Australia: How industrial lobbies disrupt democratic functioning

The lobbying and influence practices of three industries – coal, gambling and tobacco – have been analysed in a report by the Australian Human Rights Law Centre, which points to political donations and smear campaigns as real democratic problems.

Australia is characterised by weak legal frameworks protecting policy makers from corruption. The lack of funding caps for political parties and the many bridges between politics and industry are among the main weaknesses of the institutions.

To illustrate this situation, a report from the Human Rights Law Center (HRLC) puts into perspective the practices of three industries that are particularly active in influencing policy makers, revealing methods that are sometimes similar: direct donations to different political parties to put pressure on policy makers, bridges for policy makers who come from these industries or then move towards them.[1]. When these levers are not enough, pressure or smear campaigns can be deployed in opposition to draft laws, most often conducted under the cover of front groups. The methods used by the tobacco industry are similar to, and sometimes inspired by, those used by the coal and gambling industries.

Donations to parties, between financing and corruption

In Australia, political party funding is open without discrimination and without a ceiling. Companies or other donors can thus pay the sums of their choice, and do not hesitate to remind political decision-makers of this when the time comes, which can already be seen as a form of corruption. From the tobacco industry, two majors, Philip Morris International (PMI) and British American Tobacco (BAT), are particularly active in this area. Donations can be paid directly by these companies, but also by front groups such as the Australian Retailers Association (ARA). The simultaneous funding of several political parties also allows the tobacco industry to overcome political alternations. To the point that some parties, such as the Labor Party or the Liberal Party announced, one in 2004, the other in 2014, that they no longer wished to accept funding from the tobacco industry, even if this has sometimes been extended through coalitions.

Among the political parties, some, like the National Party, are preferred by the tobacco industry, in that they hold a libertarian discourse that advocates the absence of regulation and freedom to undertake. Associated with the Liberal Party through several episodes of coalitions, the National Party and its elected representatives were thus able to participate, from 2019, in a lobbying campaign in favor of vaping and heated tobacco products. This campaign came at a time when the government was considering banning the over-the-counter sale of these products as well as their personal importation, and planned to make their sale conditional on a medical prescription. The campaign was funded by the ARA, which had received significant funding for the purpose, and founded a new organisation, the Australian Vaping Industry Retailers Association, which joined forces with the ‘Legalise Vaping in Australia’ group, an offshoot of the Australian Taxpayers Alliance, a libertarian group funded by BAT and the vaping industry. At the request of these groups, National Party senators set up a Senate inquiry to question the relevance of the personal importation ban and were able to get it removed from the bill, although they were unable to prevent other provisions such as retail sales and the need for a doctor’s prescription for these devices as part of smoking cessation support. The campaign was not entirely successful here, but did obtain a significant exemption.

Other instances of close proximity to the tobacco industry can be observed, notably when members of ministerial cabinets, whether Labor or Liberal, are subsequently hired by tobacco manufacturers. The report mentions several cases of these transfers to the industry, one of the protagonists of which, for example, Chris Argent, distinguished himself by leading a smear campaign on the issue of plain packaging and by setting up a specific front group, the Alliance of Australian Retailers (AAR).[2].

Highly orchestrated smear campaigns

Smear campaigns are the preferred terrain of front groups. Directly financed by the tobacco industry, these groups mainly serve to appear on the front line to simulate a popular movement and conceal the industry whose interests they serve. This method is described by the World Health Organization (WHO) as "astro-turfing". In its first year of operation, in 2010, the AAR received no less than 9.2 million Australian dollars from three tobacco majors, BAT, PMI and Japan Tobacco International (JTI); Imperial Tobacco also participated in financing the advertising campaigns.

That year was the year that the Labour government announced its intention to introduce, for the first time in the world, plain packaging for tobacco products. Determined to ensure that this reform would never be adopted, the tobacco industry, through the AAR, staged a major smear campaign aimed at the general public, with newspaper inserts and TV spots at peak viewing times. The campaign featured retailers explaining why plain packaging made no sense and how it would jeopardise their business. However, it was not as successful as expected and the plain packaging reform was adopted anyway.

More recently, PMI repeated the exercise by sponsoring press articles with scientific appearances to promote vaping as a solution to quitting smoking, while circumventing the ban on advertising for tobacco products.

HRLC's Anti-Corruption Proposals

These lobbying campaigns sometimes have direct consequences on political life itself. While the reform of plain packaging was ultimately successful, the coal industry, for its part, obtained, in 2010, the replacement of a federal prime minister who wanted to impose a new tax system, while the gaming industry managed to defeat, in the Tasmanian elections, a candidate carrying a project to ban poker machines in pubs and clubs.

These precedents have shown the strong permeability of the Australian political class to the economic interests of different industries. The anti-corruption reform carried out by the current Australian government seems inappropriate and insufficient to remedy this situation. The HRCL has put forward its own proposals for anti-corruption laws. It suggests in particular capping donations to political parties at 6,000 Australian dollars, capping election spending and banning bridges between government structures and industry. A debate that promises to be sensitive a few months before the federal elections, scheduled for May 2022.

Keywords: Australia, corruption, front groups, smear campaign, tobacco industry, PMI, BAT, JTI

©Generation Without Tobacco

MF