Letter to Anthony Albanese 20 Jan 2023    Terms and Documents     Discussion Paper    Annexure A   Annexure A(i)   Annexure B   Annexure C   Annexure D   Annexure E   Annexure F

Annexure A(i)  - Articles and Audit Reports that Evidence and Denounce Pork-barrelling

 

 

 

The following articles are drawn from Annexure A:

 56.  There’s every reason politicians’ pork-barrelling should be made illegal - The Age -  5 July 2021 - Tom Rabe -  includes:

               "There is a long history of such pork-barrelling by both sides of politics. The most recent high-profile case involved Nationals senator Bridget McKenzie.  She approved $100 million in grants for community sporting facilities shortly before the last election. The Auditor-General found that the senator’s office ran a parallel selection process – focused, again unsurprisingly, on marginal electorates – to the merit-based process run by Sport Australia."
"With the Auditor-General and the parliamentary committee system in place to catch such blatant abuses of taxpayer money for political advantage, it has to be asked what more can be done to dissuade politicians from misusing taxpayer funds."

     But Australians are rightly disgusted by this practice. The ABC’s recent Australia Talks survey showed 77 per cent of us believe politicians should resign over pork-barrelling.  It is a practice by which politicians mis-spend public money for their own private political benefit. The Age is happy to call this for what it is: corruption. It should be illegal and come under the purview of an anti-corruption commission.

 57.  ‘It could never have been built’: Labor pinpoints holes in the pork barrel   Tom Cowie  -  SMH - July 3, 2021

"Last week the Australian National Audit Office found that the federal government cash splash was not administered appropriately and that there was no consultation with state governments and councils about where the money was needed.

“What is particularly egregious ... is that the car park could never have been built here,” said Andrew Giles, the federal opposition’s acting transport spokesman.

        Costs blow out on Coalition parking projects funded without full scoping - SMH - Farrah Tomazin  July 1, 2021

“If [the federal government] had bothered to speak to the council, speak to the local community, or even to look at the very site that we’re on, they would have known there was no way this promise could have been kept. They should have known that they were telling ... a lie at the time of the election, they should come clean about it now.”

The Audit Office report noted that just two out of the 47 car parks were completed. In March this year, the federal government pulled the pin on $50 million in funding for five Melbourne car parks, at Brighton Beach, Balaclava, Mitcham, Kananook and Seaford."

130. A ‘cancer on our democracy’: How to fix Australia’s pork-barrelling crisis - SMH  -  Jessica Irvine  April 26, 2022

               "Legislation should require both major parties to submit complete lists of their election policy and spending proposals to the Parliamentary Budget Office prior to the start of the election campaign. The PBO should publish these lists – along with full costings – as soon as possible during the campaign so that voters and journalists alike can thoroughly investigate and analyse the proposals on offer.

               Not only would voters be more informed, such a process of public scrutiny – facilitated by the parliament – would drive the development of better policy proposals in the first place – or, at least, ones less blatantly skewed to marginal electorates."

143. Bridget McKenzie's sport grant cash splash is a particularly brazen example of pork-barrelling - ABC News - David Speers  - 16 Jan 2020

"There's no hiding what was going on

First is the scale of ministerial intervention. The Minister ignored the recommendations of the independent experts at a far higher rate.

In round 3 of this program, the auditor-general found "73 per cent of the approved projects had not been recommended by Sport Australia".

Second is the frank admission by the Minister's office of what went on. According to the auditor-general, "the award of funding reflected the approach documented by the Minister's Office of focusing on 'marginal' electorates held by the Coalition as well as those electorates held by other parties or independent members that were to be 'targeted' by the Coalition".

144. Bridget McKenzie facing calls to quit after auditors condemn 'biased' sports cash splash  - ABC News -  16 Jan 2020

145. $100m sport grant scheme 'illegal' according to former senior government lawyer – ABC News - 22 Nov 2019

·         A former senior government legal advisor claims the controversial sport grant scheme is "illegal"

·         He argues the Sports Commission Act does not allow the minister to be delegated the power to approve grants

Ian Cunliffe, who worked for more than a decade in government (as a lawyer) and now advises a constitutional law centre at the University of Melbourne, argues the Community Sport Infrastructure scheme "pretty clearly was illegal" because the relevant legislation does not allow the minister to be given Sport Australia's power to choose grants.

Upon hearing this, Mr Cunliffe — with decades of providing advice establishing schemes and applying for grants — thought such an arrangement was unusual.

Section 54 of the Sports Commission Act sets out to whom Sport Australia can delegate its powers, such as choosing grants. The Sports Minister is not listed.

146.  Pork-barrelling is unfair and wasteful. Here’s a plan to end it  The Conversation -  Aug 22, 2022

"So how can we put a stop to the seemingly irresistible temptation to roll out ever more grants? Let’s start with an open, competitive, merit-based process for allocating government grants that establishes clear guardrails around ministerial discretion.

A better process for allocation and oversight of grants

Ministers should be able to establish grant programs and define the selection criteria, but they should not be involved in choosing grant recipients. Shortlisting and selecting grant recipients is an administrative function for the relevant department or agency.

A multi-party standing parliamentary committee should oversee compliance and interrogate any minister or public official who deviates from the rules. And funding for federal and state auditors-general should be increased to enable wider and more frequent auditing of grant programs.

A strong and well-resourced integrity commission is the last line of defence against pork-barrelling. Better processes and oversight should significantly reduce the opportunities and incentives for governments to engage in pork-barrelling in the first place.

If pork-barrelling continues, an integrity commission may choose to investigate. A recent report from the NSW Independent Commission Against Corruption concluded that pork-barrelling “can under certain circumstances involve serious breaches of public trust and conduct that amounts to corrupt conduct”.

Better processes and oversight of grant funding, alongside the other recommendations in our New Politics series of reports, would lay the foundations for a new way of doing politics in Australia – one that safeguards the public interest from political interests."

154. "ICAC finds pork barrelling could be corrupt, recommends grant funding guidelines be subject to statutory regulation."

154a ICAC REPORT - AUGUST 2022 -  Summary of investigation and outcomes

154b When is Pork-Barrelling Corruption And What Can Be Done To Avert It?  -  Professor Anne Twomey*

154c NSW Government response to the Report on Investigation into pork barrelling in NSW by the Independent Commission Against Corruption           

"The Code is prescribed as an applicable code of conduct for the purposes of section 9 of the Independent Commission Against Corruption Act 1988 (ICAC Act), meaning a suspected breach of the Ministerial Code may be investigated by the ICAC and, if substantiated, give rise to a finding of corrupt conduct."

154d NSW grants review recommends against making pork barrelling a criminal offence  The Guardian  Josh Taylor     Sat 7 May 2022

155. Costs blow out on Coalition parking projects funded without full scoping (SMH - Farrah Tomazin  July 1, 2021) includes:

"In a scathing report this week, the Australian National Audit Office found that projects under the $4.8 billion federal Urban Congestion Fund program had been green-lighted by Prime Minister Scott Morrison the day before he called the 2019 election, and the money mostly went to Liberal-held or marginal seats.

The Auditor-General revealed that on the eve of the election the government negotiated a deal with Maroondah Council to deliver the projects at a cost of $15 million each. However, the government agreed to pay the council 70 per cent, or $42 million, up front. The payment was made “prior to any of the four projects being fully scoped”, the documents reveal, and the remainder of the costs were to be paid on completion

“The approach taken by the department in establishing delivery timelines and milestone payments did not address the risks,” Mr Hehir said in his report. “Rather, 70 per cent of the total Australian government funding committed to these projects was paid around seven to 10 months in advance of the expected construction start dates.”

The payment plan is the latest example of dubious processes in administration of the Urban Congestion Fund, in which the Coalition promised to build 47 commuter car parks across Australia, including 29 in Victoria that had been announced without consulting the state government."

156. New politics Preventing pork-barrelling - (Grattan institute - Aug 2022 - Danielle Wood, Kate Griffiths, and Anika Stobart) provides summary points to -

Improve the grants process; 

Strengthen oversight of public spending; and

Make grants administration more transparent.

159. Pork barrelling can constitute corrupt conduct and could lead to criminal charges, ICAC says – The Guardian - Anne Davies  Mon 1 Aug 2022

               "Pork barrelling – the practice of allocating government grants for partisan political purposes – can constitute corrupt conduct, the New South Wales Independent Commission against Corruption has warned, calling for much stricter rules on grants.

               In its report on pork barrelling in NSW, ICAC said a minister could be engaging in corrupt conduct and open to criminal charges if they engage in pork barrelling."

               “In circumstances where pork barrelling is serious and willful, it may constitute conduct so far below acceptable standards as to amount to an abuse of the public’s trust in the office holder, such that criminal punishment is warranted,” ICAC said.

163. A battle to provide suburban railway station car parks has left taxpayers with a $660 million bill and precious little extra parking - SMH - Shane Wright - 3 July 2021

     "A few hours later, the Auditor-General’s office released its report into the administration of commuter car park projects within the Urban Congestion Fund, revealing huge problems in the $660 million program. 
A nationwide program to reduce “congestion” across suburban Australia managed to channel most of its cash into a handful of Liberal Party seats that were more at risk of being won by Labor than overwhelmed by parked cars.

     That single report, plus others over recent months from the Auditor-General, highlight the widening gap between the rhetoric of restrained spending and the practices of the federal government."

164. Factsheet: Pork Barrelling -  The Institute of Internal Auditors - Australia - 2018

"Pork barrelling may contravene financial legislation and regulations governing the spending of funds by governments, such as the Australian Government ‘Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Act 2013’ (PGPA Act) and the ‘Commonwealth Grants Rules and Guidelines 2017’ (CGRGs). The PGPA Act requires a minister to only approve expenditure if they are satisfied, after making reasonable enquiries, that the expenditure would be efficient, effective, economical and ethical. The lack of civil or criminal penalties for breaching these duties is seen as limiting their effectiveness.

The States and Territories typically have legislation, regulation and policies regarding conduct by public officials and financial management that may impact on pork barrelling. The lack of action where rules appear to have been breached limits their effectiveness."

165. $252 million fund designed to win seats and punish councils, inquiry finds - SMH  -  Angus Thompson - 30 March 2021

     "A $252 million grants fund handled by the Berejiklian government was deliberately devised to accommodate pork-barrelling, punish councils who objected to forced amalgamations, and win seats ahead of the 2019 state election, an inquiry has found."

166. Multibillion-dollar federal fund didn’t award money on merit, audit finds - The Age - Tina Jacks - 28 June 2021

167. What is the Bridget McKenzie scandal about?  Bridget McKenzie might have to quit federal cabinet and her deputy leadership of the Nationals over her handling of a sports grants program.  Here's why.

168. The Regulation of Pork Barrelling in Australia - Susanna Connolly - BA/LLB (Hons), TC Beirne School of Law, University of Queensland

199. REPORT ON INVESTIGATION INTO PORK BARRELLING IN NSW - ICAC REPORT AUGUST 2022


Below is an extract from the Writer's Letter to the Prime Minister dated 20 Jan 2023:

4th Reason -  Pork-barrelling - utilising the Public Purse on projects to win votes has been rife and unchecked for too long - four consequences of 'government corruption'

Danielle Wood CEO of the Grattan Institute article Grey corruption cuts our living standards ....... - Feb 2022 notes "Decades of economic research have illuminated the relationship between government corruption and economic stagnation.  It has also identified the Reason corruption is such a handbrake on growth."  It lists the following four consequences of government corruption:

a)    Increases uncertainty around investment decisions

b)    Influences the level and type of government spending.

c)    Results in more red tape and regulation.

d)    Erodes some forms of “civic” or “social capital” – essentially the trust between fellow citizens.

Political parties spending taxpayer money on campaign advertising "A Grattan Institute report released 10 Oct 2022 confirms what we all suspected: that government spending on taxpayer-funded ads consistently spikes in the lead-up to elections."

Politicised taxpayer-funded advertising  "Weaponising taxpayer-funded advertising for political advantage wastes public money, undermines trust in politicians and democracy, and creates an uneven playing field in election campaigns. Something has to change."

Michelle Grattan (University of Canberra) article "Crossbencher, Helen Haines, on Morrison and integrity" (August 2022) includes  -

        "She argues that “public money being spent for political gain through so-called rorting or pork barrelling is potentially corruption.”

Crikey article (16 Jan 2020) "Anatomy of a rort: how the Coalition spent $100 million in grants to help its election campaign" accused then Nationals Sports Minister, Bridget McKenzie, who oversaw the use of a $100 million sports allocation program, of the most blatant rorting of a grants program "ever seen"  to help the Coalition win the 2019 election.  The tiny Yankalilla Bowling Club in the SA marginal seat of Mayo received a cheque for $127,373 from Liberal Candidate for Mayo, Georgina Downer, to win votes. Little wonder the locals were so elated.

SMH article A ‘cancer on our democracy’: How to fix Australia’s pork-barrelling crisis by senior economics writer, Jessica Irvine (April 26, 2022) highlights the huge cost to the Public Purse due to a deficit of published Cost-Benefit Analysis for grants programs and calls for Australia's political parties to submit their largesse policies for confidential costing by the Parliamentary Budget Office prior to the election campaign:

"Few Australians begrudge the money governments spend on public goods and services which pass a cost-benefit analysis and enhance our national quality of living. Good schools, hospitals, roads and welfare for the less fortunate, for example.  But the election-time flurry of spending in marginal seats is a growing cancer on our democracy."

 

Former NSW Treasurer, Andrew Constance, was adept at Bunging on the Bulldust to justify simply indefensible costly NSW transport infrastructure projects and then deceitfully shelved the cost off-balance sheet into “Transport Asset Holding Entity“ which the NSW Auditor General, Margaret Crawford refused to accept:

Politicians, both State and Federal, spend the Public Purse to win votes, more so in election years.  Appraising Cost-Benefit is often a distant deliberation if at all. 

 

SMH article Liberal MP: Politicians ‘addicted’ to buying votes, take spending out of their hands (27 March 2022) includes "Australian politicians are so addicted to using infrastructure spending to buy votes that responsibility for nation-building projects should be taken out of their hands and assigned to an independent authority, departing Liberal MP John Alexander says."

 

ABC article Federal election 2022: Political parties spend big to win over West Australian voters (4 May 2022) includes: "In the last month, more than $6 million has been spent on social media to try and influence Australians' opinions on a range of social and political issues."

 

5th Reason - Stealing from the Public Purse for one's own political gain is no different to stealing from one's employer for personal gain

If an employee embezzles $100,000 or so from his/her employer and is apprehended, he/she will be Sentenced to a term in jail as Punishment and as a Deterrent to others.  If a brazen bank robber steals at gun point say $40,000, he/she would also be Sentenced a similar Punishment for their theft.

Australia's laws have to change to render politicians that steal from the Public Purse for their own personal benefit, or their party's benefit, on projects to win votes, without submitting a Conforming Cost-Benefit Analysis to the Productivity Commission well prior to execution of financing documents and construction contracts, should be similarly subject to jail incarceration Punishment if the Politician/s cannot refund the wasted millions or billions.  Australia's legislators have been slow to learn from political corruption in NSW.

The pertinent State or Treasury Minister/s could be litigated under both criminal law and civil law if she, he or they failed to provide a CC-BA, and the particular costly project was found to be materially uneconomical – meaning the construction and operating costs were far greater than patronage revenues from travelling passengers/users/vehicles, and alternative bus transport was demonstrably cheaper and more flexible to 'user demands': 

·         The pertinent State or Territory ‘Treasury Dept’ that provided funding for the infrastructure project could litigate the Minister/s for financial damages if it was found that the pertinent Minister/s failed to undertake requisite ‘due diligence’ by submitting a Conforming Cost-Benefit Analysis, but rather exhibited gross negligence and willful misconduct in appraising the utility of the infrastructure project and the project failed to achieve the Minister’s claims/assurances.

·         A Class Action could be run through the civil courts against the particular Minister/s by citizens that suffered a financial loss as a result of the particular State or Territory infrastructure project, provided independent appraisals reported that the infrastructure project was largely concocted on the back of an envelope without having lined up requisite Wooden Ducks specified in a Conforming Cost-Benefit Analysis.

8th Reason -  No state or territory is immune from irresponsible planning of major infrastructure projects during recent years to the detriment of the Public Purse:
News.com article Taxpayers pick up tab for billions wasted on megaproject blowout bungles (May 2021) evidences that no state or territory has displayed responsible planning of major infrastructure projects

NSW
In Nov 2013 the NSW Government announced the business case details for a Central Business District and South East Light Rail ("CLSER"), with an estimated cost of $1.6 billion, and purportedly almost $4 billion worth of benefits.  The NSW Auditor-General Report dated 11 June 2020 estimated total cost to be $3.147 billion - virtually double the original cost forecast as in Nov 2013, the project business case summary estimated the CSELR would cost $1.6 billion.  Legal battles cost NSW Govt to settle with the Spanish contractor, Acciona, an additional $576 million. CSELR was completed a year late causing significant traffic disruption to businesses and residents.  $60 million was paid out for the small business assistance package due to extended disruption.  Refer History of CSELR cost increases and construction delays. 

Creative accounting hides $4b WestConnex blowout - NSW Auditor General reveals.

On 15 May 2022 the NSW Govt has announced it will tunnel 11km into the Blue Mountains from Blackheath to Little Hartley (upper Blue Mountains) relying upon an “in-depth feasibility analysis and extensive investigation process” that “confirmed the 11-kilometre toll-free tunnel from Blackheath to Little Hartley as the preferred option“.  This it is public money being expended ‘out in the boondocks’ either side of Mt Victoria in th Upper Blue Mountains - hardly high traffic territory.  Is the proclaimed “in-depth feasibility analysis and extensive investigation process” open to public scrutiny?  What are the forecast traffic/patronage projections?  What are the forecast construction costs?  What are the operating costs.  What are the tunnel refurb costs every 10 years?  What tunnel water leakage costs are anticipated?

The NSW Auditor-General reported that the NSW Govt could have saved up to $25 million on the cost of the $38 million Albert Tibby Cotter Walkway at Moore Park.  For over 300 days each year, virtually no one uses it.  The former set of traffic lights that crossed ANZAC Pde would have disrupted vehicles only when a big match was being played at the SCG, or former SFS.  Traffic lights to enable patrons to cross the light rail to the SCG would similarly only disrupt for a big match, in the same manner that pedestrian traffic lights have disrupted vehicle flows across Australia for at least 60 years.