The Association of Air Conditioner Contractors of America has got in early with a special plea to the Obama transition team.
They argue that replacing inefficient air-conditioners and heaters would help the environment. To that end, they argue, the tax write-offs on new air-conditioners should be cut from 39 years to 10.
It was a typical industry-group plea for special treatment at taxpayers’ expense that lobbyists pitch to government behind closed doors. So how did I find out about it?
Well, the Obama team has launched “Your Seat at the Table” – one of the most ambitious attempts at government in the sunshine ever considered. Obama has said that any document presented to his transition team or government will go on an internet site – Change.gov — for all to see and comment upon.
By this week about 300 documents were on the site. Most of them are not from business groups. Perhaps in the face of this unwanted openness, the big end of town will rely on verbal representations or put their cases to Congress instead. Alternatively, they will follow the air-conditioner contractors and sugar-coat their pleadings in some publicly acceptable way.
Nonetheless it is a great start.
Meanwhile, in Australia, we can recall the words of former Attorney-General and Foreign Minister Gareth Evans who said that a new Government only had a year to put in place freedom of information and other transparency measures. After that it would have acquired its own bungles and foolish decisions which it would want to keep from the public eye.
Alas, the year is up for the Rudd Government. The promised Freedom of Information changes have now been split. The first is in a Bill to remove the “conclusive certificates” – much favoured by the Howard Government — which enable ministers to withhold virtually anything for unchallengeable reasons.
The rest we have not seen and will be postponed to next year.
Meanwhile, the Government behaves more and more like its predecessor as time goes on. For example, it has sat on the expert report on internet filtering commissioned by the Howard Government for 10 months because it does not like its conclusions.
Prime Minister Kevin Rudd like John Howard before him wants to play on ignorance and fear and pursue a populist political agenda instead of having the leadership and guts to admit that governments cannot stop internet porn and other nasties and explain why. Attempts to do so would virtually cripple the internet and the substantial benefits that come with it. Yes you can reduce the road toll to zero by imposing a five kilometre an hour limit, but you would destroy economic life in doing it.
All reports to Government should be made public after a reasonable time not tucked away when their publication does not suit politically. There are other examples of this government keeping things secret despite its promises of more openness.
True, the Government has set up a register of lobbyists. But it is only a list showing who lobbies and who their clients are. It is little better than the Yellow Pages. It is not who the lobbyists are but what they say that counts.
Imagine an Obama-style edict on publication of lobbyists’ documents in Australia. There is no reason why not. The Government should be worrying about what is NOT on the internet rather than worry about what IS on there.
Why, for example, isn’t the register of federal politicians’ interests not on the net? South Australia does it.
If you look at the two poorest decisions by governments in Canberra this year – greenhouse gases and the data centre – both would have been avoided if both Governments had an Obama-style sunshine rule.
The lobbyists frenzied over greenhouse gases. They argued that we would see the end of the world as we know it unless nothing was done to prevent the end of the world as we know it. The big emitters reaped $3.9 billion in ill-gotten gains because they threatened to leave Australia, shed jobs or close down unless they could continue to emit without penalty.
At least Ross Garnaut, the man who produced the comprehensive report on Australia’s response to climate change, had the courage to say about the cost to taxpayers: “Never in the history of Australian public finance has so much been given without public policy purpose, by so many, to so few.”
In the ACT, the secret arrangements made for the power station and data centre – cheap land, rezoning of land and no doubt other breaks – led to a poor decision.
Government in the sunshine not only results in better decisions in the interests of the wider public, but it also saves Governments from themselves.
In the ACT, the Greens might well look at the Obama example as a way of fulfilling their promise to hold Labor to more open and accountable government. It is a way of avoiding pandering to special interests rather than following the public interest.
There are other benefits to government in the sunshine, particularly using the internet. First, it shows the public how complicated and difficult government it. Voters would have more sympathy and respect for decision-makers if they saw how difficult it often is to weigh up competing interests, particularly when the arguments over different courses of action are put so persuasively.
Secondly, it can give voters easy direct access to the primary material without it passing through media interpretation. By and large media can condense, analyse and interpret a vast amount of material that the average voter has no time or inclination to go through. But where people have the time, interest and inclination, the internet coupled with a government commitment to openness provides a path to better understanding of public policy.
Indeed, the ACT could go one step further than Obama. His site has scanned documents. Why not insist that lobbyists also provide their documents in computer-readable test to allow for more efficient searching?