Category Archives: Politics

IBAC vs ICAC: what are these anti-corruption commissions and how do they compare?

Posted on by

James Ross/AAP

Yee-Fui Ng, Monash UniversityToday Victoria’s anti-corruption commission begins public hearings into allegations of branch stacking by Labor MPs and their staff.

This follows news Victorian Premier Daniel Andrews is being questioned by the Victorian Independent Broad‑based Anti‑corruption Commission (IBAC) over his dealings with the firefighters union (Andrews says he has behaved “appropriately”).

It also comes as New South Wales Premier Gladys Berejiklian sensationally fell on her sword last month. She resigned after revelations the NSW Independent Commission Against Corruption (ICAC) was investigating whether there was a conflict between her public duties and private interests, which she denies.

This has all further heated up the debate about the proposed federal integrity commission. The Morrison government is expected to introduce legislation establishing the Commonwealth commission by the end of the year. But its proposed model has been criticised as being too weak.

So, what are these anti-corruption commissions? And what are differences between ICAC in NSW and IBAC in Victoria?

What are anti-corruption commissions?

Anti-corruption commissions investigate corruption in government. They can be given strong coercive powers to do so, including the power to compel documents and witnesses.

Former NSW premier Gladys Berejiklian
Former NSW Premier Gladys Berejiklian quit her role last month, in the face of an ICAC investigation.
Bianca De Marchi/AAP

ICAC was established in NSW in 1988 by then premier Nick Greiner. A few years later, Greiner became the first premier to resign due to an ICAC investigation. Victoria’s IBAC was set up in 2012 following an election commitment by the Baillieu Coalition government (who made the pledge during opposition).

There are three main differences between IBAC and ICAC – jurisdiction, power and procedures.

IBAC vs ICAC

When IBAC was set up, it was criticised by prominent former judges at the Accountability Roundtable as a “toothless tiger,” given the high threshold of what it could investigate – it must be “serious corrupt conduct” before an investigation can start.

We should note here, the investigation threshold for the proposed Commonwealth Integrity Commission is even higher, requiring a reasonable suspicion of corruption amounting to a criminal offence before an inquiry can even begin. This is a difficult hurdle to clear.



Read more:
A federal ICAC must end the confusion between integrity questions and corruption

The Andrews government increased the jurisdiction of IBAC in 2016, removing the requirement for corrupt conduct to be “serious”, and adding the ability to investigate misconduct in public office.

But IBAC’s jurisdiction remains more limited than ICAC’s, which has broad powers to investigate any allegation upon suspicion of corruption. This includes alleged substantial breaches of the ministerial and MP codes of conduct.

IBAC’s powers are also more limited than ICAC. It is unable to use coercive powers to conduct preliminary investigations to determine whether matters warrant full examination. By contrast, ICAC has the full use of coercive powers, including for preliminary investigations.



Read more:
As a NSW premier falls and SA guts its anti-corruption commission, what are the lessons for integrity bodies in Australia?

Finally, ICAC holds public hearings as a matter of course. But IBAC can only hold public hearings in exceptional circumstances and when it is in the public interest to do so.

In short, ICAC is a more powerful commission than IBAC.

Who watches the watchdogs?

A big question is about how we ensure anti-corruption commissions do not overstep their bounds. Given their broad coercive powers, how do we hold them to account?

In Australia, anti-corruption commissions are subject to a strong system of accountability through parliaments and the courts.

Victorian Premier Daniel Andrews.
Daniel Andrews says he will not stand down over news IBAC is looking at his dealings with the firefighters union.
James Ross/AAP

IBAC and ICAC report to dedicated parliamentary committees who scrutinise their actions and decisions. Complaints against IBAC and ICAC can be made to a dedicated inspectorate – an independent statutory officer who oversees their actions.

Where the anti-corruption commissions go beyond the legal boundaries of their roles, the courts will police it. For example, in 2015, the High Court shut down an investigation against crown prosecutor, Margaret Cunneen. The court found ICAC had no power to investigate allegations Cunneen had advised her son’s girlfriend to fake chest pains to avoid a breath test after a car crash. This is because Cunneen’s actions occurred when acting as a private citizen (not as crown prosecutor) – and so did not fit the definition of “corrupt conduct” in the NSW legislation.

So the idea that anti-corruption commissions are not accountable is simply untrue.

Under attack

Anti-corruption commissions like IBAC and ICAC tend to be unpopular within governments because they scrutinise government action and may expose improper conduct or corruption within their ranks.

It is regrettably common for governments hostile to anti-corruption commissions to attack them, including by reducing their powers or funding.



Read more:
ICAC is not a curse, and probity in government matters. The Australian media would do well to remember that

In this vein, the latest barrage of criticisms by politicians of ICAC following Berejiklian’s resignation is rather predictable. It is part of a broader pattern of attacks on oversight bodies that police government action.

This is despite their integral role in our democracy. Alongside other oversight bodies such as the ombudsman and auditor-general, anti-corruption commissions form part of an intricate, interlocking integrity framework that monitors executive action.

In this light, the design of the proposed Commonwealth Integrity Commission is fundamental. Australians deserve a robust system of accountability that will keep our politicians honest.The Conversation

Yee-Fui Ng, Associate Professor, Faculty of Law, Monash University

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

ICAC is not a curse, and probity in government matters. The Australian media would do well to remember that

Posted on by

AAP/Bianca de Marchi

Denis Muller, The University of MelbourneJournalists are adept at creating and reflecting public sentiment. It is a reciprocating process: journalistic portrayal creates the sentiment, then the sentiment feeds back into journalistic portrayal.

This phenomenon can be seen clearly in the way the resignation of New South Wales Premier Gladys Berejiklian has been reported and commented on.

The problem is that public sentiment does not always remain tethered to the underlying facts, so journalism that continues to reflect that sentiment likewise tends to become unmoored.

The sentiment about Berejiklian is based on a narrative about a good woman and excellent state premier led astray by a rogue boyfriend who abused his relationship with her to advance his interests in ways that led to his being investigated for corruption. In the process, he dragged her down with him.

In essence, it is a tale we are familiar with, may even have experienced at close hand: a good person making decisions of the heart until confronted by an ugly reality. Beats there a heart so cold that cannot sympathise with this predicament?

Much of the coverage of Berejiklian’s resignation has drawn on and fed into this narrative.

It had worked for her previously when she first appeared before ICAC in October 2020, so she no doubt thought it would work again. To a large extent, she has been proved right.



Read more:
Berejiklian’s downfall derailed a career built on accountability and control. Now, who will replace her?

In this telling, the NSW Independent Commission Against Corruption deliberately brought down this paragon at the height of her powers to the detriment of the public welfare, disrupting the government at a crucial moment in the pandemic.

In this telling, too, ICAC becomes the wrongdoer. Instead of stalling its investigation until heaven knows when – the pandemic is over, the federal election is done – it irresponsibly pushes on regardless.

The surprising thing is that this line of chat has been accepted uncritically by so many elements of the media.

Their understanding is not improved by coverage like this.

The facts are that ICAC is investigating the suspected corrupt allocation of about $35.5 million in taxpayers’ money: $30 million to the Riverina conservatorium of music at Wagga Wagga and $5.5 million to the local clay-shooting club.

ICAC is investigating whether Berejiklian, while NSW treasurer, allowed or encouraged corrupt conduct by her ex-boyfriend, the disgraced former Liberal MP for Wagga Wagga, Daryl Maguire, in respect of those allocations.

ICAC says it is investigating whether, between 2012 and 2018, Berejiklian engaged in conduct that “constituted or involved a breach of public trust” by exercising public functions relating to her public role and her private personal relationship with Maguire.

It says it will begin a four-week inquiry into these questions on October 18.

It should not be presumed that ICAC will make adverse findings against Berejiklian. In similar circumstances in 1983, Neville Wran stood aside as premier during a royal commission into corruption in rugby league. He was exonerated and resumed office.

So a further fact in the present case is that Berejiklian chose to resign rather than stand aside.

It is a fair bet she was unnerved by the prospect of NSW being in the hands of her National Party deputy John Barilaro for any length of time. By her resigning, the state gets a new premier from within the Liberal Party. It was a calculated choice.

ICAC is not a curse. Anyone involved in public affairs in NSW before 1988 when ICAC was established – public officials, politicians, journalists – knew that certain parts of the state administration were riven with corruption. Police, planning, prisons, even the magistracy: repeated scandals engulfed them all.

ICAC has been and remains a remarkable force for good.

A sad irony was that Nick Greiner, the Liberal premier who had the courage to establish it, became one of its early victims. In 1992 ICAC found he had misused his position to secure an independent MP’s resignation for political advantage. Greiner fell on his sword.



Read more:
History repeats: how O’Farrell and Greiner fell foul of ICAC

It is instructive to consider how many of the Morrison cabinet would survive exposure to an ICAC investigation.

Berejiklian’s alleged conflict of interest is not a trivial matter. It involves substantial sums of public money in an exercise that she has previously dismissed as “pork-barrelling”.

This disarming term, rendered harmless by repetition, is actually about the improper distribution of public money. It is a form of vote-buying, as has been shown in the procession of rorts engaged in by the federal government over sports grants, community security grants and car parks.

ICAC exists to root out these and other ways by which the democratic process is corrupted.

It is undoubtedly a personal tragedy for Berejiklian that she has found it necessary to resign, and a misfortune for the state to lose a premier who was held in high public regard.

However, sentiment that draws a misty veil over underlying issues of probity in public life does not serve the public well.



Read more:
The ‘car park rorts’ story is scandalous. But it will keep happening unless we close grant loopholes


The Conversation

Denis Muller, Senior Research Fellow, Centre for Advancing Journalism, The University of Melbourne

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

How COVID health advice and modelling has been opaque, slow to change and politicised in Australia

Posted on by

William Bowtell, UNSWIn a recent article, The Australian’s health reporter asked: “has any modelling put forward by scientific institutes throughout the pandemic ever proved accurate?”

It’s a good question but the answer lies in understanding the truth about modelling — it cannot predict the future.

Rather, it’s a process that identifies variables most likely to shape the course of, say, a pandemic and to quantify their impacts over time.

Politicians commission modellers to assess the present state of things then consider what might happen if various policy settings were to be adjusted.

By providing assessments of the costs, benefits and impacts of proposed policies, good modelling provides governments with a firm foundation for deciding which policies will have what effects.

Politicians know invoking “health modelling” generates public support for their policies.

This week, federal Treasurer Josh Frydenberg claimed his decision to scrap COVID support payments at 80% double-dosed vaccination coverage accorded with the National Plan as informed by the Doherty Institute modelling.

But in neither the plan nor the modelling is any connection drawn between ending support payments at any level of vaccination coverage.

Nor was any modelling apparently commissioned on the likely impact of removing financial support for the most vulnerable when infection rates are high – as in Sydney – and rising alarmingly as in Melbourne.



Read more:
Scientific modelling is steering our response to coronavirus. But what is scientific modelling?

The power of ‘health advice’

Since the beginning of the COVID pandemic, politicians have justified the many difficult decisions they’ve had to make as being based on “health advice”.

As it should be, “health advice” provided to politicians by chief health officers is informed by modelling commissioned from a range of well-respected and credentialed scientific research institutes.

The public draws a strong causal link between health modelling inputs and policy outcomes.

They are more likely to accept policies buttressed by modelling and health advice than not.

Modelling is therefore a powerful political tool.

In a pandemic, political decisions have human and economic impacts that are irrevocable, significant and for many a matter of life and death.

Even more reason, therefore, for the scientific integrity of modelling that informs those decisions to be beyond reproach.

The brief given to the modellers is critically important in setting parameters and assumptions and selecting the variables that will be assessed and measured.

Transparency is essential

The key to building public trust in modelling is full transparency.

But in Australia, these briefs and processes are often shrouded and opaque. Secrecy and a lack of transparency has greatly affected the quality of Australia’s response to COVID.

At the beginning of the pandemic, the federal government’s Emergency Response Plan for Novel Coronavirus did not canvass the cessation of international travel and closure of borders, domestic lockdowns and the use of masks as possible or desirable responses to the pandemic.

Yet within weeks of this advice being published, the modelling had been overtaken by events.

Travel from some but not all countries was stopped, international and domestic borders closed from late March 2020, and lockdowns implemented across Australia.

In the initial planning and options, lockdowns, cessation of travel and masks were not among the assumptions. The entire response was based on a paradigm of influenza rather than the facts of coronavirus and need for rapid, preventive responses.

The assumptions informing the initial modelling should have been published, interrogated and debated before, and not after, the initial and ineffectual policy settings were adopted.



Read more:
Australia’s COVID plan was designed before we knew how Delta would hit us. We need more flexibility

Separating science from politics

Over the course of the pandemic, the assumptions of modelling commissioned by governments should have been published, scrutinised and debated before, not after, the modelling was undertaken.

Modelling ought to have been commissioned from a range of Australia’s excellent scientific institutions.

Open debate might have meant aerosol transmission of first Alpha and then Delta would have been factored into projections and policy-making about the efficacy of hotel quarantine and border protection far earlier than it was.

This unnecessary addiction to secrecy has eroded the trust and confidence that should exist between governments and the people.

Politics and science each have their separate and distinct roles to play in the managing the pandemic and reducing to the lowest possible levels the damage it causes to lives and livelihoods.

In the response to HIV/AIDS, the politicians of the day ensured scientific advice was provided independently of governments and published as it became available.

The advice became the foundation of the political decision-making process.

Now, as then, Australians expect a similar standard of open and independent scientific advice, information and assessment about the present and likely impact of the pandemic.

Whether commissioned by governments or acting independently, Australia’s pandemic modellers have lived up to their responsibilities to science and the Australian people.

They have applied their expertise to quantifying COVID and the costs and benefits of policy options.

But the critical decisions on assumptions, debate, contestability and transparency are made by politicians, not modellers.

As much as some politicians may wish to deny it, they alone are responsible and accountable to the Australian people for the decisions that have created Australia’s COVID response and will shape its future.

Modelling is integral to building the most robust, sustainable and well-supported response to the increasingly complex challenges of the pandemic.

The Australian people will be best served by separating science from politics.



Read more:
Explainer: do the states have to obey the COVID national plan?


The Conversation

William Bowtell, Adjunct professor, Kirby Institute for Infection and Immunity, UNSW

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Lebanon’s crisis has gone from bad to worse. But is anyone listening?

Posted on by

Tony Walker, La Trobe UniversityIn the midst of a pandemic that has wrenched the world off its axis, Lebanon’s precipitous decline has not received the attention it deserves given the country’s strategic importance.

Bordering Syria to its north and east, and Israel to its south, Lebanon occupies a critical space in the Eastern Mediterranean. Its collapse would risk spilling over into surrounding areas.

The country is sagging under the weight of a vast refugee population from neighbouring Syria and a permanent Palestinian refugee presence. It certainly qualifies as a “crisis state”, which the London School of Economics defines as one in “acute stress”.

The question is whether the “crisis state” becomes, to all intents and purposes, a “failed state” under the LSE definition of one that “can no longer perform its basic security and development functions”.

Lebanon, which has taken more than a year to form a new government after an ammonium nitrate explosion ripped through its port area and forced the resignation of the government of the day, is again teetering on the brink.

Fuel shortages, which this week shut down its main power stations, have drawn the world’s attention to Lebanon’s continuing slide towards outright ruin.

An ammonium nitrate explosion ripped through Beirut’s port in August 2020, killing at least 216 people.
Hassan Ammar/AP/AAP

The emergence last month of a new prime minister after months of wrangling over power sharing among the country’s confessional groups hardly engendered confidence in the new government’s ability to get on top of Lebanon’s problems.

Fuel shortages caused by a foreign exchange crisis in which the country is effectively bankrupt is merely one of a series of cascading problems that has prompted the World Bank to describe the situation as one the world’s top-10 “most severe crises since the mid-nineteenth century”.

The World Bank speculates that Lebanon’s crisis may well rank in the “top 3”. This includes the Great Depression of the 1930s.

In a report issued in June by its Beirut office before the formation of the new government, the bank said Lebanon faced

[…] colossal challenges [that] threaten already dire socio-economic conditions and a fragile social peace with no clear turning point on the horizon.

The installation of Najib Mikati, a billionaire telecommunications tycoon, as prime minister has coincided with a further step down in Lebanon’s fortunes to the point where its ability to arrest its slide now depends on outside help. But that’s the problem.

New Lebanese Prime Minister Najib Mikati faces several critical and cascading problems in his country.
Bilal Hussein/AP/AAP

Potential international donors, led by France with its traditional ties to the country, are fed up with Lebanon’s inability to get its house in order and its endemic corruption, and fear external assistance will merely strengthen the radical Shi’ite Hezbollah’s grip on the country.

With Iran’s backing, Hezbollah has been portraying itself as Lebanon’s saviour. Iranian-supplied fuel has been shipped into Lebanon by truck from the Syrian port of Baniyas to circumvent US-imposed sanctions.

Since its emergence at the height of Lebanon’s civil war, which lasted from 1975-1990, Hezbollah has gradually strengthened its position as the dominant player in the country’s complex political make-up.



Read more:
Beirut explosion yet another heartbreak for a country already on the brink

This divides power between Christian and Muslim confessional groups under a power-sharing arrangement brokered by France in 1943. A Saudi-mediated deal, known as the Ta’if agreement to end the civil war, acknowledged Hezbollah’s role.

Hezbollah is designated as a terrorist organisation by the United States and other countries.

In the three decades since Ta’if, Lebanon has got itself back on its feet under various administrations only to slide back again, and now disastrously.

The reasonable question in all of this, given its intense internal problems overlaid by a governance structure that is clearly outmoded, is whether Lebanon is ungovernable in its present form and risks breaking apart.

In an assessment of Lebanon’s status as a potential failed state the Council on Foreign Relations nominated the following criteria. These included the 75% (at least) of Lebanese living below the poverty line, the 1.7 million refugees whose plight is even worse than that of Lebanese nationals, the duration of power blackouts of 22 hours a day, and public debt of 175% of GDP.

Since that assessment in September last year the situation has got much worse, if that’s possible. The Lebanese pound is virtually valueless, having lost 90% of its value against the dollar in the past several years. The country is beset by hyperinflation with price rises of more than 400% putting basic foodstuffs beyond the reach of many. Lebanon’s economy contracted by more than 20% in 2020.

One-third of Lebanese people are now living in ‘extreme poverty’.
Hassan Ammar/AP/AAP

One-third of Lebanese are living in “extreme poverty”, according to the United Nations.

Not least of Lebanon’s problems is its huge refugee burden. The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) reports the country has 865,530 registered Syrian refugees among an estimated 1.5 million Syrians in Lebanon.

On top of the Syrian presence, there are some 190,000 Palestinians in Lebanon, many in refugee camps. The Palestinians are effectively stateless and even more vulnerable to a deteriorating economy than the impoverished Lebanese.

Lebanon’s population, including refugees, stands at around 6.8 million.

Compounding Lebanon’s problems is an acute foreign exchange crisis. It is to all intents and purposes broke, and therefore unable to continue to subsidise imports of vital commodities, including food and medicine.

This has pushed prices through the roof.

Embattled Mikati put it bluntly after his swearing in.

Where are we going to get dollars to subsidise? We are dry. We don’t have any reserves or money that allows us to help.

Meanwhile, billions of dollars have flowed out of the country as wealthy Lebanese and corrupt officials have sought to shelter their assets given the collapse of the country ‘s banking system.

Banks have become insolvent. Thousands of Lebanese have lost their life savings. In the midst of this, they would have reason to be dismayed by revelations in the leaked Pandora Papers that prominent figures in government and the bureaucracy had been siphoning funds out of the country for years.



Read more:
Pandora papers: as ordinary Lebanese suffer, elite secretly drain off billions

Among those identified as having shifted funds abroad is Riad Salameh, Lebanon’s long-standing central bank governor. He is the sole director of a British Virgin Islands company established in 2007.

Salameh is under investigation in Switzerland and France for potential money laundering and embezzlement. He has been accused in local Lebanese media of shifting funds abroad in violation of regulations. He denies having made any such transfers.

However, what is not in doubt is that Lebanon is one of the world’s most corrupt jurisdictions. This is contributing to its inability to put its house in order.

In the global Corruption Perception Index, recognised as the most credible assessment of global corrupt practices, Lebanon rates 137 on a list of 180 countries along with Russia, Papua New Guinea and the Democratic Republic of Congo.

On the Fragile States Index compiled by the Fund for Peace in collaboration with Foreign Policy magazine, Lebanon ranked 34 in 2020, down from 40 in 2019. Given its accelerating decline over the past 12 months, its 2021 rating may well rival that of failing states like Yemen, Somalia and Syria.

If Lebanon is not a failed state now it is certainly one in the making. This is barring a substantial intervention by reluctant international lending institutions and western governments concerned about its further slide towards an Iran-led “axis of resistance”.The Conversation

Tony Walker, Vice-chancellor’s fellow, La Trobe University

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Stadiums, bushfires and a pandemic: how will Gladys Berejiklian be remembered as premier?

Posted on by

David Clune, University of SydneyGladys Berejiklian will be remembered as premier of NSW for her resilience, level-headedness, crisis management skills, and administrative competence — and, of course, the ICAC investigation that toppled her.

Decent, determined and hard-working, she was unflappable in adversity.

Berejiklian leaves a legacy of economic achievement and major infrastructure creation. She achieved a major milestone both personally and for women by being the first female NSW premier to win a general election.



Read more:
Berejiklian’s downfall derailed a career built on accountability and control. Now, who will replace her?

Energetic, effective and politically astute

Of Armenian descent, Berejiklian began her career in politics working for former Liberal leader Peter Collins. She was prominent in the Liberal moderates faction and was president of the Young Liberals. After a sojourn in banking, she was elected MP for Collins’ former seat of Willoughby in 2003. She proved to be an energetic, effective shadow transport minister.

Berejiklian impressed Liberal leader Barry O’Farrell, who became something of a mentor. When O’Farrell became premier in 2011, Berejiklian served in the important transport portfolio.

She was tipped as a possible future premier because of her strong performance. However, when O’Farrell resigned after misleading an ICAC inquiry in April 2014, Mike Baird had the numbers in the party room. Berejiklian, who was personally close to Baird, withdrew from the contest and was elected deputy leader. She was treasurer and industrial relations minister in the Baird government.

Berejiklian’s time came when Baird resigned in January 2017 — she was elected Premier unopposed in late January 2017.

Berejiklian’s policy direction was similar to that of her predecessor, with a strong focus on economics, infrastructure and public sector reform.

Also like Baird, Berejiklian was a small “l” liberal on social reform. She had a less outgoing personal style than Baird but succeeded in convincing the voters she was trustworthy, capable and sensitive to their needs.

The premier stabilised the government and showed it still had purpose and dynamism. She showed her political astuteness by quickly dumping the unpopular local government reforms that had been a factor in Baird’s downfall.

The premier survived two rounds of threatening by-elections in April 2017, a sign the anti-government feeling that marked the end of Baird’s term had diminished.

The serpentine politics of Sydney

The serpentine politics of Sydney sport and stadiums left Berejiklian wrong-footed at the end of 2017. She announced that both Allianz and Homebush stadiums in Sydney would be simultaneously demolished and rebuilt at an estimated cost of A$2.5 billion.

It was a major miscalculation that would haunt Berejiklian. Public reaction was overwhelmingly negative, a common theme being that it was a gross misuse of public funds to rebuild two stadiums, one only 17-years-old, instead of financing vital community facilities. The premier backtracked on the demolition of Homebush but much public resentment remained about Allianz.

In her campaign for the March 2019 election, Berejiklian ran largely on the government’s record.

The economy was performing well compared to other states, the public finances were in the best condition they had been in for a long time, and the infrastructure budget for the next four years was close to $90 billion. Labor leader Michael Daley made opposition to the demolishing and rebuilding of Allianz Stadium the spearhead of his campaign.

While not a flashy or magnetic campaigner, Berejiklian stayed “on message” and came across as sincere and conscientious. The result was a triumphant victory for her. The government’s two-party preferred vote was 52% and its primary vote 42% — 9% higher than Labor’s.

The premier had persuaded enough voters that the government had significant achievements to its credit and was better equipped to deliver more in the future.

Through bushfires and COVID

The last years of Berejiklian’s term were marked by skilful handling of major crises. Like other parts of Australia, in January 2020, NSW was ravaged by a devastating bushfire season, in which 25 lives were lost.

Unlike Prime Minister Scott Morrison, Berejiklian emerged from the bushfire crisis with enhanced prestige.

As political commentator Niki Savva, writing in The Australian, put it:

When the fires hit NSW, she made a point of being there, every day, standing next to the fire chief, Shane Fitzsimmons, supporting him and allowing him to do his job. She visited affected communities. Her embraces were accepted. No one refused to shake her hand.

No sooner had the bushfires ceased than the state was plunged into another crisis with the outbreak of coronavirus. Berejiklian responded in much the same way, this time with Chief Medical Officer, Kerry Chant, by her side.

The second NSW COVID outbreak proved to be more difficult and unpredictable to manage but by the time of her resignation the situation was coming under control.

Although she had been criticised by some for her handling of the crisis, Berejiklian’s calm, competent, communicative approach would seem to have resonated in the electorate.

ICAC’s Operation Keppel

ICAC’s Operation Keppel was inquiring into whether former Liberal MP for Wagga Daryl Maguire engaged in conduct that involved a breach of public trust.

Public hearings began in September 2020 and Berejiklian appeared as a witness in October.

In a disclosure that generated a widespread tsunami of shock, it was revealed the premier had been in a “close personal relationship” with Maguire from 2015 which had only recently ended.

Previously, the public persona of Berejiklian, who had never married, was that of a rather prim career woman wedded to her job.

Berejiklian said that she had no intention of quitting as she had done nothing wrong and most voters seemed to be sympathetic.

The general attitude was that she had made a miscalculation in her personal life, a not uncommon phenomenon, and did not deserve to be punished by losing her job.

As reporter Deborah Snow put it, writing in The Sydney Morning Herald,

there was relief inside the government that the crisis was playing out as a titillating love gone wrong scandal rather than a probity scandal.

The announcement of an ICAC inquiry into whether the premier had engaged in conduct that involved a “breach of public trust” as a result of her relationship with Maguire has precipitated her resignation.

She could have stepped aside pending the result of the inquiry, but instead has chosen to take the same course as O’Farrell, who decided to do the honourable thing and walk.



Read more:
The long history of political corruption in NSW — and the downfall of MPs, ministers and premiers


The Conversation

David Clune, Honorary Associate, Government and International Relations, University of Sydney

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Dominic Perrottet is set to become the next premier of NSW. Who is he?

Posted on by

Gregory Melleuish, University of WollongongIn many ways, this is the worst possible time for a new premier to take the helm in New South Wales. The resignation of John Barilaro as deputy premier creates an even greater mood of uncertainty and, perhaps, insecurity.

The state is due to open up, at least partially, in the next week, and with the end of lockdown will come a need for a different type of leadership than has been exhibited over the past few months. Gladys Berejiklian has done a reasonable job during the pandemic, as can be seen from the outpouring of support, even grief, at her decision to call it a day.

However, there have also been many complaints about her government’s actions, particularly in the western suburbs of Sydney. She has at times appeared to be the premier for the north shore and eastern suburbs. For any Liberal premier of New South Wales, such a perception is extremely dangerous as elections are won in outer suburban and regional electorates.

In the 18 months before the next election, especially given the slender Coalition majority in the Legislative Assembly, the new premier will need to ensure, or at least create the perception, that the government is working on behalf of all of the state.



Read more:
ICAC is not a curse, and probity in government matters. The Australian media would do well to remember that

Assuming Dominic Perrottet becomes the next premier, it is worth asking what he brings to that position and how it will affect the politics of the state over the next year. It is also worth pointing out that Perrottet, along with Planning Minister Rob Stokes, is from the north shore. That probably explains why he chose to run with Stuart Ayres, who represents the western Sydney seat of Penrith.

Both Perrottet and Ayres are quite young: Perrottet is 39; Ayres 41. They represent a new generation of leaders.

Perrottet grew up on the north shore, where he attended Redfield College and Oakhill College. Interestingly, neither school plays rugby league, compared to St Dominic’s College, Penrith, which Ayres attended and which counts among its alumni Nathan Cleary, Des Hasler and Brad Fittler.

Perrottet’s father works for the World Bank and he is one of 12 children. The family are religious Catholics.

Perrottet’s further education and career indicate he followed in his father’s footsteps in another way. He studied economics and law at university before working as a commercial lawyer.

He was elected to the state parliament in the landslide of 2011, at the tender age of 29. He quickly advanced up the ministerial ladder, primarily in economic portfolios. He began with finance in 2015, before advancing to industrial relations and then treasury and the deputy leadership of the Liberal Party in 2017.

Perrottet’s rise demonstrates he is very capable and intelligent, and he has “topped the class” of those candidates who went into parliament in 2011.

Perrottet has risen quickly through the ranks since entering parliament in 2011.
Dan Himbrechts/AAP

But his career also says something about what it means to be on the right in the modern Liberal Party. In some ways, he resembles former Liberal leader Nick Greiner, as a highly financially literate technocrat who sees the world through a business lens. While Greiner’s policies resonated on the north shore and in safe Liberal seats, they were his Achille’s heel everywhere else. So in the 1991 election, Greiner increased his proportion of the vote in safe Liberal seats while losing crucial seats in other areas, leading to minority government.

The other important aspect of Perrottet’s persona is his conservative Catholicism. One of his original sponsors was MLC David Clarke, a well-known conservative Catholic and leader of the conservatives in the Liberal Party. He is pro-life and opposed to assisted dying.

Perrottet has claimed his personal religious beliefs do not affect his work in public life. In any case, he requires the support of the moderates, who hold quite different moral and social values, to get legislation through.

His economic and financial experience will be far more important for his role as premier. He is focused very much on the economy and, as treasurer, aware of the huge debt that the state has incurred. Back in July, he reportedly opposed the extension of the current lockdown. He has also indicated he could change the current roadmap out of lockdown in the state.

In what seems to have been the perennial issue of the pandemic – public health versus the economy – there is no doubt Perrottet comes down on the side of the economy.

Certainly, the economy will loom larger as the state comes out of the worst of the pandemic. It is also the case that a focus on the economy will win him plaudits from the north shore, which has suffered fewer COVID cases than other areas of Sydney.



Read more:
Stadiums, bushfires and a pandemic: how will Gladys Berejiklian be remembered as premier?

The problem is that the state still has to navigate its way through the lifting of restrictions and the consequences of that action. It is not clear, despite high levels of vaccination, that all will be plain sailing.

Berejiklian honed her public relations skills during the pandemic and demonstrated a capacity to reassure the wider population that there was light at the end of the tunnel. Even so, she did not reach everyone.

Perrottet is largely untested in these matters. He will need to reassure the people of New South Wales that his focus is not just economic and financial. He could well ponder the fate of Nick Greiner.

Gladys Berejiklian was able to reassure the people of NSW through the worst of the pandemic.
Joel Carrett/AAP

That situation will not be made easier by Barilaro’s resignation. It is still somewhat of a mystery as to why he resigned. Could he really have been pushed into resignation by a nuisance YouTuber?

Whatever the reason, it will make the job of the new premier all the more difficult as it will be a new leadership team that seeks to guide NSW through largely uncharted waters.

How this new team handles those circumstances may well determine the outcome of the next state election.The Conversation

Gregory Melleuish, Professor, School of Humanities and Social Inquiry, University of Wollongong

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Labor retains clear Newspoll lead with voters approving of AUKUS; Perrottet set to be next NSW premier

Posted on by

AAP/Dan Himbrechts

Adrian Beaumont, The University of MelbourneThis week’s Newspoll, conducted September 29 to October 3 from a sample of 1,545, gave Labor a 53-47 lead, unchanged from last fortnight’s Newspoll. Primary votes were 37% Coalition (steady), 37% Labor (down one), 11% Greens (up one), 2% One Nation (down one) and 13% for all Others (up one).

It is likely Clive Palmer’s United Australia Party makes up a sizeable fraction of the Others vote. UAP ads have been ubiquitous, and they won 3.4% at the 2019 election, more than the 3.1% for One Nation, although One Nation did not contest all seats.

49% were dissatisfied with Scott Morrison’s performance (down one), and 48% were satisfied (up two), for a net approval of -1, up three points. Anthony Albanese’s net approval improved one point to -10. Morrison led as better PM by 47-34 (47-35 last fortnight).

For the large majority of this term, each Newspoll has been conducted three weeks apart. The two-week gap this time suggests they will do more polls in the lead-up to the election, due by May 2022. Newspoll figures are from The Poll Bludger.

By 59-31, voters approved of the AUKUS agreement, though the question did not mention the time to get the new submarines. 46% thought AUKUS would make Australia more secure, 29% that it would make no difference and 14% thought it would make us less secure. By 75-15, voters thought China posed a significant threat to our national security.

Labor has had a lead of 53-47 or more in all Newspolls conducted since July, but I am sceptical this solid position for Labor will mean a victory at the election. Once vaccination targets are met and lockdowns ease in Melbourne and Sydney, the economy is likely to rapidly recover, boosting the Coalition’s chances.

Furthermore, the Resolve polls in August and September have been far better for the Coalition than Newspoll. As I wrote after the late August Newspoll disagreed with Resolve, the different message in Resolve should not be ignored.



Read more:
Coalition slumps but Morrison gains in Newspoll; electoral changes to curb micro parties

The Guardian’s datablog has 45.2% of the population (not 16+) fully vaccinated, up from 37.2% two weeks ago. We rank 33 of 38 OECD countries in share of population fully vaccinated, unchanged since last fortnight. The Age shows 56.5% of 16+ are fully vaccinated and 79.4% have received at least one dose.

Essential and Morgan polls

In last week’s Essential poll, the federal government had a 45-30 good rating on its response to COVID (43-35 in mid-September, 39-36 in late August). The NSW government’s good rating has surged 13 points since late August to 53%, while Victoria fell back to 44% good after rising six points to 50% in mid-September.

50% of Victorian respondents said they didn’t have confidence in their state’s roadmap out of lockdown, compared with 40% of NSW respondents.

A late September Morgan poll from a sample of 2,752 gave Labor a 54-46 lead, a 1.5% gain for Labor since the mid-September poll. Primary votes were 36% Coalition (down 2.5%), 36% Labor (up 1%), 12.5% Greens (down 0.5%), 3.5% One Nation (up 0.5%) and 12% for all Others (up 1.5%).

Essential vs Resolve’s issue questions

In Essential, the Liberals had a 15-point lead over Labor on national security and a 10-point lead on economic management, while Labor led by 13 points on climate change, and 18 on fair wages and workplace conditions. Since October 2019, Labor has improved five points on the economy.

Essential’s issue questions give very different outcomes from Resolve’s, where Labor led the Liberals by just one point on the environment and climate change in September. Resolve gives a “someone else” option, and people who support the Greens on this issue select “someone else”, but a large majority of them prefer Labor to the Liberals.

It is likely there is also a pro-incumbent skew in Resolve’s questions, as they use “the Liberals and Morrison” versus “Labor and Albanese”. Morrison has had large leads over Albanese as better PM, so this formulation likely skews towards the current PM.

Newspoll quarterly aggregate data: July to September

Newspoll provides state and demographic breakdowns from all its polls conducted during a three-month period. As reported by The Poll Bludger on September 27, the September quarter Newspoll data gave Labor a 52-48 lead in NSW, a two-point gain for Labor since the June quarter, and a four-point gain since the 2019 election.

In Victoria, Labor’s lead blew out five points from June to 58-42, a five point gain for Labor since the last election. In Queensland, the Coalition led by 55-45, a two-point gain for them since July, but a 3.4% swing to Labor since the election. In WA, Labor led by 54-46, which would be a swing of almost 10% to Labor since the election.

Perrottet set to become next NSW premier

Gladys Berejiklian announced she would resign as New South Wales premier on Friday, owing to ICAC investigations. Media reports, such as in The Guardian, indicate that the right-aligned treasurer, Dominic Perrottet, is set to be elected NSW Liberal leader and thus premier at a Liberal party room meeting on Tuesday under a factional deal.

Berejiklian is also resigning as Member for Willoughby (held by 21.0%), so there will be a byelection soon. There will be other byelections in Bega (Lib 6.9%), where the Liberal MP Andrew Constance has announced he will contest the federal seat of Gilmore, and in Monaro (Nat 11.6%), as Nationals leader John Barilaro is retiring. Other NSW MPs may quit in the near future, so there could be several byelections on the same date.

Nobody wins German election

At the September 26 German election, the centre-left SPD won 25.7% (up 5.2% from 2017), the conservative CDU/CSU 24.1% (down 8.8%), the Greens 14.8% (up 5.9%), the pro-business FDP 11.5% (up 0.8%), the far-right AfD 10.3% (down 2.3%) and the far-left Left 4.9% (down 4.3%).

The Left was below the 5% threshold, but won three of the 299 single-member seats to barely retain a proportional allocation of seats. Right-wing parties combined defeated the combined left by a 45.9-45.4 margin, and this is reflected in parliament where left-wing parties won 363 of the 735 seats, just short of the 368 needed for a majority.

No other party will cooperate with the AfD, but no government of the left can be formed. Protracted negotiations are likely to achieve a governing coalition. I live blogged this election for The Poll Bludger.The Conversation

Adrian Beaumont, Honorary Associate, School of Mathematics and Statistics, The University of Melbourne

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

NSW Deputy Premier John Barilaro quits, as state government faces three byelections

Posted on by

AAP/Joel Carrett

Michelle Grattan, University of CanberraThe fallout from Gladys Berejiklian’s resignation has continued with Deputy Premier and Nationals leader John Barilaro announcing he will quit parliament.

This comes a day after NSW’s Liberal Minister for Transport Andrew Constance declared he was leaving state politics to seek preselection for the marginal federal seat of Gilmore, held by Labor.

Dominic Perrottet, treasurer under Berejiklian, is set to become the new premier. Stuart Ayres ­ – whose partner is foreign affairs minister Marise Payne – is to be his deputy, under a factional deal.

Berejklian announced her resignation as premier and from parliament on Friday after the Independent Commission Against Corruption said it was conducting a probity investigation arising from her relationship with former boyfriend and ex-MP Daryl Maguire.

The NSW government, which is in minority, now faces three byelections.

Barilaro’s seat of Monaro is on a 11.6% margin. Berejiklian’s Willoughby electorate has a 21% buffer. Constance’s Bega seat is on 6.9%.

The byelections in the two Liberal seats present some potential problems for Scott Morrison.

They will deplete party funds in a state where Morrison needs to win seats at his election in the first half of next year.

Also, a swing against the state Liberals would be read – rightly or wrongly – as partly a reflection on the Morrison government.

Although it is a longer bow, the byelection in Monaro might also have some implications for Barnaby Joyce, recently restored to the Nationals federal leadership. The seat is dominated by Queanbeyan, and also takes in small towns in the district. It was held by Labor before being won in 2011 by Barilaro, who has increased the Nationals’ vote to a solid margin.

Barilaro, who has been deputy premier since 2016, has been a volatile political operator. In 2020 he indicated he was likely to run for the Eden-Monaro federal byelection, but then stepped back. The same year he and the Nationals were at the centre of a major blowup over state policy to protect koalas.

Barilaro told a news conference Berejiklian’s resignation had not caused his decision. He had intended to announce his resignation soon, and had a date in mind, not far off. But he had brought this forward, believing it would be unfair on the new premier to be sworn into the new ministry and then soon after say he was going. He said Perrottet had tried to get him to stay.

He ruled out running for Eden-Monaro.

He cited a defamation action he has launched against YouTube personality Jordan Shanks over videos as a reason for his resignation, condemning what he described as “a vile and racist attack” on him.

He also said, “I don’t have the energy anymore”.

Constance is very popular locally and will give the Liberals a very good chance of regaining Gilmore. He lives in Gilmore, which takes in part of his state electorate.

He was critical of Morrison during the bushfire crisis but Morrison will be delighted to have him as a strong candidate. Labor holds Gilmore by 2.6%. Last election the Liberals ran prominent Indigenous figure Warren Mundine, who was seen by many local Liberals as a candidate imposed on them.The Conversation

Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of Canberra

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Gladys Berejiklian quits premiership amid ICAC inquiry into links with former MP

Posted on by

Michelle Grattan, University of CanberraGladys Berejiklian has resigned as NSW premier after the Independent Commission Against Corruption (ICAC) announced it is investigating whether she breached “public trust” arising from a potential conflict of interest involving her personal relationship with disgraced former state MP Daryl Maguire.

Berejiklian, premier since 2017, told a news conference: “Resigning at this time is against every instinct in my being and something which I do not want to do.

“I love my job, and serving the community, but I have been given no option following the statement issued [by ICAC].”

She said standing aside wasn’t an option for her because the NSW people “need certainty as to who their leader is during these challenging times of the pandemic”.

“To continue as premier would disrupt the state government during a time when our entire attention should be focused on the challenges confronting New South Wales. I do not want to be a distraction from what should be the focus of the state government during this pandemic, which is the wellbeing of our citizens.”

She will also resign from state parliament.

Her shock resignation comes at a critical point in the state’s COVID crisis as it prepares to come out of lockdown, which is set to trigger increased cases and hospitalisations.

Scott Morrison has regarded Berejiklian as his closest ally among the premiers, notably because she favoured where possible keeping things open.

Morrison told a news conference she was a “dear friend”. He had always found her “a person of the highest integrity”.

ICAC is investigating her conduct between 2012 and 2018. It is looking at funding given to the Australian Clay Target Association and funding promised or awarded to the Riverina Conservatorium of Music in Wagga Wagga.

It is also investigating whether her conduct “was liable to allow or encourage” corrupt conduct by Maguire, who held the seat of Wagga Wagga between 1999 and 2018.

Berejiklian declared her innocence. “I state categorically, I have always acted with the highest level of integrity. History will demonstrate that I have always executed my duties with the highest degree of integrity for the benefit of the people of NSW.”

Berejiklian’s future was put in question when last year she gave evidence to ICAC about her close personal relationship with Maguire. During the hearing, damaging phone taps of calls between her and Maguire were played.

State treasurer Dominic Perrottet is considered the front-runner to replace her.

Berejiklian is the third Liberal premier to be claimed by ICAC – the others were Nick Greiner and Barry O’Farrell.The Conversation

Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of Canberra

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.