1 00:00:00,200 --> 00:00:02,440 Speaker 1: Now do you remember the crackdown on lobbying that Chris 2 00:00:02,440 --> 00:00:05,280 Speaker 1: Hopkins promised in April last year when he was Prime Minister. Well, 3 00:00:05,280 --> 00:00:07,680 Speaker 1: it looks like that's going nowhere fast. The Ministry of 4 00:00:07,880 --> 00:00:10,360 Speaker 1: Justice drew up a code of conduct for lobbyists and 5 00:00:10,400 --> 00:00:13,080 Speaker 1: then went ahead and asked lobbyists to help design it. 6 00:00:13,080 --> 00:00:15,840 Speaker 1: Even further. Significant changes were made and now apparently it's 7 00:00:15,840 --> 00:00:19,040 Speaker 1: not worth the paper it's written on. Transparency International CEO 8 00:00:19,120 --> 00:00:20,000 Speaker 1: Julie Haggy is with. 9 00:00:20,040 --> 00:00:22,680 Speaker 2: Us a Julie Kyoda, good to lead you. 10 00:00:22,880 --> 00:00:24,360 Speaker 1: It's very good to talk to you. Some of those 11 00:00:24,440 --> 00:00:25,760 Speaker 1: changes were material, weren't they. 12 00:00:27,040 --> 00:00:29,760 Speaker 2: Oh, the changes from the original draft that the Ministry 13 00:00:29,840 --> 00:00:32,600 Speaker 2: drew up, which was based on best practice, to the 14 00:00:32,640 --> 00:00:36,479 Speaker 2: one that resulted that eventuated after they'd talked with the 15 00:00:36,479 --> 00:00:40,479 Speaker 2: Ministry with the lobbyists was like chalk and cheese. So 16 00:00:40,560 --> 00:00:43,160 Speaker 2: it was just every single element, just about every single 17 00:00:43,200 --> 00:00:46,160 Speaker 2: element of actual conduct, that is what you would actually 18 00:00:46,240 --> 00:00:49,919 Speaker 2: do to prove that you really had ethical standards, was removed. 19 00:00:50,120 --> 00:00:52,519 Speaker 2: So it's not really a code of conduct. It was 20 00:00:52,840 --> 00:00:55,320 Speaker 2: a code of intending to be nice. 21 00:00:55,760 --> 00:00:57,440 Speaker 1: It seems to me one of the things that they 22 00:00:57,440 --> 00:01:01,680 Speaker 1: did was they redefined lobbyists as anyone trying to influence 23 00:01:01,720 --> 00:01:04,200 Speaker 1: the government. But that would be like any citizen that 24 00:01:04,360 --> 00:01:06,679 Speaker 1: goes up to any member of the government would suddenly 25 00:01:06,680 --> 00:01:08,000 Speaker 1: be a lobbyist, wouldn't. 26 00:01:07,640 --> 00:01:12,720 Speaker 2: They anybody who turned up at Parliament with flag and protested, 27 00:01:13,440 --> 00:01:16,959 Speaker 2: anybody who met anybody, anybody wrote a letter, anybody possibly 28 00:01:17,000 --> 00:01:21,600 Speaker 2: who attended Parliament and clapped. You know, honestly, there's good 29 00:01:21,680 --> 00:01:26,160 Speaker 2: models for what has defined as lobbyist overseas, and we 30 00:01:26,319 --> 00:01:29,440 Speaker 2: usually follow overseas good practice, and in this case we 31 00:01:29,560 --> 00:01:33,839 Speaker 2: just seem to be meandering around where there's clear Sure, 32 00:01:34,200 --> 00:01:36,600 Speaker 2: sure there's arguments about where the edges of that are, 33 00:01:36,640 --> 00:01:39,280 Speaker 2: but it's you know, a third party lobbyists. It's people 34 00:01:39,280 --> 00:01:42,280 Speaker 2: who are lobbying on behalf of another organization or the 35 00:01:42,400 --> 00:01:45,600 Speaker 2: lobbying largely for their own organization, like a like a 36 00:01:45,720 --> 00:01:49,680 Speaker 2: union or a powerful professional group. We know, we know 37 00:01:49,920 --> 00:01:53,680 Speaker 2: generally who they are. So it's it's that that trying 38 00:01:53,720 --> 00:01:57,040 Speaker 2: to broaden it out so becomes a morphous is just ridiculous. 39 00:01:57,200 --> 00:01:59,280 Speaker 1: What do you make of EWE who said that they 40 00:01:59,280 --> 00:02:01,960 Speaker 1: didn't want their law beists to be considered lobbyists because 41 00:02:01,960 --> 00:02:03,640 Speaker 1: they are different than treaty partners. 42 00:02:04,160 --> 00:02:07,040 Speaker 2: Well, yeah, that's another good it's another good argument. I 43 00:02:07,040 --> 00:02:09,880 Speaker 2: hadn't actually taken that into the it's just. 44 00:02:09,880 --> 00:02:11,760 Speaker 1: Trying to get out of being defined as a lobbyist. 45 00:02:12,240 --> 00:02:14,600 Speaker 2: I think, you know, it's about transparency no matter what. 46 00:02:15,320 --> 00:02:18,160 Speaker 2: There will be sometimes we will lobby on an issue 47 00:02:18,360 --> 00:02:21,040 Speaker 2: and sometimes they'll have conversations, so maybe they are also 48 00:02:21,160 --> 00:02:23,840 Speaker 2: non you know, maybe there's there's other international models that 49 00:02:23,919 --> 00:02:26,480 Speaker 2: show you there's a difference between those elements as well. 50 00:02:26,919 --> 00:02:29,520 Speaker 2: So you know, but when you're going up and you're 51 00:02:29,560 --> 00:02:31,960 Speaker 2: saying we think this, you're making a decision on this, 52 00:02:32,120 --> 00:02:34,040 Speaker 2: you're putting out a position on this. We think this 53 00:02:34,080 --> 00:02:36,239 Speaker 2: should be the way that you should do it, then 54 00:02:36,400 --> 00:02:39,360 Speaker 2: that's and here is our proposal that is how you 55 00:02:39,360 --> 00:02:41,000 Speaker 2: should do it. Then that's lobbying. 56 00:02:41,040 --> 00:02:43,440 Speaker 1: Really yeah, I mean the other problem with it was 57 00:02:43,440 --> 00:02:45,000 Speaker 1: there was going to be voluntary. It really needs to 58 00:02:45,040 --> 00:02:46,040 Speaker 1: be mandatory, doesn't it. 59 00:02:47,080 --> 00:02:49,160 Speaker 2: Well, there has to be some mandatory elements if you 60 00:02:49,280 --> 00:02:53,320 Speaker 2: otherwise it's pointless. It would have been great though, we 61 00:02:53,400 --> 00:02:57,760 Speaker 2: could have had self regulation and at if the lobbying 62 00:02:57,800 --> 00:03:02,560 Speaker 2: sector had actually said yes, we face risk, Yes, the 63 00:03:02,600 --> 00:03:05,080 Speaker 2: work that we do involves risk of conflict and interest 64 00:03:05,240 --> 00:03:09,519 Speaker 2: of undue influence, you know, and so and that's why 65 00:03:09,560 --> 00:03:12,400 Speaker 2: you would need to have ethical standards. But we didn't 66 00:03:12,440 --> 00:03:14,720 Speaker 2: see any of that. They didn't talk about that, So 67 00:03:15,560 --> 00:03:17,360 Speaker 2: that would have been if they'd been able to say 68 00:03:17,400 --> 00:03:18,880 Speaker 2: we need to have that and we are going to 69 00:03:18,880 --> 00:03:21,120 Speaker 2: make sure that happened, then you could have possibly stepped 70 00:03:21,120 --> 00:03:24,080 Speaker 2: down and have a go, you know. But now now 71 00:03:24,120 --> 00:03:26,639 Speaker 2: it just says, well, no, you really do need regulation. 72 00:03:26,760 --> 00:03:30,040 Speaker 2: And that was the second part of this proposal back 73 00:03:30,040 --> 00:03:33,919 Speaker 2: in last year, to have regulation, and that we haven't 74 00:03:34,120 --> 00:03:37,120 Speaker 2: seen anything mentioned about that recently, so that's the really 75 00:03:37,160 --> 00:03:38,120 Speaker 2: important part of it. 76 00:03:38,400 --> 00:03:41,200 Speaker 1: Mark Unsworth, who's been in the industry for something like 77 00:03:41,240 --> 00:03:43,520 Speaker 1: thirty years, reckons this is probably going to go the 78 00:03:43,520 --> 00:03:46,000 Speaker 1: way of every other attempt to regulate lobbyists and just 79 00:03:46,080 --> 00:03:48,080 Speaker 1: eventually just die a death. What do you think. 80 00:03:50,280 --> 00:03:52,520 Speaker 2: I think that we're going to get a pushback from 81 00:03:52,560 --> 00:03:55,920 Speaker 2: overseas and also a pushback from people in. 82 00:03:55,880 --> 00:03:58,640 Speaker 1: New Zealand who overseas cares about this. 83 00:03:59,280 --> 00:04:02,360 Speaker 2: Well, there are things, it's like, there are international mechanisms 84 00:04:02,400 --> 00:04:05,200 Speaker 2: like the United Nations Convention against Corruption which have a 85 00:04:05,200 --> 00:04:07,120 Speaker 2: look at we in New Zealand sits in terms of 86 00:04:07,160 --> 00:04:11,119 Speaker 2: its control of potential corruption across various areas and political 87 00:04:11,120 --> 00:04:14,520 Speaker 2: corruptions there, and that's we see the number of those 88 00:04:14,560 --> 00:04:17,159 Speaker 2: that apply. So we might get a bit of push 89 00:04:17,240 --> 00:04:18,760 Speaker 2: back there. And I think we'll get pushed back from 90 00:04:18,760 --> 00:04:21,240 Speaker 2: New Zealand the twenty twenty value. So they said that 91 00:04:21,680 --> 00:04:23,880 Speaker 2: a lot of New Zealanders feel that New Zealanders that 92 00:04:23,960 --> 00:04:28,440 Speaker 2: the government is being affected by strong groups, strong industry groups. 93 00:04:28,560 --> 00:04:32,280 Speaker 2: And so there is that element as well that people say, look, 94 00:04:32,360 --> 00:04:33,720 Speaker 2: I want to see more, I want to know who 95 00:04:33,720 --> 00:04:35,320 Speaker 2: they are. I want to see them having to be 96 00:04:35,400 --> 00:04:38,440 Speaker 2: called to account. And that's so I think there will 97 00:04:38,440 --> 00:04:40,520 Speaker 2: be a push against that. I don't think he's quite 98 00:04:42,279 --> 00:04:45,080 Speaker 2: of that approach. Also, I'm not sure if I've heard 99 00:04:45,160 --> 00:04:49,120 Speaker 2: him call for greater ethical standards either. 100 00:04:49,760 --> 00:04:52,800 Speaker 1: Yeah, Julie, thank you. Well, I don't ask me. I 101 00:04:52,800 --> 00:04:55,080 Speaker 1: don't know, but you're no more than me. Listen. I 102 00:04:55,120 --> 00:04:59,440 Speaker 1: really appreciate your time. Julie Haggey, Transparency International New Zealand CEO. 103 00:05:00,320 --> 00:05:03,520 Speaker 2: For more from Hither Duplessy Allen Drive, listen live to 104 00:05:03,600 --> 00:05:06,280 Speaker 2: news Talks at b from four p m. Weekdays, or 105 00:05:06,360 --> 00:05:08,440 Speaker 2: follow the podcast on iHeartRadio.