| |
Email sent 16/2/09
Terry Sweetman
Sunday Mail
Crony Capitalism in Queensland?
I noted your
article ('A question of what is on the agenda', Sunday Mail,
15/2/09) which expressed concern about whether government decisions could be
seen to be inappropriately influenced by political insiders. Your
article suggested that there may be a perception that former ministers were
able to cash in on their experience, contacts and mates after they leave
office - because of the $500,000 success fee reportedly paid in relation to
the Airport Link project.
Might I submit
for your consideration that the concern that your article expressed may be
only the tip of an iceberg because:
- the Queensland's Government's decision in relation to
the Airport Link project was extremely dubious (see
Airport Link: An Example of the Monster)
because it was made:
- in an environment in which conflicts of
interest had been suggested between the promoters of such projects (who
received large immediate fees) and investors (including the QIC on behalf of
state public servants whose returns depended on the project's long term
viability - and who appear, in this case, to have 'done their shirts'); and
- at the same time (ie May 2008) that
information apparently became available that the project probably could not
be commercially viable - because the aggressive financial engineering on
which it was based was critically dependent on long term growth in traffic
volumes, but emerging data showed a reverse trend in Brisbane -
presumably due to the impact of rapid rise in oil / petrol prices, a
commercially unfavourable trend likely to resume when the global recession
eases because of the prospective global peak oil event;
- politicians might also make decisions while in office
that favour their 'mates' and receive benefits subsequently (eg in the form of
well-paid jobs). Changes made to government in recent years have increased the
risk that political decisions might be distorted for personal gain (eg
widespread politicisation of the public service
- ie its dominance by cronies and 'yes men', and
significant private
investment in infrastructure);
-
the process whereby land development in SE
Queensland came to be restricted may be the most extreme example of where
potential moral hazards were naively created for those involved in making key
decisions (see
Reform of Queensland Institutions or a Rising Tide
of Public Hypocrisy?).
John Craig
|