Concerns are being raised around a Cabinet Minister's ability to leave Parliament and become a lobbyist.
A new report by the Helen Clark Foundation is calling for tougher rules around political lobbying and donations to improve trust and confidence in political decision-making.
Former Attorney-General Chris Finlayson says he believes there should be a stand-down period.
"The idea that you finish up in Parliament on Friday and start lobbying on Monday is unacceptable, and I think most people would acknowledge that."
LISTEN ABOVE
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:06):
You're listening to the Sunday Session podcast with Francesca Rudkin
from News Talks edb as.
Speaker 2 (00:13):
New Zealand at risk of political corruption. That's the question
being asked in a new report by the Helen Clark Foundation.
The report, authored by Philippa Yasbek, looks into the transparency
of our government systems and it's identified five areas most
vulnerable to corrupt practices. Those are political lobbying, donations, OIA access,
(00:35):
foreign bribery, and beneficial ownership of corporate entities. So do
we need tougher rules to protect New Zealand against political corruption?
Former Attorney General and National Cabinet Minister Chris Van Lason
has read the report, He wrote the ford for it,
and he joins me, now, good morning Chris, Good morning
to you.
Speaker 3 (00:53):
Hey.
Speaker 2 (00:53):
How important is the discussion this report has raised.
Speaker 3 (00:58):
I think it's a very very usful discussion. As I
said in my introduction, it's non party political, so the
fact that was published by the Helling Clark Foundation doesn't
mean it's necessarily left wing, but it does raise important issues,
for example, the Official Information Act and compliance with it,
and whether we need a tougher regime. That's not a
(01:20):
national party or a labor party issue. It's a non
political important issue.
Speaker 2 (01:25):
Are we or any government at greater risk of corruption?
Is the risk getting greater?
Speaker 3 (01:33):
What I would prefer to say is that we pride
ourselves on our adherence to the rule of law and
having a transparent and honest political system. We can never
rest on our laurels, and from time to time we
need to look at some of these issues because they
are very much issues overseas. So we just need to
(01:56):
keep keep in mind that our system is very precious
and that we have to take steps on a regular
basis to review how things are going.
Speaker 2 (02:06):
Bit naive to the possibility of political corruption.
Speaker 3 (02:10):
Yeah, I think New Zealand's naived many things, but certainly
corruption is as I described in the Forward and insidious cancer.
It can creep up on you. People would say, well,
we're not Venezuela, we're not Lumbia places like that. Well
maybe not, but nonetheless the potential for abuse exists and
(02:31):
we must always be alert to it.
Speaker 2 (02:33):
Is it because our political integrity has evolved from social
norms rather than good systems? Is that how you see it?
Speaker 3 (02:43):
Well, I think exactly a very good way of describing it,
we've inherited a system based on certain social norms. What
we need to do is, as I say, not rest
on our laurels, but make sure that our standards are
kept very very high. Respect for the rule of law,
(03:03):
respect for the fact that public service is exactly for
that service. It's not an opportunity to guard for one's
own personal benefit. So these things are important and they
need to be checked regularly.
Speaker 2 (03:17):
Do you think we have a commitment would do you
think we are committed to being politically transparent or do
we just pay lip service to transparency?
Speaker 3 (03:27):
Well that's a really good question. In relation to the
Official Information Act, I describe it in the forward as
a venerable piece of legislation that everyone pays homage to.
But it's very much a system where if people get
an OAA, they try and work out how to avoid
(03:48):
answering it, So the spirit of the legislation is not
always observed. So I do think in many respects we
pay lip service to the principle of access to official information.
Speaker 2 (04:01):
Because at the moment there is a lack of penalties
if you don't comply with an OA.
Speaker 1 (04:05):
Is that right, Yen?
Speaker 3 (04:07):
And I was very interested in the report to see
that the author is suggesting that we look to other
more modern pieces of official information legislation, which do you
have penalties And there's nothing like penalizing a government department,
finding them to bring them to heal.
Speaker 2 (04:28):
There should be penalties, shouldn't there.
Speaker 3 (04:31):
Yeah, I would have thought it was a natural development
given the way in which sometimes the OIA is administered.
And again I emphasize that's a non party political issue.
It's a function of government that governments don't like certain
information released and often it runs contort the spirit and
(04:53):
philosophy of the official information at Chris.
Speaker 2 (04:56):
Another one of another area that's been identified as vulnerable
and one that I think is probably sort of stuck
out over recent years is lobbying. Do you have an
issue with cabinet ministers leaving Parliament and heading straight into
lobbyist roles.
Speaker 3 (05:13):
I think, well, lobbying has always been there in New Zealand.
I mean I can recall when I was a kid,
I used to have access to I had a special
pass to sit down the back of the house when
they had guests on the lower level and you could
see the occasion of all I remember DearS Delgetti a
lawyer in bell Gully having a quiet chat to someone.
So lobbying goes on all the time. But the point
(05:37):
you raise is it's a highly lucrative business and should
it be appropriate to someone to leave Parliament and immediately
become a lobbyist. I have problems with that, and I
think that perhaps there should be a stand up period,
and that the idea that you finish up in Parliament
on fridayance start lobbying on Monday is unacceptable. I think
(05:59):
most people would.
Speaker 2 (06:00):
Acknowledge that, so that would be the simple solution. They're
the easiest way to regulate.
Speaker 3 (06:03):
It, probably a stand up period there. There are precedents
of the United States where if a person retires from
the Senate or from a cabinet secretary's position, they have
a certain period within which they cannot do this sort
of thing before joining their Washington law firm and commencing
of what is obviously a lucrative life of lobbying.
Speaker 2 (06:27):
Chris, something else which has been you know, taking place
for a very long time of political donations. Are we
at risk of undue influence here?
Speaker 3 (06:36):
I think we've always got to be careful about it.
And there was a huge debate in my first Parliament
about the Electoral Finance Act, and Simon Parr, who was
Minister of Justice between two thousand and eight and twenty eleven,
did a great job and tigeing up that legislation. I
just think that we need to be very careful to
(06:57):
make sure that our political parties or individuals don't become
the whole to people. That of course, donations are to
be gratefully received by political parties, but they cannot and
must not influence a particular policy outcome.
Speaker 2 (07:15):
Chris, what would you like to see off the back
of this report? Do we need stronger laws and regulations
to protect us from political corruption?
Speaker 3 (07:23):
What I'd like to see is the two big parties
having a good look at it, recognizing that it's not
party political, and seeing if there are ways in which
they can agree, for example, on improving the Official Information Act.
I don't think it's beyond the width of the two
big parties to reach some kind of consensus on some
(07:46):
of these issues.
Speaker 1 (07:48):
For more from the Sunday Session with Francesca Rudkin, listen
live to News Talks it Be from nine am Sunday,
or follow the podcast on iHeartRadio.
You're listening to the Sunday Session podcast with Francesca Rudkin
from News Talks edb as.
Speaker 2 (00:13):
New Zealand at risk of political corruption. That's the question
being asked in a new report by the Helen Clark Foundation.
The report, authored by Philippa Yasbek, looks into the transparency
of our government systems and it's identified five areas most
vulnerable to corrupt practices. Those are political lobbying, donations, OIA access,
(00:35):
foreign bribery, and beneficial ownership of corporate entities. So do
we need tougher rules to protect New Zealand against political corruption?
Former Attorney General and National Cabinet Minister Chris Van Lason
has read the report, He wrote the ford for it,
and he joins me, now, good morning Chris, Good morning
to you.
Speaker 3 (00:53):
Hey.
Speaker 2 (00:53):
How important is the discussion this report has raised.
Speaker 3 (00:58):
I think it's a very very usful discussion. As I
said in my introduction, it's non party political, so the
fact that was published by the Helling Clark Foundation doesn't
mean it's necessarily left wing, but it does raise important issues,
for example, the Official Information Act and compliance with it,
and whether we need a tougher regime. That's not a
(01:20):
national party or a labor party issue. It's a non
political important issue.
Speaker 2 (01:25):
Are we or any government at greater risk of corruption?
Is the risk getting greater?
Speaker 3 (01:33):
What I would prefer to say is that we pride
ourselves on our adherence to the rule of law and
having a transparent and honest political system. We can never
rest on our laurels, and from time to time we
need to look at some of these issues because they
are very much issues overseas. So we just need to
(01:56):
keep keep in mind that our system is very precious
and that we have to take steps on a regular
basis to review how things are going.
Speaker 2 (02:06):
Bit naive to the possibility of political corruption.
Speaker 3 (02:10):
Yeah, I think New Zealand's naived many things, but certainly
corruption is as I described in the Forward and insidious cancer.
It can creep up on you. People would say, well,
we're not Venezuela, we're not Lumbia places like that. Well
maybe not, but nonetheless the potential for abuse exists and
(02:31):
we must always be alert to it.
Speaker 2 (02:33):
Is it because our political integrity has evolved from social
norms rather than good systems? Is that how you see it?
Speaker 3 (02:43):
Well, I think exactly a very good way of describing it,
we've inherited a system based on certain social norms. What
we need to do is, as I say, not rest
on our laurels, but make sure that our standards are
kept very very high. Respect for the rule of law,
(03:03):
respect for the fact that public service is exactly for
that service. It's not an opportunity to guard for one's
own personal benefit. So these things are important and they
need to be checked regularly.
Speaker 2 (03:17):
Do you think we have a commitment would do you
think we are committed to being politically transparent or do
we just pay lip service to transparency?
Speaker 3 (03:27):
Well that's a really good question. In relation to the
Official Information Act, I describe it in the forward as
a venerable piece of legislation that everyone pays homage to.
But it's very much a system where if people get
an OAA, they try and work out how to avoid
(03:48):
answering it, So the spirit of the legislation is not
always observed. So I do think in many respects we
pay lip service to the principle of access to official information.
Speaker 2 (04:01):
Because at the moment there is a lack of penalties
if you don't comply with an OA.
Speaker 1 (04:05):
Is that right, Yen?
Speaker 3 (04:07):
And I was very interested in the report to see
that the author is suggesting that we look to other
more modern pieces of official information legislation, which do you
have penalties And there's nothing like penalizing a government department,
finding them to bring them to heal.
Speaker 2 (04:28):
There should be penalties, shouldn't there.
Speaker 3 (04:31):
Yeah, I would have thought it was a natural development
given the way in which sometimes the OIA is administered.
And again I emphasize that's a non party political issue.
It's a function of government that governments don't like certain
information released and often it runs contort the spirit and
(04:53):
philosophy of the official information at Chris.
Speaker 2 (04:56):
Another one of another area that's been identified as vulnerable
and one that I think is probably sort of stuck
out over recent years is lobbying. Do you have an
issue with cabinet ministers leaving Parliament and heading straight into
lobbyist roles.
Speaker 3 (05:13):
I think, well, lobbying has always been there in New Zealand.
I mean I can recall when I was a kid,
I used to have access to I had a special
pass to sit down the back of the house when
they had guests on the lower level and you could
see the occasion of all I remember DearS Delgetti a
lawyer in bell Gully having a quiet chat to someone.
So lobbying goes on all the time. But the point
(05:37):
you raise is it's a highly lucrative business and should
it be appropriate to someone to leave Parliament and immediately
become a lobbyist. I have problems with that, and I
think that perhaps there should be a stand up period,
and that the idea that you finish up in Parliament
on fridayance start lobbying on Monday is unacceptable. I think
(05:59):
most people would.
Speaker 2 (06:00):
Acknowledge that, so that would be the simple solution. They're
the easiest way to regulate.
Speaker 3 (06:03):
It, probably a stand up period there. There are precedents
of the United States where if a person retires from
the Senate or from a cabinet secretary's position, they have
a certain period within which they cannot do this sort
of thing before joining their Washington law firm and commencing
of what is obviously a lucrative life of lobbying.
Speaker 2 (06:27):
Chris, something else which has been you know, taking place
for a very long time of political donations. Are we
at risk of undue influence here?
Speaker 3 (06:36):
I think we've always got to be careful about it.
And there was a huge debate in my first Parliament
about the Electoral Finance Act, and Simon Parr, who was
Minister of Justice between two thousand and eight and twenty eleven,
did a great job and tigeing up that legislation. I
just think that we need to be very careful to
(06:57):
make sure that our political parties or individuals don't become
the whole to people. That of course, donations are to
be gratefully received by political parties, but they cannot and
must not influence a particular policy outcome.
Speaker 2 (07:15):
Chris, what would you like to see off the back
of this report? Do we need stronger laws and regulations
to protect us from political corruption?
Speaker 3 (07:23):
What I'd like to see is the two big parties
having a good look at it, recognizing that it's not
party political, and seeing if there are ways in which
they can agree, for example, on improving the Official Information Act.
I don't think it's beyond the width of the two
big parties to reach some kind of consensus on some
(07:46):
of these issues.
Speaker 1 (07:48):
For more from the Sunday Session with Francesca Rudkin, listen
live to News Talks it Be from nine am Sunday,
or follow the podcast on iHeartRadio.
Popular Podcasts
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.