ISSUES WITH BALLS

ASHLEY BALLS ENTERS THE ‘SHADOWY’ WORLD OF LOBBYING AND QUESTIONS WHETHER THERE IS A BUSINESS CASE FOR IT IN NEW ZEALAND.

point for any article on lobbying is a definition that is not designed to further the process. The definition I have chosen is benign and taken from a neutral source – The Aotearoa New Zealand Association of Social Workers – who describe it as follows: an activity of trying to persuade someone in authority, usually an elected member of a government, to support laws or rules that give your organisation or industry an advantage.1

A cynical interpretation is licensed bribery. Google indicates a lack of postings as this 2004 article is on the first search page.2

In my view it is detrimental to the SME sector who mostly cannot devote the time and resources to lobbying. It may even be undemocratic as it gives a voice to those with money. Even worse it gives those seeking to make their views heard in Wellington direct access to government. Accredited lobbyists are given security passes for the Beehive which gets them direct access to MPS and ministers. Lobbyists get appointments, when others don’t or have a very long wait.

The media in general is ‘hohum’ about lobbying and it gets very little press coverage – good or bad. When researching this piece I started with the view that lobbying probably didn’t matter in New Zealand as there is, or was, a prevailing interest in balance or fairness. Whereas lobbying has become an industry to the point where one well-known national law firm partner told me personally that much, at least half, of their business was lobbying in one form or another.

Lobbying has become a largely invisible multi-million-dollar influence peddling industry.

When behaviours operate in the shadows it is inevitable that attempts will be made to regulate them. Lobbying is no different. There was even a thwarted attempt to ban it altogether in

April 2012.3

We will never know what killed off the bill – lobbying perhaps.

All businesses have problems dealing with regulations and in some circumstances either end up in court when an alleged regulatory breach occurs. Some go further and seek to influence existing or new legislation and regulation. This is a basic right of all citizens who seek to have their views heard and, in the case of business, to protect or secure their position.

If a major change in regulation is scheduled government typically has a consultation period where appointments can be made to attend a select committee and make your case. Having done this several times I have concluded it is an expensive (airfares, hotels, taxis, etc) and virtually pointless exercise. This view was formed having spoken with MPS who have convinced me that unless some major act of regulatory omission has occurred the whole process is largely ignored.

Lobbyists are largely absent from the select committee process as they have had their ‘audience’ before it even started. The process is straightforward: when legislation/regulation is heralded that has the potential to have an impact or cost to a large business they, not unsurprisingly, look to protect their profits/shareholder value – even at the expense of common sense. Witness the extent of political ‘noise’ made by the oil industry in their relentless pursuit of drilling rights in Taranaki and offshore. This despite that glaringly obvious fact that hydrocarbon energy generation is already more expensive than viable alternatives. Lobbying has been used to protect the environmentally unjustifiable.

Is this fair and reasonable? Is it moral? Worse, why do we allow the representatives of a business that has no votes (but may pay taxes) to access government directly and privately?

Does the SME sector have the same privileges? Does it heck!

IN THE SHADOWS

At least since 2017 there has been a register of lobbyists which allows the public and small business to see some names, but we have no idea who the clients are and how much money has changed hands to forward a particular viewpoint or even whether that viewpoint is in the national interest.4 In late

May this year a further expression on lobbying reached the media but again discussion was small and outcome largely unknown.5

Lobbying, like other ‘consulting’ businesses, operates in the shadows and is another cost to business – it adds cost as opposed to value.

Does anyone remember the time before recruitment consultants when ‘personnel officers’ not only managed internal staff matters but recruited without paying fees? As a management consultant with 40 years’ experience I am acutely conscious that unless there is a measurable/quantifiable benefit to a client my purpose is redundant.

Making a business case for lobbying crosses that line as it is not transparent and given the sums involved may corrupt the political process.