At the core of any integrity issue or scandal in politics lies the question – did a person in power make the right decision, for the right reasons?
When a minister makes a decision, as they are elected to do on our behalf, that decision must always be made in the public interest, with strong evidence to support it and a genuine test of value for money.
But in a world of aggressive lobbying, of jobs for mates, and acceptance of pork-barrelling, it is no surprise that in Australia there is diminishing trust in politics and governments.
This week questions are being asked of the prime minister. Whether his relationship with the former Qantas chief executive Alan Joyce, the free upgrades on flights and the membership of the Chairman’s Lounge, had any role to play in decisions made about the airline industry.
Like most MPs I am a member of the Chairman’s Lounge, and the Virgin equivalent. I rarely fly and I have never been offered an upgrade. Nevertheless, I am reflecting on the dominant purpose of memberships such as these and how it helps or hinders the way I fulfil my responsibilities as a member of parliament.
A spokesperson for the prime minister on Wednesday said “the prime minister did not ever call Alan Joyce seeking an upgrade”. What Anthony Albanese has done, through accepting upgrades over a period of time when he was the transport minister, whether they were sought out or not, is allow questions about whether subsequent decisions he has made regarding Qantas were unduly influenced.
I am not accusing the prime minister of making decisions for the wrong reasons but the point is that the existence of freebies and close friendships can be enough to raise doubt about any elected official.
Our accountability and transparency frameworks should give avenues to remove this doubt. Or, even better, avoid it in the first place.
But the rules as they exist don’t go far enough, and the consequences for breaching them are negligible.
It was disappointing that in answering first questions from journalists the prime minister sought to deflect by raising free private flights accepted by the opposition leader, Peter Dutton, from mining magnate Gina Rinehart.
This gives rise to the view that all politicians are just as bad as each other. It sets a very low bar when we should be striving to meet the highest standards.
The public already thinks MPs live a life full of perks and empty of responsibility or consequences. Shifting the blame while failing to fix the shortcomings at the heart of our integrity system will do nothing to change this.
That’s why it’s so important that we make changes to our integrity frameworks sooner rather than later, or our democratic institutions will face the consequences.
Yes, we have the National Anti-Corruption Commission but this is about more than referring matters for investigation.
This is about urgent reform to laws around lobbying and donations, to ensure we get better practices from, and create a robust culture of integrity among our government agencies, institutions and politicians.
Without it, we will continue to see trust in government fall. That’s why it’s so disappointing that outside the Nacc progress on other integrity matters from the government seems to have stalled. And it’s not for lack of trying from the crossbench.
Monique Ryan has introduced a bill which would strengthen the lobbyist register, publicise ministerial diaries and stop the revolving door between ministers and their senior staff and the lobbying industry.
Sophie Scamps introduced a bill to end jobs for mates practices, ensuring independence in hiring practices to make sure senior government roles are appointed on merit, not on mateship.
Many crossbenchers have introduced bills on electoral reform, including Andrew Wilkie, Rebekha Sharkie, Zali Steggall, Kate Chaney and myself.
I have additionally introduced a bill to clean up pork-barrelling practices, to ensure grants are awarded on merit, not to win votes in marginal seats.
There’s a clear opportunity in front of the government to work with independents to make politics better. The last time we had a minority federal government, integrity reforms such as the Parliamentary Budget Office were negotiated.
Currently it feels like the major parties are comfortable with an agreed go-slow on integrity reforms. But with a minority government potentially on the horizon, the next parliament may present the opportunity once more for the crossbench to break the integrity stalemate.