More than 110 years ago the US supreme court justice Louis Brandeis wrote about the need to shine a light on the actions of governments: “If the broad light of day could be let in upon men’s actions, it would purify them as the sun disinfects.”
Brandeis would hone that thought into “sunlight is the best disinfectant”, an idiom still relied on today – usually by politicians sitting on opposition benches. Anthony Albanese’s Labor party is no exception.
While in opposition, Labor MPs railed against the “secrecy” of the Morrison government and its failure to address transparency issues. Those issues ranged from a federal anti-corruption commission, to using grants to pork barrel seats, to “jobs for mates”, the failure to answer questions, and secrecy surrounding government processes.
Now sitting on the other side of the chamber, the Albanese government has found room for shade among the sunshine, at least according to the independent MPs elected on a platform to increase transparency and restore trust in Australia’s democracy.
‘A fail for transparency’
Ask any of the teal independents about transparency, and they all touch upon the same list.
Delays on lobbying and political donation reforms. Delays on the release of ministerial diaries. The lack of timely detail on the use of private jets (known as special purpose flights). The increasing use of non-disclosure agreements for stakeholders consulting on legislation, which has included industrial relations reform and the NDIS. On top of that, crossbenchers complain about the refusal to release exposure drafts of legislation more widely, which includes the EPBC Act, the ongoing prosecution of whistleblowers, as well as delays in whistleblower protections.
They also mention the lack of reforms and transparency about how grants and public money is awarded, their repeated bids to have merit-based, open processes established surrounding appointments to government boards and the public service, and freedom of information reform. On that, the fight by the attorney general, Mark Dreyfus, to retain the right to destroy documents before leaving office has left some independent MPs flabbergasted.
The Albanese government has its own list, which it says has met many of its election commitments to restore transparency and integrity, including establishing the royal commission into robodebt, setting up a national anti-corruption commission, and strengthening the ministerial code of conduct and protections for whistleblowers. A government spokesperson also points to reinstating a standalone privacy and FoI commissioner, increasing the funding to the National Audit Office, restoring transparency to administrative review tribunal appointments and implementing the Bell inquiry recommendations.
“The Albanese government will continue to work constructively across the parliament on these matters,” the spokesperson says.
Andrew Wilkie, the veteran of the independent bench with 14 years of service, says the government has not gone far enough, scoring it “a fail for transparency”.
“This government routinely dishes up tripe in question time, ignores questions on notice and obfuscates on freedom of information requests. Moreover, whistleblowers are pursued in the courts, there’s no effective reform of the Public Interest Disclosure Act or relevant part of the Corporations Act, no media freedom law and no political donation reform,” he says.
“In other words, the current federal government is barely an improvement on its predecessors when it comes to transparency.”
‘More secretive than the Morrison government’
Setting the Morrison government as the measure on which to judge transparency is a low bar, the Indi independent MP, Helen Haines, says, and does not mean the Albanese government is doing enough.
Haines has spent this electoral term much like the previous one – fighting for an end to pork barrelling through grants administration reform. With the next election imminent, Haines says it is critical the Albanese government adopts “a fair and transparent system” for grants. That includes “publicly available guidelines, selection criteria and parliamentary oversight, projects would be funded based on merit and community need”.
All independent MPs have introduced a private member’s bill which seeks to address a particular transparency or integrity gap in government. As with Haines’ experience, getting the bills debated has been a tough ask.
“The major parties only believe in government transparency when they’re in opposition,” she says.
“The Centre for Public Integrity reported last April that the Albanese government is more secretive than the Morrison government, because of its frequent use of the ‘public interest immunity’ claims to keep documents confidential,” Haines says.
“Compliance with orders to produce documents has dropped from 92% in 1993-96 to 20% under the current government. That is a concerning decline in transparency and integrity in Australian politics.”
The Wentworth independent MP, Allegra Spender, says the prime minister “promised the community a better way of doing politics, but has a long way to go to deliver on this”, while the Kooyong independent, Monique Ryan, agrees, saying the government’s “actions have not matched its words”.
Ryan’s private member’s bill, which has been nicknamed the “clean up politics act” and would set boundaries around lobbying as well as let the public know who ministers are meeting with, has not been supported by the government.
Time is running out
The Curtin independent MP, Kate Chaney, says Australians “may feel let down by the Albanese government” despite it having made “a start on integrity reforms”.
“I’m very concerned that we are still waiting to see the promised electoral reform and time is running out for that to be legislated in time for the next election, to start rebuilding trust in politicians,” she says.
“The government has promised greater transparency, with real-time disclosure of donations over $1,000. We haven’t seen that yet and at this rate, voters still won’t know who’s financing the politicians next time they vote.”
The government has promised action in this area, pledging to introduce spending and donation caps, and truth in political advertising laws, as revealed by Guardian Australia after the 2022 federal election and confirmed by a parliamentary inquiry that reported last July.
Last month the special minister of state, Don Farrell, said an agreement between the major parties and the crossbench had not yet been reached. A bill is still expected by the middle of the year, but crossbenchers fear it will be delayed until the election.
“‘Bipartisan support’ is being used as an excuse for the delay, but the crossbench in both houses stands ready to support the government in making these changes in time for the next election,” Chaney says, citing her own private member’s bill as an example.
The Warringah independent, Zali Steggall, is equally frustrated, describing the Albanese government’s record on transparency as “a mixed bag” with slow progress.
“I’ve been pushing for truth-in-political-advertising laws for two terms, and almost nine in 10 Australians support this,” she says. The Albanese government has said it would address truth in advertising as part of its electoral reform, but that suite of changes has also been delayed.
Also delayed is a decision on whether the government will ban gambling advertising, the Goldstein independent, Zoe Daniel, says, almost a year after the government received a report recommending it do just that. She says it is the “opposite” of what the Albanese government promised while in opposition.
Slide towards secrecy
The delays and obfuscation around issues of integrity and transparency are not just political, the Mackellar independent, Sophie Scamps, says. It is also a missed opportunity to rebuild trust in the political system as a whole.
Scamps has focused on ending what she calls the “jobs for mates culture in Canberra”, which she sees as an easy step to restoring trust in political institutions. As with the others, her private member’s bill, which was developed with the Centre for Public Integrity “to develop a gold standard process for all major public appointments”, has not moved.
The North Sydney independent, Kylea Tink, shares the concerns of her crossbench colleagues. Tink says she has been particularly concerned with “a worrying slide toward secrecy and lack of transparency” by the government through its use of NDAs.
“The overzealous use of NDAs in stakeholder engagement is hampering the ability of civil society to engage fully in policy debate,” she says.
The independent senator David Pocock, who has found himself one of the power brokers in the upper house, says Labor raised expectations to be far more transparent but “disappointingly the reality has fallen short on multiple occasions”.
“It seems transparency is something major parties only champion from the opposition benches, rather practising what they preach when in government,” he says.
