned donations were “laundered” through an entity called Eightbyfive. </p>
<p>ICAC also recommended the DPP prosecute Samantha Brookes, Andrew Cornwell, Tim Gunasinghe, Tim Koelma and Bill Saddington for giving false or misleading evidence to the commission.</p>
<p>ICAC also found nine state MPs acted with the intention of evading election funding laws: Hartcher, Cornwell, Mike Gallacher, Chris Spence, Tim Owen, Garry Edwards, Bart Bassett, Craig Baumann and Darren Webber. It also made similar findings about property developer and former Newcastle lord mayor Jeff McCloy, and former Australian Water Holdings CEO Nick Di Girolamo. </p>
<p>In the hearings, McCloy <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/i-feel-like-a-walking-atm-newcastle-lord-mayor-jeff-mccloy-admits-giving-tens-of-thousands-of-dollars-to-liberal-candidates-20140813-103plf.html">infamously said</a> he felt like a walking ATM and admitted to ICAC that he made illegal donations by giving envelopes stuffed with $10,000 in cash to three MPs before the 2011 election. He then rather shamelessly <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/jeff-mccloy-apologises-over-paper-bag-birthday-cake-20141013-1159ko.html">posted photos</a> of himself with a birthday cake shaped as a brown paper bag overflowing with cash.</p>
<h2>What are the issues with the NSW political donations system?</h2>
<p>Operation Spicer is part of a broader problem with NSW’s system of political donations. </p>
<p>Within the span of two years, ICAC has undertaken nine investigations into alleged corrupt conduct by NSW government ministers. The investigations sparked the <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/nsw-premier-barry-ofarrell-resigns-20140416-36qwv.html">resignation of Barry O’Farrell</a> as premier over a bottle of wine, and caused ten MPs to <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-05-02/political-scalps-of-nsw-icac/5427260">resign or leave</a> the Liberal Party. </p>
<p>The scandals have raised questions about political donations and the role of lobbyists. The concern is that money can buy political access or influence. This is amply borne out by ICAC inquiries laying bare that politicians have acted to secure policy benefits for lobbyists or those who have opened their wallets to them.</p>
<p>Although NSW has <a href="https://theconversation.com/explainer-how-does-our-political-donations-system-work-and-is-it-any-good-60159">one of the strongest</a> political donations regimes in Australia, it can be evaded. There are loopholes and inconsistencies in political donations laws across the nation.</p>
<h2>Is this enough to fix our political donations system?</h2>
<p>There are a few necessary ingredients for effective regulation of any political donations system. </p>
<p>The first is the ability to uncover any illegal donations that have occurred. ICAC has done admirably well in bringing to light some shady dealings that would have otherwise been hidden. There is thus a strong case to introduce a federal ICAC, so these issues can be uncovered federally as well. </p>
<p>The next is an effective set of laws to regulate this area. In the wake of these scandals, the NSW government has introduced <a href="http://www.legislation.nsw.gov.au/acts/2014-30.pdf">new legislation</a> regulating lobbyists and tightening political donation rules. But there is still no consistency in political donations laws across Australia.</p>
<p>Just as important is the enforcement of any breaches of law. The NSW Electoral Commission has <a href="https://theconversation.com/electoral-commission-makes-a-stand-on-liberal-breaches-of-nsw-donations-laws-56920">sprung into action</a> and become more active in pursuing breaches of electoral laws. It penalised the Liberal Party for breaching electoral rules <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-05-23/electoral-comm-defends-decision-to-withdraw-funding-from-libs/7435900">by withholding</a> $4.4 million in public funding from the party.</p>
<p>The electoral commission has also <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/icac-former-liberal-mps-forced-to-repay-illegal-donations-20160829-gr3tcv.html">recently issued</a> letters of demand to politicians involved in Operation Spicer to repay the illegal donations. The <a href="http://www.legislation.nsw.gov.au/inforce/27ca53b3-96cb-6b43-f472-a3bac3e2f368/1981-78.pdf">law</a> allows the commission to recover any unlawful donations, and double that amount if the politician knew it was unlawful.</p>
<p>The reforms to date and increased enforcement of breaches of electoral law do improve the NSW system. But we need a more holistic solution to this problem at the federal level to stamp out the corruption in our political system.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/64547/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Yee-Fui Ng has co-written a commissioned report for the New South Wales Electoral Commission on lobbying regulation. </span></em></p>There are a few necessary ingredients for the effective regulation of any political donations system.Yee-Fui Ng, Lecturer, Graduate School of Business and Law, RMIT UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/626972016-07-20T02:24:47Z2016-07-20T02:24:47ZQueenslanders will soon see in real-time who’s paying politicians – now Canberra must act<p>At long last, Australia has a government that is prepared to introduce real-time disclosure for political donations. The Queensland government – and independent Speaker Peter Wellington, who has been crucial in <a href="http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/peter-wellington-wants-premiers-promised-political-donations-inquiry--now-20160602-gpaenp.html">pushing for the change</a> – deserve praise for this <a href="https://theconversation.com/labors-first-test-putting-integrity-before-politics-in-queensland-37373">long-awaited</a> reform. </p>
<p>The significance of Premier Annastacia Palaszczuk’s <a href="http://statements.qld.gov.au/Statement/2016/7/19/realtime-disclosure-of-political-donations-to-be-introduced-in-qld">promise to implement</a> “an electronic real-time disclosure system” by the beginning of 2017 should not be underestimated. </p>
<p>I have spent many years researching and writing on public sector accountability matters and more recently on Australia’s mismatched <a href="https://theconversation.com/explainer-how-does-our-political-donations-system-work-and-is-it-any-good-60159">nine sets of political donations laws</a>. In my opinion, the introduction of real-time disclosure – already in place <a href="http://www.dpc.nsw.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0004/167521/Volume_1_-_Final_Report.pdf">in New York and Ontario</a> – is the most important reform in a suite of <a href="https://theconversation.com/eight-ways-to-clean-up-money-in-australian-politics-59453">much-needed political funding reforms</a>.</p>
<p>I say this because it allows the electorate to know, before casting a vote, who has made a donation, how much they have donated, and to whom. The introduction of real-time disclosure will mean that at least Queensland voters will soon be making an informed decision at the ballot box – an informed choice denied to Australian voters on July 2.</p>
<p>If other state and territory governments and the federal government can display the moral courage shown by the Queensland government, it would mark an important first step toward an open political donations system. It may also prove to be an important first step toward addressing the <a href="https://theconversation.com/now-for-the-big-question-who-do-you-trust-to-run-the-country-58723">widening trust deficit</a> between the community and those we entrust with the power to make decisions on behalf of us all.</p>
<p>But as welcome as it is, this reform does not go far enough. What is required – and quickly – is a national approach to how politics is funded in this country. This needs to be accompanied by changes to other key elements of what constitutes a <a href="https://theconversation.com/au/topics/political-donations">political donations</a> regime. </p>
<hr>
<blockquote>
<p>Read more on <a href="https://theconversation.com/au/topics/political-finance-in-australia">political finance in Australia</a>, including an <a href="https://theconversation.com/infographic-a-snapshot-of-political-donations-in-australia-60112">infographic</a> of donations at glance.</p>
</blockquote>
<hr>
<p>These elements include (but are not limited to) the disputed issue of placing a ban on certain types of donors, setting a cap on all donations regardless of their source, and meaningful penalties for those who break the law. Without these reforms, many politicians and the parties to which they belong will continue to game the federated system and to adopt a minimalist approach to the democratic principles of transparency and accountability.</p>
<p>The issue of governments banning donations from particular donors has been <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2016/jun/03/turnbull-restates-belief-in-donations-cap-but-does-not-commit-to-act">widely contested</a>, including in the High Court of Australia. There is a strong possibility that imposing bans could again end up in the High Court. Therefore, it might be prudent, in the short term at least, to settle for placing a cap on all donations.</p>
<p>Restricting donations to a maximum of say $500 or $1000 addresses the possibility of “policy capture”. When this occurs, inappropriate, unfit-for-purpose polices can be implemented. This in turn fuels the perception that those capable of donating considerable sums of money to a political party can, in return, exert inappropriate influence over public policy.</p>
<p>The penalties currently imposed for breaking political donations laws require urgent attention. To be frank, they are totally inadequate. If they are to have a preventive dimension, which is one of the primary reasons sanctions are imposed in the first place, they must be significantly increased.</p>
<p>The federal government should take the lead when it comes to reforming Australia’s political donations laws. Perhaps there is a glimmer of hope that they will act to do so in the near future. Cabinet Secretary Arthur Sinodinos made it clear when <a href="https://theconversation.com/disclose-political-donations-in-real-time-sinodinos-59017">interviewed by Michelle Grattan</a> in May 2016 that he thought political donations should be disclosed in “continuous real time”. As he explained:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>I think the time has come to do that because I think that will be a major step forward in transparency.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Sinodinos is correct in his assessment. He was also correct when he said that inconsistencies between federal and state laws needed to be examined.</p>
<p>Sinodinos is a senior member of the recently re-elected Coalition government. As such, he is in a position to put in place the mechanisms needed to turn his words into action, including plans to have a national approach to political donations placed on the next <a href="https://www.coag.gov.au/">Council of Australian Governments</a> agenda. </p>
<p>He must also act to have real-time disclosure laws introduced into the federal parliament. If the Queensland government is able to do so by January next year, there is no reason why the federal government cannot do the same. The <a href="http://insidestory.org.au/new-york-where-political-finance-never-sleeps">technology already exists</a> and has for some time to implement a real-time disclosure policy. </p>
<p>What has not existed is the desire to place the public interest before personal and party interests. The Palaszczuk government has just shown it is possible to do so. It will be interesting to see how long it takes the federal government and all other governments around Australia to come to the same decision.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/62697/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Colleen Lewis has previously received funding from the Australian Research Council for research into parliaments and parliamentarians. She is an Adjunct Professor with the National Centre for Australian Studies, Monash University and a Director of the Accountability Round Table. Dr Lewis was recently commissioned to write a report on political funding for The John Cain Foundation. The commission came with no conditions, restrictions or suggestions as to the direction or findings of her research. She has never received any funding from the Palaszczuk Government or been approached by them to undertake any research.</span></em></p>At long last, Australia has a government that is prepared to introduce real-time disclosure for political donations – a crucial change that lets voters make an informed choice at the ballot box.Colleen Lewis, Adjunct Professor, National Centre for Australian Studies, Monash UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/569202016-03-29T23:58:35Z2016-03-29T23:58:35ZElectoral commission makes a stand on Liberal breaches of NSW donations laws<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/116593/original/image-20160329-13709-32g3f9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">The NSW Electoral Commission's withholding of public funding to the NSW Liberal Party may yet again imperil Arthur Sinodinos.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP/Dan Himbrechts</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>The New South Wales Electoral Commission last week <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/nsw-liberals-concealed-illegal-donors-before-2011-election-win-20160323-gnpsn6.html">condemned the NSW Liberal Party</a> for failing to disclose the identity of major donors in 2010-11. These donations, totalling more than A$690,000, occurred in the lead-up to the 2011 state election.</p>
<p>By the Liberal Party’s admission, these included donations in excess of the cap on donations to NSW parties, and prohibited property developer donations. As a result, the commission is withholding about $4.4 million in public funding to the party.</p>
<p>These findings are significant but not new. These issues, and others, were ventilated in the <a href="https://www.icac.nsw.gov.au/investigations/current-investigations/investigationdetail/203">Operation Spicer</a> hearings before the NSW Independent Commission Against Corruption (ICAC) in 2014. But the commission’s actions may yet imperil former NSW Liberal Party treasurer and finance director, federal senator Arthur Sinodinos, for the second time. Sinodinos <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/am/content/2016/s4432118.htm">continues to deny</a> any knowledge of wrongdoing.</p>
<p>What is the legal basis and consequence of all this? And what might it say about the trajectory of political finance regulation and enforcement?</p>
<h2>The legal background</h2>
<p>Despite much public discussion in recent decades, political financing law has remained relatively laissez-faire federally. But innovation at state level has helped offset this.</p>
<p>NSW has generally been the leader in political finance law in Australia. It introduced the first public funding and donation disclosure laws <a href="http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/efeada1981443/">in 1981</a>. </p>
<p>And since 2009, state governments of both hues have erected Australia’s most comprehensive election finance regime. This includes limits on individual donations (now $5,800 per year to a party), limits on electoral expenditure by parties and others, and bans on donations from property developers and alcohol, tobacco or gaming interests. </p>
<p>It also includes increasingly regular disclosure of donations above $1,000. In comparison, the national disclosure threshold at the relevant time was $11,500.</p>
<p>Supporters of broad regulation – especially caps on donations or expenditure – argue that when money speaks, it <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-wa-senate-election-and-the-rise-of-money-in-australian-politics-25477">sometimes screams</a>. Policing money in politics is not just a matter of accountancy and disclosure. Unrestricted flows of money threaten the fundamental promise of equality of voice and respect that universal suffrage is meant to emblemise.</p>
<h2>A trust to be trusted?</h2>
<p>Into this web, in 2010, elements in the NSW Liberal Party appear to have tried to circumvent the law or game the system. </p>
<p>According to the NSW Electoral Commission and evidence before ICAC, one aspect of this involved the use of an existing trust, the Free Enterprise Foundation, as a conduit for donations. Paul Nicolaou was <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/icac-arthur-sinodinos-and-the-lunch-that-destroyed-careers-20141016-1173it.html">paid commission</a> to solicit gifts to the foundation. Nicolaou was then a chief fundraiser for the NSW Liberal Party, including as chairman of the party’s Millennium Fund (a vehicle to attract business donors by facilitating access and networking with political figures).</p>
<p>A “major part” of the Free Enterprise Foundation’s activities, the commission <a href="http://www.elections.nsw.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0004/214672/23_March_2016_Liberal_Party_of_Australia_NSW_Division_ineligible_for_further_public_funding_and_supporting_information.pdf">found</a>, was to seek to offer anonymity to those who wanted to donate to the party, and a means to wash developer donations through the system.</p>
<p>Through this, it was assumed that funds could be donated to the foundation on the understanding that they would be channelled to the NSW Liberal Party, but that there was no strict legal obligation to so do.</p>
<p>The foundation had opened the financial year in question, 2010-11, with just $3,443.23 in its coffers. Within six months, it had passed on $787,000 to the NSW Liberal Party. The NSW election was held in March 2011. In the same half-year, a further $294,000 was paid to the Liberal Party National Division – most of it just prior to the August 2010 federal election.</p>
<h2>What are the consequences?</h2>
<p>The NSW Electoral Commission <a href="http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/efeada1981443/">is obliged</a> to withhold all public funding payments to a party that is in breach of its disclosure obligations. The $4.4 million at stake includes a mix of funding outstanding from the Liberals’ successful 2015 election campaign and this year’s “administration” funding. </p>
<p>The Liberal Party had been banking on this money. In correspondence from its solicitors to the commission, <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2016/mar/24/nsw-electoral-commission-withholds-44m-from-liberals-over-donations-scandal">it said</a> the money was “critical [to] its operations” and flagged “emergency measures”, including “retrenchment of staff”. It even pleaded for $3.7 million to be released, reasoning that only around $700,000 of undisclosed donations were the issue. But the act clearly requires the commission to withhold all public funding.</p>
<p>Could the NSW Liberal Party challenge the commission in the Supreme Court? It might press a claim that promoting “free markets” or “individual freedoms” could be – at least on its face – charitable and that, on the basis of the High Court in the <a href="http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/sinodisp/au/cases/cth/HCA/2010/42.html">AidWatch case</a>, political activities did not taint that status. But this is not an easy argument to mount given the facts. </p>
<p>The party might also seek to argue some ambiguity in the concept or agency or “intention” to benefit, in the definition of a state “political donation”. It might even seek to question aspects of due process or fact-finding by the commission.</p>
<p>However, NSW Premier Mike Baird <a href="http://www.skynews.com.au/news/top-stories/2016/03/24/nsw-libs-did-the-wrong-thing--baird.html">has told</a> the party’s state director to declare the donations and admit the party machine has “done the wrong thing”. </p>
<p>The Free Enterprise Foundation could take action. It might say it is protecting its honour, having led donors to believe it could keep their anonymity. If it does not take action, that will reinforce the impression that the foundation was never more than a wing of the party.</p>
<p>However common such administrative law gambits are when corporations confront governments, the regulator holds the upper hand here. NSW parties are heavily dependent on public funding. And the law – to its credit – now requires a significant level of disclosure and even probity in the financial affairs of parties. </p>
<p>The NSW Electoral Commission’s statement is important less for its findings of facts – most of which have already been ventilated – but for its forthright pursuit of the matter and willingness to act as a robust regulator. </p>
<p>In the past electoral commissions have seen their role as mere administrators of the law. For too long, electoral law in Australia has been subject to limited enforcement and minimal interpretive development. This is because commissions tend to lack the resources or powers to pursue infringements, and referrals to police or prosecutors meet a dead-end of time limitations and low penalties.</p>
<p>But in pursuing this matter, and using clean public funding as leverage to an outcome where parties will think twice about resorting to formalities of trust law to hide donations, the NSW Electoral Commission is to be congratulated.</p>
<hr>
<p><em>This piece was adapted from an <a href="https://auspublaw.org/2016/03/never-too-late-to-regulate/">earlier article</a> on the <a href="https://auspublaw.org/">Auspublaw blog</a>.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/56920/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Graeme Orr has previously written a report for the NSWEC on drafting principles for general electoral/voting law, but never worked with that body on political finance issues. </span></em></p>What does the latest donations scandal enveloping the NSW Liberal Party say about the trajectory of political finance regulation and enforcement?Graeme Orr, Professor of Law, The University of QueenslandLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/490622015-10-13T12:55:27Z2015-10-13T12:55:27ZThe test of Turnbull’s commitment to cabinet government will be the long haul<p>It might have seemed a statement of the obvious when Malcolm Turnbull told Tuesday’s Coalition parties’ meeting that “my chief advisers will be my ministers”. But in the context of the command-and-control style of Tony Abbott’s office, which caused so much trouble, it was an emphatic reinforcement of his repeated message – that he intends to restore proper cabinet government.</p>
<p>Turnbull said his office’s role would be to support and liaise with ministers and ensure that the government got the best out of the public service. Sub-text: it wouldn’t be like a Peta Credlin-run politburo.</p>
<p>As the new frontbench shakes down, cabinet secretary Arthur Sinodinos on Tuesday described his role as “a bit like being a traffic cop. Just making sure that all cars are going in the right direction and not crashing into each other.”</p>
<p>Sinodinos said it was a matter of cabinet ministers being “consistent on the messaging, having ownership of the decisions that come out of the process, so therefore having a fair process which gives everyone the chance to have a go”.</p>
<p>Having been chief-of-staff to John Howard, Sinodinos has a big advantage: he’s also seen the process from the vantage point of a prime minister’s office. “It gave me a feel for what works and doesn’t work.”</p>
<p>He told Sky that Turnbull was being consultative, asking each of the ministers to have a view on things. “Does that mean it makes for a longer cabinet meeting? It can sometimes, but if it means at the end people have a sense of where they’re going and they have ownership on the outcome it helps with confidentiality, it helps with collective responsibility.</p>
<p>"And if the cabinet knows where it’s going it can put a consistent view to the party room and the government knows where it’s going and we all know what we’re saying out to the public.”</p>
<p>Treating colleagues as a team was better than a command-and-control system or dealing with things in silos, Sinodinos said. “At the end of the day, the prime minister’s colleagues are his colleagues – they should be treated accordingly. My role, as much as the Prime Minister’s Office role, is not to be gatekeepers, but in a sense gate openers, because prime ministers need to have different trajectories of advice – they have to have diverse sources of advice.”</p>
<p>He said that in the last two years a lot of the goodwill present when the government came to office had been dissipated because “there probably was too much command-and-control. And I think you need to build productive relationships with your colleagues … the colleagues come first, you have to have a structure which reflects that.”</p>
<p>In a speech to the Sydney Institute on Tuesday night, Anne Tiernan, from Griffith University, co-author of two books on prime ministers’ chiefs-of-staff, noted that “criticisms of the ‘control freakery’ of successive PMOs are so common to have become almost routine”. That they had contributed to the demise of three prime ministers – Kevin Rudd, Julia Gillard, and Abbott – “indicates a structural problem in our governance”.</p>
<p>She said Rudd, Gillard and Abbott had struggled because of a lack of effective transition planning; difficulties in shifting from campaigning to governing; and an incapacity to understand and find ways of dealing with “the realities of resource dependence in government” – that is, other players including the party room, cabinet, the Senate, state leaders and the like.</p>
<p>Whether Turnbull could carry out his commitment to restore cabinet government, consult more effectively and better manage his dependences remained to be seen, Tiernan said.</p>
<p>“He has made what looks to be a promising start, but then so did Kevin Rudd. The devil will be in the detail,” she said.</p>
<p>And, it might be added, when the pressures come on for quick decisions and, to use a favourable word of Turnbull’s, “agile” reactions.</p>
<p>Tiernan elaborated after her speech: “Internationally, the trend to centralisation is unmistakable across different types of political systems. It’s commendable that Turnbull is committed to running a more consultative and devolved model – letting ministers ‘minister’ – but the pressures of the 24-hour news cycle and the speed of events push the other way. It’s difficult to resist the demands of immediacy which tempt the leader and their inner circle to decide unilaterally.”</p>
<p>In some ways Turnbull will have to deny aspects of his own personality if he is to achieve his objective of operating a genuine style of cabinet government. Will he be able to tolerate indefinitely everyone having their say in those long cabinet discussions? Will he successfully curb his natural impatience? </p>
<p>How, as time goes on, will he react to advice that goes against the grain? As Sinodinos says, prime ministers don’t always like some of what they’re told.</p>
<p>The measure of Turnbull’s approach to governing will be over the long haul, when adversity, colleagues and politics try his endurance and his temper. His prime ministership will be a test of character as well as of cabinet government.</p>
<p><strong><a href="https://theconversation.com/politics-podcast-jamie-briggs-on-the-infrastructure-needs-of-australian-cities-48383">Listen to the latest Politics with Michelle Grattan podcast with guest, Cities Minister Jamie Briggs, here.</a></strong></p>
<iframe id="audio_iframe" src="https://www.podbean.com/media/player/fwe48-591058" width="100%" height="100" frameborder="0" scrolling="no"></iframe><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/49062/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
It might have seemed a statement of the obvious when Malcolm Turnbull told Tuesday’s Coalition parties’ meeting that “my chief advisers will be my ministers”. But in the context of the command-and-control…Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of CanberraLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/476962015-09-17T03:48:28Z2015-09-17T03:48:28ZPolitics podcast: Arthur Sinodinos on why Australia needed a new prime minister<p>Arthur Sinodinos was a key backer of Malcolm Turnbull. In this interview with Michelle Grattan he talks about why the Liberals needed a change in leadership, what he hopes will change in the running of the Prime Minister’s Office and much more.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/47696/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>Arthur Sinodinos, a key backer of Malcolm Turnbull, talks about why the Liberals needed a change in leadership and what he hopes will change in the running of the Prime Minister's Office.Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of CanberraLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/371792015-02-04T12:43:34Z2015-02-04T12:43:34ZSinodinos weighs into leadership crisis with tough critique of Abbott government<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/71065/original/image-20150204-28612-4ks01p.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Senator Arthur Sinodinos, John Howard's former chief of staff, is the first major figure to throw his weight behind leadership speculation.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP/Paul Miller</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>In 2001, after a disastrous Queensland election result, then-Liberal federal president Shane Stone wrote his famous memo reporting that the Howard government was seen as “mean and tricky”, out of touch and not listening to the electorate.</p>
<p>The memo caused massive trouble when later leaked, but by then John Howard had absorbed the lessons and undertaken repairs.</p>
<p>Senator Arthur Sinodinos, then-Howard’s chief of staff, recalled the problems of 2001 in his swingeing intervention in the Liberal leadership crisis on Wednesday.</p>
<p>Interviewed on Sky, Sinodinos delivered a verbal memo on the government’s shortcomings and what had to be done.</p>
<p>It contained some sledgehammer blows for Abbott. “I’ve always supported Tony Abbott … but that support ongoing is not unconditional – it’s based on being able to grapple with the issues we face at the moment, which appear to have impacted on our standing in the polls”. When asked whether Abbott will be leader in a week, Sinodinos said: “Comrade, come and ask me next week!”</p>
<p>Until Sinodinos’ emergence, the public attacks were being run by marginal figures, such as West Australian backbencher <a href="https://theconversation.com/bring-on-a-leadership-vote-next-week-liberal-backbencher-37113">Dennis Jensen</a>, who has urged a spill next week. Sinodinos, despite his recent troubled history, is a heavyweight in both policy and political experience.</p>
<p>Sinodinos’ core message to the Liberal Party is: identify the government’s problems, then assess who can best handle them. If alternatives to Abbott emerge, ask what they offer and how equipped they are to rectify things.</p>
<p>Sinodinos was forced to stand aside as assistant treasurer last March when the NSW Independent Commission Against Corruption called him as a witness. The reports affecting him are yet to appear. Abbott stuck by him for many months but finally had him quit the ministry to facilitate the pre-Christmas reshuffle.</p>
<p>Sinodinos was angry with the Prime Minister’s Office when his resignation leaked prematurely. The tension went back further. Abbott in opposition had flagged to Sinodinos that he wanted him as finance minister; Abbott’s chief of staff, Peta Credlin, is credited with heading that off.</p>
<p>While Sinodinos is not an entirely disinterested critic, his analysis of the government’s situation is sound.</p>
<p>Sinodinos dismissed any notion the leadership talk was “media hype”; the reason for it was that there’d been “a number of events in recent times which have raised questions about our direction, as a party and as a government”.</p>
<p>The government needed to connect with the public, revise or drop unpopular policies, and change the way the budget is prepared.</p>
<p>On the hot topic of the Medicare co-payment: “We either design one that is appropriate and equitable, or we drop the concept and look for other ways to restrain health spending,” Sinodinos said.</p>
<p>“We have to change the way we do budgets so that there is a lot more transparency around what is being considered and why.” That might go against canons about market sensitivity and the like but “we have got to ventilate options, and we have got to engage stakeholders and the community as a whole in an honest conversation”.</p>
<p>Sinodinos highlighted the issue of fairness, a weak point of the 2014 budget and something Malcolm Turnbull <a href="https://theconversation.com/people-will-accept-unpopular-decisions-if-they-understand-the-need-turnbull-36994">stressed</a> in a recent speech. “We need to make sure our spending is appropriately targeted but we need to consult the electorate about how we do that in a fair and equitable way, which properly shares the burden of adjustment across the community,” Sinodinos said.</p>
<p>Sinodinos predicted the backbench will become much more assertive on policy in the party room and the community. “Unless we engage the community and show the community we’re actively looking at the pros and cons of options and that we, as members of the party room, understand their concerns and are acting on them, I think we will lose touch with the broader community.”</p>
<p>The party had to be “very conscious of the everyday concerns of our fellow Australians” and show that “fairness in how we do things is going to be very important in framing the next budget”.</p>
<p>The political adviser in Sinodinos praised Abbott as “the Black Caviar” who delivered the election. But he rejected the Abbott tactic of trying to extract guarantees that he would not be challenged. “I don’t think either Julie Bishop or Malcolm Turnbull should be put in a position where their loyalty is questioned.”</p>
<p>Earlier, Education Minister Christopher Pyne had explained Bishop’s delay in issuing Tuesday’s loyalty statement by saying she’d been insulted and offended “about the idea that she wasn’t totally loyal … she felt that she didn’t need to prove her loyalty”.</p>
<p>Sinodinos urged putting some order in the current chaotic debate about whether to change leaders.</p>
<p>“It’s hypothetical to talk about a leadership contest – no-one’s put their hand up and no-one’s offered an alternative program.</p>
<p>"That’s why I’m saying, if we’re contemplating any of this, what is it exactly that we’re seeking to do, and how would it improve our situation? These are the sort of questions which are in the minds of backbenchers.</p>
<p>"At the moment it is a conversation about people asking each other what is going on.</p>
<p>"Unless and until someone else declares, it’s academic to discuss the merits of other people because we don’t know what is on offer.”</p>
<p>The problem in the prescription is that neither Turnbull nor Bishop wants to put themselves out there ahead of a clear indication the party room is ready to dump Abbott. It’s chicken and egg. In contemplating a spill many MPs would want to know who, if it were carried, would then put their hands up. But if Turnbull or Bishop openly signalled their availability beforehand, and a spill motion was lost, they could not then remain in the cabinet. </p>
<p><strong>Listen to the latest <a href="http://michellegrattan.podbean.com/e/mathias-cormann">Politics with Michelle Grattan podcast</a> here. Mathias Cormann speaks about the Liberal leadership crisis.</strong></p>
<iframe id="audio_iframe" src="https://www.podbean.com/media/player/xz98d-5392b0/initByJs/1/auto/1" width="100%" height="100" frameborder="0" scrolling="no"></iframe><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/37179/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
In 2001, after a disastrous Queensland election result, then-Liberal federal president Shane Stone wrote his famous memo reporting that the Howard government was seen as “mean and tricky”, out of touch…Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of CanberraLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/357352014-12-19T10:50:03Z2014-12-19T10:50:03ZAbbott should be bold with his reshuffle<p>Tony Abbott’s imminent ministerial reshuffle has become a serious test of the Prime Minister’s leadership. Will he wimp it, or make the most of the opportunity?</p>
<p>Now that the Independent Commission Against Corruption reports affecting Arthur Sinodinos have been delayed from January to March at the earliest, Abbott has concluded the government does require an assistant treasurer to help with the May budget.</p>
<p>Sinodinos stood aside from that post in March; Finance Minister Mathias Cormann had Sinodinos’ work added to his own load. Cormann is a strong performer but to have him continue any longer in two jobs would have been ridiculous.</p>
<p>Admittedly, the situation is hard on Sinodinos. He’s out of the ministry on pragmatic grounds before a proper judgement can be made on whether he should have had to leave on ethical ones. Abbott’s inclination for a long time was to stand by Sinodinos until the matter was clarified, but the changed timetable made that unsustainable.</p>
<p>The word from Abbott’s office for months has been that in the event of a reshuffle triggered by the Sinodinos factor, Abbott wanted minimal changes. That is what some sources believe is likely to happen but others are expecting wider moves.</p>
<p>Under the minimalist scenario, the probable course is that a parliamentary secretary – the favourite is Josh Frydenberg, who is praised for his work on deregulation – is promoted to assistant treasurer, or to take the job of a junior minister such as Sussan Ley who would move into that spot.</p>
<p>Assistant treasurer, incidentally, is a plum job. While it has been in the outer ministry and thus Sinodinos was disappointed with it (having earlier been given the nod by Abbott that he’d get finance), it is a great training ground for an ambitious minister. It provides an insight into all areas of administration and – very importantly – a seat on the expenditure review committee, taking its incumbent to the heart of government.</p>
<p>With a minimalist reshuffle, the idea apparently would be to have a more substantial one at the end of next year.</p>
<p>Why anyone thinks that would be the sensible course is unclear. The government needs the best possible frontbench now. It doesn’t necessarily benefit from an overhaul months before an election, unless you believe a reshuffle is more about cosmetics than increasing the capacity for substantial work. </p>
<p>If things roll down the minimalist road, what will be the nature of the verdict? Harsh – that Abbott has missed the chance to boost the team’s talent, and the representation of women.</p>
<p>Abbott fears that anything too extensive can be destabilising, creating critics and enemies. That’s true – but acting too conservatively also risks a backlash, not just from the commentators but internally.</p>
<p>And Abbott really has to address the gender issue. What is the use of putting that off for a year? Only one woman is in cabinet and they are sparse in the ministry. Abbott was heard to opine a while ago that he would like to promote Michaelia Cash, a junior minister, into cabinet; Ley also has a claim to a cabinet spot. Karen Andrews, a Queensland backbencher, has a case to get a parliamentary secretaryship.</p>
<p>No discussion of a reshuffle can avoid the perennially embattled Defence Minister David Johnston. Whatever decision is taken about him carries difficulties. His critics are many, but moving him would be seen as putting blood in the water.</p>
<p>When pressed in parliament recently to say whether Johnston would be defence minister when parliament resumes in February, Abbott dodged.</p>
<p>Deputy Liberal leader Julie Bishop is a strong ally of Johnston – who’s had trouble with Abbott’s office – and would no doubt speak up for him if asked.</p>
<p>If the reshuffle is widened Immigration Minister Scott Morrison will be seeking to expand his territory or change empires. Having stopped the boats, Morrison has for some time wanted something extra or different to do, to the frustration of ministers whose areas he abuts.</p>
<p>What is particularly unfortunate about this government is that it has a lot of talent outside the frontbench that is sorely needed inside it.</p>
<p>In opposition Abbott was loath to change his line-up; coming to government he made some alterations but avoided a sweeping overhaul.</p>
<p>The election brought new faces to the parliament. Now these people have settled in, the best of them have claims for promotion. When economic messaging is a problem, why not make use of Christian Porter, former West Australian treasurer? He hardly needs to “serve his time”, despite Abbott liking people to do that.</p>
<p>What would happen if Abbott put aside his caution and made some bold moves? Yes, losers would gripe. But with a seriously revamped team would the government go into 2015 in a better position? Without doubt.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/35735/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
Tony Abbott’s imminent ministerial reshuffle has become a serious test of the Prime Minister’s leadership. Will he wimp it, or make the most of the opportunity? Now that the Independent Commission Against…Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of CanberraLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/247202014-04-02T19:47:20Z2014-04-02T19:47:20ZParties, money and their masters: who do office holders serve?<p>It’s hard not to be disturbed by the allegations emerging from the inquiry into Australian Water Holdings (AWH) by New South Wales’ <a href="http://www.icac.nsw.gov.au/investigations/current-investigations">Independent Commission Against Corruption</a> (ICAC). The proceedings have painted a picture of NSW politics as increasingly tainted by corruption and extensive networks of money and influence. These networks run from unions and companies (both public and private) to parties, parliaments and ministries. </p>
<p>As the latest high-profile politician to take the stand, the allegations against Liberal Party senator <a href="https://theconversation.com/sinodinos-stands-aside-during-corruption-inquiry-24571">Arthur Sinodinos</a> have revealed yet another series of potentially damaging relationships and financial transactions. Among these are suggestions that during Sinodinos’ time on the AWH board, A$76,000 was donated to the Liberal Party and billed back to Sydney Water under the guise of providing water and sewage infrastructure in northwest Sydney. </p>
<p>At the time, Sinodinos also held the position of honorary treasurer of the NSW Liberal Party. </p>
<p>The allegations against Sinodinos hang on the extent of his knowledge and involvement in the allegedly corrupt dealings of AWH. However, the inquiry has also highlighted a much broader problem that potentially threatens political integrity. Conflicts of interest arise when party officials also hold senior positions on companies that have a financial interest in government contracts, or companies that could potentially benefit from political connections. </p>
<p>When parliamentarians enter public office they are required to <a href="http://www.aph.gov.au/parliamentary_business/committees/house_of_representatives_committees?url=pmi/declarations.htm">disclose their financial interests</a> in the hope that transparency might build a solid foundation of parliamentary ethics. This guards against conflicts of interest and minimises the risk of corrupt behaviour. In some states, declarations also extend to MPs’ families and their spouses.</p>
<p>Typically, parliamentarians self-regulate. Registers and codes of conduct are designed to influence behaviour in line with public expectations and ethical practices, but they do not have legislative force. A breach, therefore, may be of little consequence.</p>
<h2>Parties offer back-door access to power</h2>
<p>The public duty of parliamentarians and ministers is at least reasonably clear. What is far murkier is where political parties and their high-ranking officials are placed within these networks of influence. Some party positions yield considerable strategic and financial power. However, whose interests officials serve is not always clear. </p>
<p>It is common for party presidents, directors, treasurers and secretaries to also hold office within companies, unions and interest groups. In itself, this is not necessarily a bad thing. Such overlaps between party members (office holders or ordinary members) and outside groups are an important way in which parties maintain connections with their support base. They may even help to generate policy ideas.</p>
<p>For the Liberals, this membership overlap would traditionally include business organisations. For Labor, it is unions. After all, political parties are the parliamentary voice of organised interests. </p>
<p>As the ICAC inquiry has shown, the values underpinning our democracy are threatened when influence can be bought through political parties without having to comply with the guidelines that regulate direct access to governments.</p>
<p>Political integrity can be threatened by donations to parties or <a href="http://www.theage.com.au/comment/political-donations-now-for-some-real-disclosure-20130811-2rq10.html">payments for access</a> to politicians at party fundraisers. <a href="https://theconversation.com/think-the-us-electoral-system-is-flawed-check-out-australias-10536">Disclosure laws</a> catch these donations, but thresholds are high, reporting mechanisms are clunky and disclosures lags well behind expenditure.</p>
<p>Laws cannot address the influence exercised by party officials when they act as “middlemen”. This is particularly a problem when no payment is involved. </p>
<p>What is not regulated – and rarely acknowledged – is the culture of <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-case-for-transparent-funding-and-better-regulation-of-political-parties-777">fundraising within the major parties</a> and the norms governing these practices. </p>
<p>As private, voluntary associations, political parties are generally not required by legislation to reveal the interests of their senior office bearers. Nor is there a culture of party members demanding transparency in these matters. The Greens, with an internal policy on donations, stand out as an exception.</p>
<p>For many parties the desire to win elections trumps other concerns. And to win parties need to raise money and keep supporters and donors onside. This is what drives party politics in Australia.</p>
<h2>Who calls parties to account?</h2>
<p>Because parties and politicians are so intimately related, we tend to think that parties are quasi-public bodies. Parties support their candidates’ campaigns and we vote for parties rather than individuals at the ballot box. At the very least, we believe they play at least some sort of a public function.</p>
<p>Since the <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-opinion/australian-politics-101-take-the-money-and-run-20130604-2noci.html">establishment of public funding</a> in Australia the law has also been moving in this direction, but not far enough to allow any sort of legislative intrusion to regulate potential conflicts of interests within political parties. </p>
<p>Achieving reform in this area is not straightforward. Legitimate disagreements exist over the public duty of parties and their role as campaigning organisations designed to further the interests of their members and supporters (which includes donors). Whose interests a party should serve is a debate that has existed since parties themselves. </p>
<p>The more immediate question here is whose interests should party office holders serve: those of their party or their company? If we want to see greater transparency and more ethical practices established, agitation for change needs to come from within the parties. This needs to be driven by the membership, which in a voluntary association is the only real source of accountability.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/24720/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Anika Gauja receives funding from the Australian Research Council.</span></em></p>It’s hard not to be disturbed by the allegations emerging from the inquiry into Australian Water Holdings (AWH) by New South Wales’ Independent Commission Against Corruption (ICAC). The proceedings have…Anika Gauja, Senior Lecturer, Department of Government and International Relations, University of SydneyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/29362011-09-13T06:38:52Z2011-09-13T06:38:52ZFrom chief of staff to Senator: the rise and rise of Arthur Sinodinos<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/3503/original/PIC_-_Sinodinos_and_Howard.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Former Prime Minister John Howard with his then chief of staff Arthur Sinodinos.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Arthur Sinodinos has long been mooted as a potential successor to retiring former Howard minister, Senator Helen Coonan. </p>
<p>Now that Sinodinos - long serving chief of staff to former Primer Minister John Howard - has <a href="http://www.nsw.liberal.org.au/news/special-mention/nominee-for-senate-casual-vacancy-endorsed">yielded to pressure</a> from party colleagues to nominate for <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2011-08-18/senator-coonan-retires/2845840">the casual vacancy created by Coonan’s retirement</a>, he will significantly enhance the Liberal brand in his home state of New South Wales.</p>
<p>It is difficult to think of someone better qualified to sit in the nation’s Upper House. Harder still to recall an individual - so long at the centre of bitter and intense political contest, who is held in such high regard on all sides of Australian politics. </p>
<p>That he has accepted the Senate nomination may surprise some. Already he has eschewed an opportunity to run for a safe seat in the House of Representatives. </p>
<p>But if this son of Greek immigrant parents, who grew up in working class Newcastle, where he earned a first class honours degree from the local university, fulfills the promise so many see in him, he will be welcomed with open arms. </p>
<p>Having someone of Sinodinos’ calibre will lend much-needed gravitas and policy grunt to Tony Abbott’s front-bench – particularly in its area of most obvious weakness: economic policy.</p>
<p>By dint of educational background, policy and professional experience, Sinodinos confounds the stereotype of political staffer on the fast track to pre-selection. </p>
<p>An economist with 13 years experience in a variety of senior roles in Commonwealth Treasury, Sinodinos spent five years as Economic Adviser to John Howard – first in Opposition (1987-1989; 1995-96) and later in government (1996-97). </p>
<p>As Chief of Staff to the Prime Minister for eight years from September 1997 to December 2006, Sinodinos helped Howard attain what had eluded him for much of his first term and again in his last – an efficient and effective advisory and support system. </p>
<p>During his tenure as the government’s most senior and influential ministerial staffer, notable improvements were achieved in policy coordination and political management – in the leader’s office, across the ministry as well as in the government’s relationships with the public service, the parliament and stakeholders. </p>
<p>Sinodinos is regarded as one of the most professional and effective individuals to have held the role of prime minister’s Chief of Staff. A consummate professional, he is respected across the political divide for his approach, attitude and political nous.</p>
<p>Since leaving politics, Sinodinos has worked in the private sector – first at Goldman Sachs JB Were and more recently with the National Australia Bank. </p>
<p>But he has maintained his links with the public sector, serving on the Board of the <a href="http://www.anzsog.edu.au/">Australia and New Zealand School of Government</a> (ANZSOG) since late 2008. </p>
<p>He has shared the benefit of his considerable experience and insight by contributing to activities across ANZSOG’s research, teaching, executive education and applied learning portfolios. </p>
<p>His recent election as President of the Liberal Party in NSW suggests no lack of political ambition.</p>
<p>But he better than anyone knows that, unlike the experience of Opposition that steeled the Coalition to embrace the discipline and cohesion that defined the Howard government, the “hard yards” of policy review and redevelopment have not yet been done; the bitter lessons of the 2007 defeat have not been learned; many late-comers whose only experience was being in government have developed neither the hunger, nor, it has to be said, the skills, that years in the wilderness teach. </p>
<p>Still, the prospect of a return to office in 2013 might have some attractions for Sinodinos, given his twin passions of economic management and economic reform, will be front and centre. </p>
<p>Australia’s Parliament will be better for his taking a seat there.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/2936/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Anne Tiernan is an Associate Professor in the Department of Politics and Public Policy at Griffith University. She has received research funding from the Australian Research Council (a Discovery Grant which examined policy advisory capacity in the Australian Public Service). Dr Tiernan also received funding from ANZSOG for research into the role of Prime Ministers' Chiefs of Staff, the subject of her next book. She is currently a visiting research scholar at the School of Public Policy at George Mason University in the United States, where she is conducting comparative research for this project. </span></em></p>Arthur Sinodinos has long been mooted as a potential successor to retiring former Howard minister, Senator Helen Coonan. Now that Sinodinos - long serving chief of staff to former Primer Minister John…Anne Tiernan, Associate Professor in the School of Government & International Relations, Griffith UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.