The worries of corruption around Parliament

Michael Morris, Chairman Transparency International New Zealand. (TINZ)

New Zealand is perceived to be one of the least corrupt countries in the world but the actions of some of our politicians put at risk the things that have earned us that reputation.

Corruption is a word New Zealanders are used to hearing describe other countries and their politicians, seldom is it applied here. The increasingly frequent use of the word in and around Parliament over recent weeks jars with our perception of ourselves. The release of the Ingram report into the actions of Mangere MP Taito Phillip Field, and debate on the Auditor General’s reported draft findings that several political parties illegally spent public money during the last election campaign, have revealed contrasting issues surrounding our integrity.

The critical responses arising from Mr Field’s actions provide a degree of reassurance. The issues surrounding the use of public money during the last election campaign are quite different and a cause for real concern, not reassurance.

Before addressing the case of Mr Field it is necessary for some brief background on Transparency International New Zealand. TI NZ is the New Zealand chapter of an international TI network which exists to combat corruption - 90 countries now have chapters. They are all locally established, run by their own boards of directors, set their own agendas, but all agree to common values in the fight against corruption. TI NZ, like the other 89 chapters, exists to address the causes of corruption and identify threats to integrity. It is not our intention to get bogged down in exposing or investigating specific cases - the news media and our law enforcement agencies serve New Zealand very well in that respect. Against that background we see no point in trying to reach any judgement on the detail of Mr Field’s case because a reassuring consensus seems to be emerging over what is and is not acceptable practice for politicians.

Openness is a fundamental prerequisite to good governance. The idea that politicians should receive payments (especially those hidden from public view), from other individuals, businesses or interest groups, is we think clearly unacceptable. Money should not buy influence with people who are elected and employed by the public to make decisions in the public good. Politicians should debate the reasons for the laws they want enacted, then abide by the law - not manipulate the law in the interests of someone who pays them to obtain an advantage they are not entitled to.

We have no more knowledge of what Mr Field did than anyone else who has been following the news media. What is reassuring in the debate generated by Mr Field’s case is that the danger of buying influence with lawmakers seems understood and subscribed to by most if not all of those in Parliament and the bulk of the community. However, the past unanimity of views condemning payments to MPs may have passed us by . Further debate and clarification seems warranted and soon to which TINZ already has work to contribute.

Clarity and consensus is much more worryingly absent from the Parliamentary debate over political party spending of public money during the last election. The Auditor General, Kevin Brady, backed by a legal opinion from former Solicitor General Terence Arnold, is reported to have found that several political parties appear to have illegally spent public money in the lead up to last year’s election. The money was intended to help parties represented in Parliament to fulfill their role as lawmakers, identifying and responding to matters that were, or were likely to become, public concerns. It was not intended to be used to help parties get elected at the election, and Mr Brady warned MPs of these issues in June of last year - well before the election. Unless Mr Brady dramatically revises his draft there seems little question that the money was spent, and that it was spent on electioneering.

It is a fundamental tenet of New Zealand’s legal system that ignorance of the law is no defence, nor is the possible guilt of others a defence, so it is disturbing to see the absence of any consensus, (among our politicians at least) over the illegal spending of public money for partisan political gain. When it comes to attracting attention to and support for a general election those already represented in Parliament have enough of an advantage over any other citizen seeking to enter Parliament. To compound that by using money intended for legitimate Parliamentary purposes to help get votes, and to then avoid the issue of culpability brings the law, the people who make the law, and the system that generates the law, into public contempt. Vituperative finger pointing, seeking legitimacy in past practice or the recent practice of others, or hurried repayment of money already illegally spent - none of these are legitimate defences to breaches of the law, and nor should they be.

As has already been noted, New Zealand is rightly considered one of the least corrupt countries in the world. The most widely used measure of corruption, the Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI) produced by Transparency International’s Secretariat in Berlin, consistently ranks New Zealand in the very highest echelons of integrity. New Zealand is currently 2nd equal with Finland behind only Iceland, and we have always been in this area of the rankings despite such embarrassments as the imprisonment of former Auditor Jeff Chapman in the 1990s and the more recent imprisonment of former MP Donna Awatere Huata.

The next CPI rankings will be released next month with New Zealand likely to be ranked near the top again. That ranking is based not on the quality of our laws but the openness of New Zealanders, their respect for the law, their willingness to abide by it and their indignation at the dishonesty of others. The absence of those priceless values brings misery to many parts of the world. The illegal spending of public money will tend to erode these values here and the conduct of the very people who make the laws will pose a threat to the respect which allows our laws to work.

++++++++++++

Shane Cave
Executive Officer
Transparency International New Zealand
Level 4 James Smith Bldg
49 - 55 Cuba St
Wellington
New Zealand

tinz@paradise.net.nz