COALITION SENATORS' REPORT
BACKGROUND AND PAST INQUIRIES
This issue has been considered by the Senate previously in
recent times, notably in June last year in the inquiry by this committee into
the Preventing the Misuse of Government Advertising Bill 2010.
It was also the subject of an inquiry by the Finance and Public
Administration References Committee in 2005.
Coalition Senators have previously opposed proposals to
place the Auditor-General at the centre of decisions regarding Government
advertising. Amongst other issues, the main reasons for this view are twofold:
1. Placing
the Auditor-General in a position to approve or otherwise advertising campaigns
would potentially put the Auditor-General in a conflicted position – having to
both approve decisions, then to be responsible for their examination and audit.
2. Placing
the Auditor-General in this position would not necessarily guarantee the
outcomes desired by the supporters of this proposal.
Both of these positions are expounded further in other
reports of this Committee and of the Joint Committee on Public Accounts and
Audit earlier this year.
The Government accepted this position after it commissioned
the Independent Review of Government Advertising Guidelines (the Hawke
Review) in early 2010.
However, as the passage of time was to illustrate, the
guidelines subsequently adopted by the Government were to prove nothing more
than a charade to facilitate the further expenditure of public funds on
advertising to support Labor's political agenda.
LABOR'S 2010 BACKFLIP
Public concern regarding the role of Government advertising
has reached new heights since the Labor Government so spectacularly
back-flipped and circumvented their own guidelines in 2010. This is
demonstrated by a simple timeline of events in 2010.
In the months prior to the release of the Henry Review in
May 2010, the Labor Government commissioned a research company to undertake
work to determine the level of community understanding of tax reform.
On 21 April 2010 the so-called Independent Communications
Committee established as a result of the Hawke Review was provided with a
communications strategy for a proposed campaign. The ICC approved the strategy
and a number of advertising agencies were briefed.
Following the release of the Henry Review, the Treasurer
almost immediately sought an exemption from the guidelines established following
the Hawke Review, on 10 May 2010.
That same day agencies were scheduled to present their
creative proposals to officials at The Treasury. The following day, in the
Budget, the Treasurer announced that a so-called 'communications campaign'
would proceed, with an appropriation of $38.5 million.
On 14 May 2010, the Department of Finance provided a brief
to the Cabinet Secretary which included a draft letter to the Treasurer and a
draft Statement to Parliament. This was not released for ten days.
On 24 May 2010, the Cabinet Secretary approved the
Treasurer's request for an exemption from the advertising guidelines, citing
'extreme urgency' and 'compelling reasons.'
Despite this, the notification to Parliament was delayed by
a further four days – finally being tabled on 28 May.
Of particular note is the fact that this was the day after
Senate Estimates hearings into government advertising had concluded.
This timeline of events with respect to the Labor
Government's failed mining tax advertising campaign illustrates just how hollow
Labor rhetoric has been on this subject.
Labor's subsequent behaviour with respect to advertising its
carbon tax legislation demonstrates that hypocrisy continues.
LABOR'S CARBON TAX HYPOCRISY
Public concern about government advertising has escalated
further in response to Labor's misleading campaign regarding the carbon tax.
The $25 million dollars dedicated to the carbon tax
advertising campaign has provoked outcry about both the notion that the
Government should use public funds to advocate a hotly contentious political
topic, even more so given the Government's dishonesty regarding the carbon tax
prior to the 2010 election.
Furthermore, questions have arisen about the honesty of the
Labor Government's advertising campaign – in particular the notion that the
carbon tax would reduce Australia's emissions when the truth is taxpayers'
funds will be used to purchase abatement from overseas.
Labor's hypocrisy regarding using public funds for political
government advertising can be illustrated with their own words.
In the 2005 inquiry by the Finance & Public
Administration References Committee Government Advertising and Accountability,
Labor Senators stated:
First, the Committee considers that no expenditure of
public money for mass media advertising should be undertaken until the
government has obtained passage of the legislation giving it authority to
implement the relevant policy, program or service.[1]
They went on to say that:
'material should not be directed at promoting party
political interests'.[2]
In their conclusion to Chapter 6 of the 2005 report, Labor
Senators also stated that
No expenditure of public money should be undertaken on
mass media advertising, telephone canvassing or information services, online
services, direct mail or other distribution of unsolicited material until the
government has obtained passage of legislation giving it authority to implement
the policy, program or service described in the public information or education
campaign.[3]
And:
The only exclusions to these requirements are where major
issues of public health, public safety or public order may arise at short
notice.[4]
It is immediately apparent that the current carbon tax
advertising campaign does not meet any of these hurdles.
Labor has no credibility on this issue. Labor's record
speaks for itself.
CONCLUSION
Coalition Senators do not agree with the conclusion of Labor
Senators that the current guidelines for government advertising adequately
address the concerns raised by submitters given the behaviour by the Labor
Government in this regard. This is demonstrated by the current scandal of the
carbon tax advertising campaign.
However, the bill as proposed does not provide for adequate
flexibility for legitimate public information campaigns.
Accordingly, Coalition Senators agree with the
recommendation that this bill not be passed.
Senator Scott
Ryan Senator
Sean Edwards
Senator for Victoria Senator
for South Australia
Navigation: Previous Page | Contents | Next Page