Is PNG really one of the most corrupt countries in the world?
06 September 2017
TUMBY BAY - Is PNG really one of the most corrupt countries in the world? Many people would think this a silly question, especially Papua New Guineans.
“Of course it is!” they would respond and point to the latest index of corrupt countries in the world compiled by the United Nations and other ratings agencies. “See, it’s the 29th most corrupt country.”
I’ve always been a bit wary of statistics. You really have to know the criteria on which they are based and the method by which they are collected.
I’d be inclined to think that statistics from any country as dysfunctional as Papua New Guinea are bound to be suspect. I’d prefer to trust what ordinary Papua New Guineans say.
These assessments also depend on how you define corruption. In many countries corruption has effectively been legalised.
If it is legal to engage in activities that are manifestly corrupt, can a country be technically called corrupt?
An interesting question.
Let’s look at a case in point, the United States.
For many years, conservative politicians in the USA have been stacking the Supreme Court with sympathetic judges.
Several years ago the Supreme Court handed down a decision that dramatically reshaped the business of politics in the USA.
In its Citizens v Federal Election Commission decision, the court opened the campaign spending floodgates by ruling that political spending was protected under the first amendment of the Constitution, meaning corporations could spend unlimited amounts of money on political activities without having to disclose them publicly.
Its ramifications reach well beyond the USA.
This decision was in part engineered by the big corporations and it means that democracy is effectively on life support in the USA.
A small group of wealthy donors have gained huge influence over elections and maintain that influence once candidates take office.
Of the billions spent i federal elections since the court decision in 2010, nearly 60% of the money has come from 195 super wealthy individuals.
They now effectively run the USA.
It is now common for lawyers representing corporate interests to sit in on legislative drafting sessions to ensure that the wording of new laws favour them and remove obstacles to the plans of the corporate businesses they represent.
Many states in the USA now routinely rubber stamp laws which have written in their entirety by corporate lawyers.
Is that corruption, or what?
And remember, the USA, by virtue of its massive expenditure on its military, is still the world’s sheriff.
We now have a president and government on the payroll of the world’s biggest corporations.
It kind of makes the amateur kleptomaniacs in Papua New Guinea’s patriarchal government look puny.
But of course in the USA it’s legal, so it’s not corruption after all, is it?
PS: According to the 2017 statistics New Zealand and Denmark are in a dead heat for the least corrupt country in the world. Australia doesn’t make the top ten.
Phil - Senator Elizabeth Warren has been campaigning against regulatory capture and revolving doors for many years.
It is worth looking at the coal seam gas approval process in Queensland and the treatment of several whistleblowers including Simone Marsh and Sally MacDow.
The QGC and BG approval process with Sir Frank Chapman and the Queensland government is worth reading.
Posted by: Bernard Corden | 06 September 2017 at 11:34 PM
Regulatory capture is rife thought federal and state parliaments.
The gig economy, which is indentured servitude is responsible for the 7-11, Dino Pizza and exploitation of hundreds of fruit pickers in the Bundaberg and Swan Hill regions.
Then join the dots and you will find a senior executive in a major contingent labour hire company is closely related to our opposition leader in federal parliament and daughter of the former attorney general.
These are ALP representatives who are responsible for reducing inequality.
If it stinks at a federal level it is even more rotten at a state level, especially not Queensland.
All the names are still around despite the Fitzgerald inquiry.
Posted by: Bernard Corden | 06 September 2017 at 07:40 PM
Phil, isn't PNG heading the same way even if it has only just made a start? Think RH, Borneo Pharma, etc
Posted by: Daniel Doyle | 06 September 2017 at 11:09 AM