Editor’s view: Coaldrake confirms culture is a problem

A fish rots from the head, or so goes the old adage about the impact poor leadership can have on an organisation. And Professor Peter Coaldrake does not miss making that point in his landmark review, writes the editor.

A fish rots from the head, or so goes the old adage about the impact poor leadership can have on an organisation. And Professor Peter Coaldrake does not miss making that point in his landmark review of the failure of government integrity in Queensland, saying the problems first exposed by fearless reporting and then confirmed by his review emanate from a “culture that, from the top down, is not meeting public expectations”.

This is the first clear take-out of the 101-page review released by the government just before 5pm on Tuesday – that the “tone” of this government (set by the leadership team) “in the form of modelling behaviour” is inappropriate. The culture within government, this breathtaking four-month review has concluded, is “too tolerant of bullying, unwilling to give life to unfashionable points of view and dominated by … short-term political thinking”. Prof Coaldrake writes he therefore hopes his review “influences a cultural shift which encourages openness from the top”.

With criticisms that thinly veiled, it is little wonder Annastacia Palaszczuk last night uncharacteristically quickly pledged to implement all 14 of Professor Coaldrake’s recommendations. The Courier-Mail of course welcomes that clear commitment.

Premier of Queensland, Annastacia Palaszczuk. Picture: NCA NewsWire / John Gass

Transparency in government is clearly the overarching theme of Prof Coaldrake’s review, an ambition given away in its title: “Let the sunshine in” – a nod (inclusive of his choice to write sunshine as one word and not two) to the 1976 US “Sunshine Act” that remains an iconic piece of legislation, in that it broke new ground in essentially demanding full transparency in government. The sentiment of that Act was based on a 1788 essay by founding father James Madison, which argued “the road to the decision of the people ought to be marked out and kept open”.

Why is a commitment to transparency in government so important? Prof Coaldrake says every instance of poor culture he uncovered in the 100 interviews he conducted and in the 327 written submissions he received “could be reversed by a commitment to openness, supported by accountability” – “whether the trivialising of parliamentary committees, lack of independence needed by integrity bodies or lack of clarity about decision making”. Consequently, one of the review’s 14 key recommendations is any submissions to cabinet (including their attachments) be proactively released by default – alongside any discussion papers and the agenda of every meeting.

This will be a seriously radical change for a system where “cabinet in confidence” is almost considered a sacred right. But The Courier-Mail agrees with Prof Coaldrake that it would be “an important signal, from the very top, of an open and pro-disclosure culture”.

Another key take-out of the review is its comprehensive take-down of the lobbying industry in this state – a problem Prof Coaldrake rightly points out is caused by ministers somehow having forgotten that their job is to actually talk to real people. Or, as Prof Coaldrake describes it: “The failure of the government itself to be able to deal with business and community interests without the involvement of a paid intermediary”. Ouch.

You can also almost hear Prof Coaldrake sigh when he asks why nobody in government, the Labor Party, or the lobbying industry seemed to recognise “the damage to confidence in the system” created by two of the state’s most high-profile lobbyists being enlisted to literally run the Premier’s re-election campaign in 2020.

Prof Coaldrake “suggests” that “if an individual plays a substantive role in the election campaign of a prospective government, they should be banned from engaging in lobbying for the next term of office”. Ms Palaszczuk will therefore surely agree her government will refuse to engage with both Evan Moorhead and his Anacta firm and also Cameron Milner until after the next election, in late October 2024.

The review also repeatedly refers to specific recommendations by other reviews into integrity matters having not been implemented by the Palaszczuk government – a sign it has not taken these matters seriously. Again, we welcome this.

The Premier bristles whenever her behaviour in waving away issues of integrity is likened to former premier Joh “don’t you worry about that” Bjelke-Petersen. It was fascinating, then, to see her promise to implement Prof Coaldrake's changes “lock, stock and barrel” – the exact phrase Sir Joh’s National Party successor Mike Ahern used when he pledged to act on the recommendations of the Fitzgerald Inquiry. The more things change …