Behind Closed Doors
By Katie Llanos-Small, December 3rd, 2006
It’s stories like this one, about the National Party’s Associate Health Spokesman being hosted by British American Tobacco that make me worry. Clearly, it disturbs me that the person responsible for health matters in the major opposition party is being pampered by huge international drug companies.
But it worries me more that, had it not been for the fact that Jonathon Coleman was punched, it’s likely that we never would have known that he was treated to a corporate box at the U2 concert. What else do we not know about?
I’m reminded of the ceasefire that Spanish terrorist group ETA announced earlier this year. The group had been actively engaging in low-level acts of terrorism for more than forty years, and then all of a sudden they got up on TV one day and announced that weren’t going to blow things up anymore. Of course, the group had been talking with the Spanish government in private before the announcement. But until the ceasefire was proclaimed, the public was unaware of such discussions.
This is a completely different scenario to that of BAT and the Nats, but it illustrates the same point. We have little idea of what politicians are doing in official roles behind closed doors. In some cases, discretion is necessary: the Spanish government would have been completely roasted if they’d openly talked with a pre-ceasefire ETA. But on the whole, politicians are our elected representatives: shouldn’t we know more about them and what they’re doing when they represent us?
Other posts by Katie Llanos-Small
December 3rd, 2006 at 10:08 am
On the whole, yes. The whole Bretheren email thing underlines exactly the same concerns - we don’t really know who is schmoozing whom, but it matters. A very common sales technique involves giving something away right at the start, to create a psychological desire on the part of the recipient to reciprocate. That’s why these firms are willing to spend $ hosting such people.
The ETA one is pretty different in my opinion. Negotiations of that type could be killed at the outset if the press was reporting every tentative step. Publicity through media exposure is a bit like competition. They are both superb constraining forces that we generally could do with more of. But not always and everywhere - sometimes they are very undesirable.
December 5th, 2006 at 9:15 am
Yes, this shows a huge error of judgement on the part of Coleman (and of Simon Power who was also present). I mean, Hager’s book had only been released what 4, 5 days earlier? If, as Coleman proclaims, he only attended because he is a U2 fan and was invited by a personal friend to the box then this shows a huge degree of political naivety. One would have thought that the Nats would be trying to distance themselves from lobbyists nad interest groups at the moment. Then again, most scrutiny appears to have been levelled at Brash and not the others involved. If the Nats had any sense, they would have rid themselves of Key and McCully at the same time as well as publically distancing themselves from the lobby groups and influential right wingers (Ruth Richardson anyone?)