Seeking the Post-Corona Sunshine: More Continuity for Post-Fitzgerald…

By Denis Bright  Even Nostradamus himself might be hesitant about predicting the final…

Jobs plan must be a way forward, says…

On the day where the Morrison government’s announced cuts to the JobKeeper…

The ‘Panama Papers’ exposed the greed of the…

By Paul Gregoire  The Panama Papers could have been a massive moment in…

Just because we are governed by clowns it…

1 Yet another scandal surrounding the Liberal Party. A Liberal Party donor…

Australia’s poor old women

By Jane Caro  Despite women facing the wage gap, eventual poverty and possible…

Assange’s Thirteenth Day at the Old Bailey: Mental…

September 24. Central Criminal Court, London.The lion’s share of today’s Old Bailey…

Industrial relations reform talks breached again as deadline…

With less than a week to go in the scheduled agenda for…

The big lie

By Leonie Saunders  A little over two weeks have passed since I listened…

«
»
Facebook

Rorts sports

The “sports rorts” saga that has lately claimed the privileged position of Bridget McKenzie has consumed many newspaper front pages and exercised many peoples’ outrage – and not just those of us on the left. McKenzie is gone, relegated to the back bench for a token period of contrition.

(If there’s one thing the last week and Barnaby Joyce’s resurgence should have taught us, it’s that no matter how egregious the sin, the redemption is only a few news cycles away. After all, McKenzie knows first-hand how deeply embroiled the office of the PM – and conceivably, the PM himself along with Cabinet – were with this and other electoral misuses of public funds. It seems entirely likely that McKenzie’s demotion is a handshake deal with the understanding that her star will once again rise, given enough water under the bridge.)

Many in the ranks of the Liberal and National government may be relieved that the erstwhile Sports minister fell on her sword. McKenzie’s elevation to cabinet and the deputy leadership was unexpected and (some argue) unwarranted. McKenzie herself perhaps never expected to receive such a prominent role. Upon reaching the big chair she and her department have been the subject of many a scandal and rort. She seems to have capitalised on the perks of the job for all they’re worth, notching up the government’s largest travel bill in 2019.

McKenzie was not a high-performing minister in her other roles. In her capacity as Minister for Agriculture, arguably one of the Nationals’ core constituencies, McKenzie earned the ire of her colleagues for her poor communication skills, lack of visibility and poor organisation.  Nationals were furious that McKenzie capitulated quickly to demands from Pauline Hanson’s One Nation, allowing PHON to claim credit for something the Nationals themselves had been agitating for over many months, something McKenzie had argued could not be achieved so quickly.

Most importantly, of course, the finding from Phil Gaetjens that McKenzie breached ministerial guidelines by not declaring the gift of a membership to a shooting club (which had, quite coincidentally, been given a grant under McKenzie’s funding program) allows the Liberal/National coalition government to safely demote the Minister for Sports without copping to the much more substantial claim that said funding program had been systematically rorted.

Because of course, that rorting was entirely according to Coalition policy and methods. McKenzie was not an outlier running a private little game. She was doing exactly what she had been told and what was expected of her.

We know this, even if the government won’t come out and admit it. The government knows this, and they know we know it. We know it, because they’re effectively admitting to it.

On ABC radio this week, Nationals MP Damian Drum admitted, on air, that “Every jurisdiction does it… “.

It’s hardly a new observation. Just after the 2013 federal election Sophie Mirabella, smarting from defeat in the battle for the seat of Indi against Cathy McGowan, claimed that “I had a commitment for a $10 million allocation for the Wangaratta Hospital that, if elected, I was going to announce a week after the election. That is $10 million that Wangaratta hasn’t had because [independent] Cathy [McGowan] was elected.”

The Coalition has a long tradition of paying back its benefactors. After all, this is why the Coalition is so hell-bent on sending the planet to hell, supporting the coal/oil/gas/fossil fuels industry against all scientific advice, despite world opprobrium and against the economic and environmental interests of the Australian public. Not because coal and fossil fuels are essentially good for us. Not even because the sums add up. If making plans to ditch coal would really send Australia’s economy into freefall you could understand the government’s position, but any rudimentary analysis shows that the market for coal and gas is a very short road indeed, and if we have not made significant inroads into renewable energy and associated industries by the time nobody else wants to buy our coal, we will be deep in it.

No, the reason the Coalition won’t ditch coal is that they owe their benefactors. The Liberals, like the Lannisters, always pay their debts.

So the idea that a voter needs to vote for the Coalition to secure any love from a Coalition government feels right at home. The thought of granting, or withholding, funds for a needy project not on the basis of need but because of the political party in control of that seat, is just and right in their eyes. Or if not “just and right”, it’s a case of “Every jurisdiction does it.”

Which raises two questions. Do they? And should they?

To be clear, we’re not talking about the time-honoured Australian method of “pork-barrelling” here. It’s true that both Labor and the Coalition talk the talk when it comes time for an election. An election is a battle of purses, each contender seeking to out-promise the other without ever stepping over the tenuous line beyond which the electorate wonders how the debt will be paid. We understand this. We accept it. To some extent, we reward it – politicians wouldn’t commit themselves to spending promises if it didn’t work at least some of the time.

The sports rorts is a deeper issue. Rather than promises to spend money in your electorate should you vote the correct way (and the promiser be in the position to grant their beneficence), these grants are intended to be retrospective. It’s not “Vote for us and we’ll do something for you”. It’s “See what we’ve done for you? Vote for us and you’ll get more.”

The corollary being, “Vote for somebody else and you won’t get a dime from us.” Or, in the case of Indi, a hospital.

We’re talking about a government, which actually has its hands on the levers of government, being partisan in the distribution of its funds. We’re not talking about fulfilling election promises.

So is Labor just as bad – or, as Damian Drum avers, worse? It’s hard to tell. I am not sure if the required analysis has been done. There certainly have not been as many scandals under Labor governments than Liberal ones, but perhaps Labor is better at keeping the lid on it. They appear to be better than the Liberals at many things, winning elections being the notable exception.

If it’s hard to tell whether it’s true that “every jurisdiction does it” – and let’s assume, for the sake of convenience, that they do – then, should they?

After all, MPs are expected to advocate for their electorates. They bring the needs and desires of their voters to those Ministers with the wherewithal to provide government support. Some would argue that Coalition MPs have better access to Coalition Ministers and receive a friendlier ear.

But this means that projects of merit can only receive funding if it suits the government of the day. It means that some electorates suffer in neglect due to being safe seats for either party, while marginal seats are showered in largess. It means that public funds – money coming from Australian taxpayers – is overtly funneled for political purposes, and only secondarily for public gain. I would argue that this should not happen. But how to avoid it, in a democratic two-party system where only the government of the day can call the shots?

If only there were an independent body, something like an overarching Sports Australia body, which could give advice as to the merits of any applicants to a funding scheme. A body with appropriate expertise – for the sake of imagination, let’s call it Infrastructure Victoria, and let it rule on the cost/benefits of something like the East/West Link. If only governments would commit to evidence-based policy.

But what kind of a political party would ever countenance such a thing? Certainly not the one we have now.

Like what we do at The AIMN?

You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.

Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!

Donate Button

9 comments

Login here Register here
  1. Pingback: Rorts Sports – Random Pariah

  2. Phil Pryor

    One begins to feel a permanent pessimism, a feeling that no good can occur here, that the right wing semi-fascist shit, often reinforced by ancient imperial self erecting bullshit and romanist ratbag superstitious idiocy, will pervert, infuse, corrupt, betray, condemn and alter what is left of intelligent hope for the nation. The Head Moron and his filthy foul team of feeble farty fools is so repulsive as to require daily douching, spraying, wiping, drenching, dosing, hosing just to get most of the political and media shit stains OFF. The country party types, born to idiocy and conventional stupidity, have stuffed the nation’s environment, with every pox, pest, plague bad practice, stupid imposition, ignoring common sense, science, best practice and prudence, all for pose, profiteering and perverted corporate aims, often foreign. The urban conservatives, filth in waiting to fleece and betray, exploit and coerce, are in partnership with the rural fools, making this a nation of deliberate profiteering egocentric arseholes bent on personal glory, a picture at the races, a big hangover, So, up them.

  3. Matters Not

    Good article. Lots of issues raised – and therefore much that might be addressed. Let’s start with an if only that you raise;

    If only there were an independent body, something like an overarching …

    And perhaps, it might be useful to put aside a particular issue like sport and deal with the (government) allocation of funding at a more general level. Hard to imagine any government department not having some type of planning capacity and processes that generate a list of priorities in response to anticipated demands. That information (whether it be about schools, hospitals, roads, bridges, etc) is there within departments and is also generally communicated to Treasury and presumably other central agencies.

    So within the bureaucracy, specialist agencies with technical competence generate impersonal, rational, non-political documents that are then made available only to a select group for decision making. That this particular group are not required to have any particular technical expertise, have a clear conflict of interest (given they are politicians whose futures might depend on the decisions made) rarely is seen as a problem. Perhaps when politicians make announcements it might be also be made mandatory that the citizens also have access to the specialist opinions that agree or disagree with the decision(s) made?

    But probably not. Because politicians are (re)elected on the basis of their ability to fight on behalf of their constituents. Hilarious.

  4. Kaye Lee

    “a list of priorities ”

    Oh you mean like Infrastructure Australia had until the Coalition came along?

  5. Matters Not

    KL, the possibilities I’m talking about go way beyond what Infrastructure Australia was on about. But the way the Public Service is currently conceptualised is limited to that as advisory to Executive Government.

    That expertise should be more widely available. And be made available on request.

  6. John Holmes

    I would suggest that a detailed review of how the various schools are funded is in order.

    Questions re the adjustments of $/head for schools as per the Sports Rort need to be answered. Also the role of state funding for religious schools with the need to keep State and Religion separate. Also are there any interstate differences?

  7. Lambchop Simcard

    Bridget McKenzie did look lovely on Sunday night after a week of massages and beauty treatments and with her hair glistening in front of the cameras and showing her soft and gentle side coming to the fore to accept her minuscule penance. Though,I did detect her laughing to herself and the media and us.You could see her laughing to herself saying “how did we pull this off”.”Christ! Scott’s a genius”.Yes Scott from Marketing is a Genius.
    Watching the beautifully Hollywood style staged managed “State of the Union” speech by Donald Trump yesterday I’m sure old Scotty would have been taking notes. What a triumph.
    Modern Conservative politics is all showbizz . Feed them bullshit and few handouts and a few empty platitudes to the mob and they can go on merry way with their noses in the trough and of course serving all their powerful puppet masters in the process. Soon, when the charade is through, it will all be back to business as usual and Marie-Antoinette can get back to what she does best; building her own residential property portfolio.

  8. New England Cocky

    Thank you Ozfrenic for a clear explanation of the machinations of politics that even politically naive persons will easily understand.

    Pork barrelling, even promises of pork barrelling that are reneged upon, are stock in trade political ploys country people have experienced at the hands of the self-serving Nazianal$. Our experiences in New England would fill an encyclopaedia!!

    You have identified the key personal attribute required by the unelected political hacks who control pre-selection in the Nazianal$; “McKenzie earned the ire of her colleagues for her poor communication skills, lack of visibility and poor organisation.” In other words, nothing of merit, making her a willing slave to the demands of Party donors so that she keeps her snout in the political payments trough: “She seems to have capitalised on the perks of the job for all they’re worth, notching up the government’s largest travel bill in 2019.”

    But I must protest strongly against your assertion that agriculture remains one of the Nazianal$ core constituencies. This is no longer the case!!! The Nazianal$ now represent the mining industries, both Australian owned national and foreign owned multinational corporations since Mark Vaille (Nazianal$) abandoned politics to work for the Whitehaven (??) COAL miners.

    During the 2019 Kiwi bye-election Barnyard Joke is publicly gifted a $40,000 by his Auntie Gina for “lost income” (but had to return it with regret because it did not pass the notorious pub test rather than for bouncing). Has anybody seen the COAL mining tenements in the Galilee Basin held by Hancock Mining and associated corporations?

    The political reality is that agricultural individuals and business entities have so little interest in the power of politics to provide high value infrastructure largesse at taxpayer expense rather than corporate cost and naively believe that politicians are representing the best interests of their constituents. Indeed, many do not want to know.

    As Tony Windsor(Independent) has always said,”Swinging seats get the government funding before elections”.

  9. Pingback: Rorts sports #newsoz.org #auspol - News Oz

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Return to home page
Scroll Up
%d bloggers like this: