Questions on election transparency a matter of democracy

New campaign is seeking answers hidden from voters, writes Greg Barns

ACCOUNTABILITY and transparency are in short supply when it comes to politics in Tasmania. The March state election, which was bought by the gaming and hotels industry for the Hodgman Government, is a case in point. While the media caravan has moved on, it is critical that there be answers to the extraordinary events that saw the Liberal Party outspend its opponents by millions of dollars in campaigning. It was ugly and dishonest then and needs to be reckoned with now.

Last week a group of concerned members of the Tasmanian community launched an effort to ensure we do not forget what happened earlier this year. The group, led by lawyer and gun control campaigner Roland Browne, gaming machine campaigner Pat Caplice, and environmental activists Ted Cutlan, Rebecca Howarth and Amanda Sully have proposed a series of questions to the man who led the charge to undermine democracy in Tasmania during the election, Premier Will Hodgman.

Some will no doubt switch off at the listing of those names and causes. “Here we go again, sore losers, the anti everything brigade etc”, will be the reaction of those readers. But to do so would be to miss the point. The questions raised by these individuals, who have formed a group called Tasmania 2018 Election Inquiry, are serious, legitimate and go to the heart of the supposed democratic values of accountability and transparency.

There were are number of decisions and commitments made in the March election campaign which directly benefited certain controversial causes and which were hidden from the sight of the electorate. These are issues which deserve answers. Tasmania 2018 Election Inquiry lists a number of them.

In the context of the appalling way in which the Liberal Party was prepared to sell itself to the gaming and hotels industry this question is asked; “Why did the Liberals hide the Tasmanian Hospitality Association’s funding increase of 300 per cent ($6.8 million over four years) until after the election?”

In the context of the secretive proposal to promise to change firearms laws, exposed on the eve of the Election, why did the Liberal Party promise “$59,000 funding to the Sporting Shooters Association (see attached), despite that organisation claiming that it is in a ‘powerful financial position?’” the group asks.

And then there is the Mt Wellington cable car proposal, strongly supported by the Hodgman government. The Tasmania 2018 Election Inquiry asks why “did the government instruct the Mount Wellington Cable Car proponent to cancel a community meeting planned for February and why did the Treasurer sign off on an secret exploration licence for the proponent just days before the election was called?”

It is important that these questions are answered.

The idea that governments should be allowed to make secret promises and deals to individuals, corporations and interest groups before the people vote is the antithesis of

a democracy. It is the sort of conduct that undermines confidence by the community in a democratic system.

The conduct of the Hodgman Government on guns, the cable car and gaming machines in the context of the March election would confirm for many people why governments are so mistrusted today. Government is not about the good of the community but simply an exercise in ensuring power is consolidated through the buying off of key interest groups. Power is maintained and enhanced by governments through the mechanism of secrecy. The questions being asked by the Tasmania 2018 Election Inquiry would have no place if the political culture of Tasmania was one of genuine openness. We should insist our legislators pass laws which require full accountability and transparency in decision making at all times.

A good start would be to force the release of the daily schedule of ministers and political leaders. We should all know whom they meet with and why. There must be realtime disclosure of donations to all political parties. Cabinet agendas should be published weekly so we understand what issues and decisions our government is taking.

And all correspondence with interest groups, including corporates, non-government organisations, lobby groups and unions, must be disclosed on a monthly basis, at the very least.

In the meantime, leaking of government business should be encouraged.

If politicians are not prepared to be honest and transparent with the community then we must rely on those with information about rent-seeking deals with interest groups, lobbying efforts to change laws, and donations to political parties to ensure the truth outs through the media and other individuals with an interest in real democracy.

If we sit on our hands and do nothing about the Hodgman Government’s conduct in the March election and if we do not insist on full transparency in decision making, then watch democracy continue to decline in Tasmania.