August 2013 and the plan to improve transparency and restore trust seems a long, long time ago

Item August 2013
Liberal Party Our Plan Policy-2013 Election
"We will restore accountability and improve transparency measures to be more accountable to you."

Item August 2013
Trust deficit
Mark Baker SMH:
"Abbott now declares he wants to be a healer. He says his first priority if he wins the election will be to seek to rebuild Australians' confidence in government and restore civility to the national political discourse after three bruising years of minority government.
''The greatest deficit in our country at the moment is the trust deficit. Sure we have got a very serious budget deficit, but the trust deficit is even more serious. I would hope that, should we win the election, I would be able to so conduct myself and my team would be able to so conduct themselves that by the end of the first term people would have once more concluded that Australian government was competent and trustworthy …

 Item June 2015
Trust in Professions 
Bernard Keane Crikey:
"For the first time, Essential also asked about most trusted professions. Doctors scored highest, with 81% of voters having a lot or some trust in doctors; engineers were next, on 68%. Accountants, on 49%, rounded out the trusted professions. .. Journalists scored 27% a lot or some trust, 26% no trust at all and 41% little trust. Real estate agents managed 12% trust and 44% no trust. And at the very bottom, scoring 1% a lot of trust, 10% some trust, 33% little trust and 49% no trust at all, politicians."

Item June 2015
"Tony Abbott's tangled web over paying people smugglers" 

Related Item
(Minister for Immigration and Border Protection) Dutton said: “It’s been a longstanding policy of the government not to comment on on-water matters.”

Item May 2015
"Feds Iron Curtain  of Secrecy' around Detention Centres" 

Item June 2015
"Veil of secrecy descending over foreign aid, experts warn"

Item June 2015
Australian National Audit Office Report: Administration of Travel Entitlements Provided to Parliamentarians 
"The conduct of an independent ‘root and branch’ review of Parliamentarians’ entitlements following the completion of ANAO’s 2009–10 audit report gave some cause for optimism that improvements would be made to the entitlements framework and its administration. However, fundamental weaknesses in the framework remain. Principally, this is because independent recommendations for substantive legislative and administrative reform developed to simplify current arrangements and safeguard the interests of the Commonwealth and Parliamentarians, or alternative measures to address recognised fundamental issues with the framework, have not been actioned. As a result, the framework under which Parliamentarians’ non-remuneration entitlements are provided has continued to be complex and opaque, with travel entitlements recognised as representing one of the areas most affected by those factors.

Item June 2015
Xenophon urges housing transparency

"Independent senator Nick Xenophon has called for greater scrutiny of politicians' travel allowances, saying if taxpayers are helping MPs or their families pay off mortgages then they are entitled to greater transparency."

(An earlier list of noteworthy items.)

The trust thing-where to from here?

The absence of trust and confidence in politicians, government and institutions is striking.

 The Readers Digest Survey of who is held in high regard for integrity and substance sees politicians ranked 49 of 50 professions, with no politician ranked higher than 68 in a list of 100 public figures. The Prime Minister is at 79. Roughly confirming the Morgan Poll.
in April where 12% of Australians rated Federal (and state) parliamentarians highly for ethics and honesty beating out three of 50 30 professions. The trend line before the Budget according to the Essential Report was that trust in political leadership dropped 13 points since February.

Then there's the Lowy Poll 2014:

"... 60% of Australian adults, and just 42% of 18-29 year-olds say ‘democracy is preferable to any other kind of government’. Only a small majority of the population (53%) choose ‘a good democracy’ over a ‘strong economy’. For those who do not see democracy as the preferable form of government, the strongest reasons are that ‘democracy is not working because there is no real difference between the policies of the major parties’ (45% citing this as a major reason) and ‘democracy only serves the interests of a few and not the majority of society’ (42%)."

Then Leader of the Opposition Tony Abbott was on the money in September 2013
when he identified the trust deficit as the biggest deficit facing the nation. But things have got worse not better.

Lack of trust translates to a major governance problem. Government in a democracy occupies a position based on the notion of a public trust. As well lack of trust complicates the making of difficult decisions and government's capacity to see them through.

It is not a unique problem to Australia.

Books are being written about why it is so but among many contributing causes are lack of honesty and consistency, overuse of spin, excessive secrecy, failure to genuinely consult and test ideas, and pre-occupation with short termism and political advantage.

The Oxford Martin Commission report Now for the Long Term explores some of these issues. 

Chair Pascal Lamy visited Australia two weeks ago. Canberra was on his itinerary and he met at least one minister, Andrew Robb, Treasury Secretary Parkinson and officials involved in the G 20 process.

Let's hope Lamy was able to refer them to the Agenda for the Long Term section of the report, page 59 and the recommendations for Innovative, Open and Reinvigorated Institutions that include:

Optimise new forms of political participation, transparency and accountability, whilst amplifying the voices of global citizens. The Commission recommends renewed commitment to transparent government and deeper political engagement...

The report describes the Open Government Partnership as "a particularly welcome development" bringing together government, civil society and private enterprise in member countries to address governance and means to improve transparency, accountability and public participation with independent international oversight of their efforts. 

It's such a good model

The Commission calls for the OGP platform to be adopted by other institutions and governments, and for the platform’s work to be expanded to strengthen coordination between citizens across countries.

Readers will know of Australia's dithering over whether to join the OGP now running without resolution for close to three years. When I checked with the Office of the Minister for Finance this week on the current position before heading off to the C20 Summit in Melbourne:

the government has made no decision to join or withdraw the Labor government's May 2013 notice of intention to join.

Not of its own a decision likely to reverse the trust decline, but the penny should drop sometime that a journey starts with a step in the right direction.

The Trust Thing

A month before the furore over the Budget and broken promises,12% of Australians rated Federal (and state) parliamentarians highly for ethics and honesty, according to the most recent annual Roy Morgan poll of attitudes towards 30 professions. Nurses (91%), doctors and pharmacists (86%) were way out in the lead.

The pollies were down two (state parliamentarians three) points in a year, and a whopping 11 points since 2008, only matched by Ministers of Religion who dropped 13% in the same period.The ministers' current 37% score however is three times that of the politicians who tied with union leaders and in a field of 30 came in ahead of just three, real estate, advertising and car sales types.

With confidence in politicians to do what is right at such a low level, you would have to think someone in government is thinking about how to reverse the trend. It's not evident anywhere I look. 

Tony Abbott seemed onto this, citing the trust deficit as the biggest of those facing government from the time the election was called in August 2013. But it hasn't proved his strong suit then or since.

The Coalition for example had nothing to say during the campaign about how it planned to restore trust other than the mantra 'stop the boats' etc. The Budget, and denial that any promises have been broken will relegate the 'say what we do, do what we say' part of this to a storage box in the attic

Within a month of being elected, in response to the first integrity blow up, the government initially ignored abuse of entitlements by parliamentarians that came to light then spoke of changes at the margins rather than taking this head on and acting to ensure full transparency and accountability.

Our leader(s) in eight months haven't spoken up about the importance of open transparent and accountable government, leaving Immigration Minister Morrison unchallenged to set secrecy as the prevailing 'tone at the top.'

Agencies seemed to get (in some cases welcome) the message, almost uniformly refusing FOI access to incoming government briefs, a monumental turn around from three years ago. Some, well experienced in gaming the system, have taken this to new levels.
(Addendum: during Labor's last gasp, they and the Coalition rushed through legislation to exempt the parliamentary departments from FOI.)

Against this backdrop (and no response to the Hawke review which said someone should do the job thoroughly, he couldn't and didn't) the FOI framework is set to return to darker days that predate the 2009 reforms with the Budget announcement of the abolition of the Office of Australian Information Commissioner. FOI seems headed back to 'orphan' territory with no high level advocate or sponsor to proclaim, safeguard and nurture its essential elements. Reviews are headed back to the AAT at $816 flagfall plus plenty for help to match the legal resources available to the agency.

As to the goverrnment's intentions about proceeding with its predecessor's application to join 63 other countries in the Open Government Partnership all we hear is the matter is 'under consideration.' After eight months this reminds of Yes Minister where the phrase meant 'we have lost the file.' 'Under active consideration' at least meant 'we are trying to find it.' 

We didn't manage to send a minister to an OGP conference in London last year, and told Indonesian President SBY none could be spared to take up his invitation to Bali earlier this month..

We claim "Global leadership in combating corruption" but having ratified the United Nations Convention Against Corruption in 2005, we are yet to complete the required National Anti Corruption Plan.(The link to the Plan at the bottom of the page on the AGD website leads to "Not Found", no irony intended I'm sure.)

We have heard nothing about political donations and lobbying reforms despite regulations that are inadequate and pathetic disclosure requirements and the fact that the Federal Liberal Party is feeling the heat from the NSW ICAC hearings.

The Greens introduced the National Integrity Commission Bill in the Senate last Thursday. The Bill

"establishes a National Integrity Commission as an independent statutory agency which will consist of the National Integrity Commissioner, the Law Enforcement Integrity Commissioner and the Independent Parliamentary Advisor and provide for: the investigation and prevention of misconduct and corruption in all Commonwealth departments, agencies, and federal parliamentarians and their staff; the investigation and prevention of corruption in the Australian Federal Police and the Australian Crime Commission; and independent advice to ministers and parliamentarians on conduct, ethics and matters of proprietary. Also: provides for the establishment of a Parliamentary Joint Committee on the National Integrity Commission.." 

Three Coalition speakers spoke in the adjourned debate and generally poured a bucket on Labor and The Greens, but did not indicate government support. Labor (see John Faulkner's speech) is generally supportive although yet to decide.

Related issues such as a code of conduct for parliamentarians don't rate a mention anywhere.

Last week, both major parties passed legislation that confirm that refugees subjected to an adverse security assessment by the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation, have no right to know the reasons, can be detained indefinitely and can't challenge the merits of the decision.

Let me know what I've left out.

That 12% in April may prove to be a high point. 

Integrity, transparency and Open Government Partnership should underpin Abbott Government 'trust' goal

The new Federal government starts in office with a leader who during the campaign identified the trust deficit as the biggest deficit problem, who pledged on election night to create a competent, trustworthy government, and  who reassures on the front page of the Sydney Morning Herald today - 'We won't let you down.'

(The starting point (paywall) on trust for Mr Abbott, drawn from the most recent Newspoll, is 43 per cent consider him trustworthy, and 53 per cent as untrustworthy. At least, better scores than his opponent.)

Trust is hard to win easy to lose. Good luck to us all.

As to the detail, as mentioned in recent weeks, Mr Abbott and the Liberal Party in opposition put nothing on the public record during the campaign regarding plans for governing differently. The integrity issues didn't rate a mention.

There are many. Transparency is a big one. As The Australian in an editorial on Saturday noted:

Mr Abbott promises to restore proper process to government and we are confident he will keep his word. The public service must be de-politicised, cabinet must be restored to prominence and Mr Abbott must maintain a commitment to transparency that is easier to make in opposition than to observe in power

The Hawke report on review of the operation of the Freedom of Information Act will be somewhere in the pile on the desk of incoming Attorney General Senator Brandis.

Senator Brandis won't need to read far - just the transmission letter - to see that the review wasn't as comprehensive as those who advocated it back in 2010 hoped at the time. And that cherry picking the recommendations (many based to my mind, on skimpy or apparently no research beyond consideration of some suggestions in some submissions) isn't the answer to addressing underlying problems that stand in the way of  an Abbott Government emerging as the transparent, trustworthy government the Prime Minister Designate intends. Dr Hawke recommends a comprehensive review, identifies some issues that should be considered but are not addressed in his report, and recommends that we start with a blank sheet of paper to render the complex messy statute understandable by those intended to benefit from it- all of us.

Another issue that requires early clarification is Australian participation in the Open Government Partnership. Then Attorney General Dreyfus announced in June our intention to join.The Liberal Party in Opposition maintained silence. 

But for a government that puts the trust issue up there in lights, standing firm as part of a 60 strong international partnership dedicated to improving the way democracies work with an emphasis on open, efficient and effective government should be a no brainer.

Friends such as current co-chairs Indonesia and the UK, and the US and Korea to mention just a few of the countries involved would expect ongoing Australian commitment to the OGP. As do individuals and groups in Australia following the issue closely and who have been waiting for months since the intention to join was announced to hear how the Government intends to manage the partnership with Civil Society in developing a National Action Plan.

Senator Brandis should reaffirm the commitment by the previous government that Australia intends to join, test whatever thinking has taken place within government about 'partnership' with those outside government who might expect to be part of it, and follow through by ensuring high level Australian attendance at the OGP Annual Summit in London in late October.  

Dr Hawke in his transmission letter dated 1 July advised the Attorney that OGP involvement was proof positive that Australia was interested and understood the importance of 'open government' in the broadest sense.