Government Media Monitoring Unit

GOVERNMENT MEDIA MONITORING UNIT

DATE: NOVEMBER 3RD, 2006

TIME: 9.06AM

STATION: 6PR MORNINGS(MAUMILL)

SUBJECT: MAUMILL COMMENTS ON CCC INQUIRY

This transcript is produced for information purposes only. Although all care is taken, no warranty as to its accuracy or completeness is given. It is your responsibility to ensure by independent verification that all information is correct before placing any reliance on it.

BOB MAUMILL

I pick up The Australian today, there it is starring at me – page one – Minister paid by developer. Oh no, we all go. A Carpenter Government Minister was last night under mounting pressure to resign, after it was revealed that he accepted $5,000 from a developer. The Corruption and Crime Commission heard that Norm Marlborough, Minister for Small Business in the South-West, received the money from Canal Rocks Proprietary Limited less than two weeks before the February 2005 state election.

Strewth, he’s my Member of Parliament. So then I pick up The West and there’s Norm, smiling Norm, obviously wasn’t taken yesterday, smiling Norm there with Alan Carpenter with his arm around him. And Robert Taylor, Sean Cowan, Amanda Banks and Daniel Emerson – took four of them to write that story. And then a comment by Robert Taylor about the same issue and then I thought, my man’s in trouble. So at half-past-five in the morning, seeing as he’s my Member of Parliament, I rang him up.

Woke Ros up, his wife and said, now listen Norm, I’ve told listeners on this program you’re my Member of Parliament, you’ve been a friend of mine for 30 years, is there anything in all of this? And Norm said, yeah the bloke gave me five grand, it was for five tickets to a Kim Beazley fundraiser. I said what’d you do with the money? He said gave it to the state secretary of the ALP, that’s what I’m supposed to do with it. It was five tickets to an ALP fundraiser. I said that’s not on the front page of The Australian newspaper. He said what do you want me to tell you? He said, I’m telling you, it was for five tickets, he said I think I sold other tickets as well, gave all the money to the state secretary of the ALP.

So I thought, the thing to do here listeners, because it’s well known that I use Norm on this program from time to time as a butt of all of my jokes, we’d better ring the state secretary of the ALP and get Bill Johnston, who’s state secretary of the ALP, to come on air and explain this matter. But then I read all of the stories and I spoke to Norm and I spoke to his wife and - 2 –

I spoke to Bill Johnston and I thought about the recent program on which I raised the issue, pardon me, of property developers making donations to political parties.

You may recall, if you’re a regular listener, that I spoke to an academic who studied these matters. I raised the issue because Paul Keating had said that.. in a recent speech, you remember Rob, when Paul made that speech about property developers should not be allowed to make donations to political parties or candidates? I thought it was worthy of discussion. I made my position clear, as I have done in the past. Playing footsie and accepting donations from property developers had always had the potential to end in scandal and grief. Think as far back as Bjelke Petersen and the white shoe brigade on the Gold Coast, when they were cutting loose up there with donations going in all directions.

Which brings us to the issue of my local Member of Parliament, Norm Marlborough. Norm is copping heaps. Now as far as I’m able to find out, ringing everyone I know who’s involved in this – one, because he met with and arranged a meeting between a man who wanted to develop a property at Smith’s Beach, which other people opposed and Norm arranged a meeting between that man and a public servant. Two, this man bought five tickets at a thousand dollars a ticket, to an ALP fundraising dinner at which Kim Beazley was the guest of honour. Norm sold the tickets, sent the money to the state secretary of the ALP.

Three, the five grand, along with those monies, went into ALP headquarters and then became the responsibility of the people in headquarters. Four, the man.. the man was.. who Norm arranged the meeting for, was not a constituent of Norm’s. Norm Marlborough arranged that meeting between the man and a public servant. The man obviously wanted to get his development over the line, the public servant was someone that knew about the matters and as far as I know, may have been involved in the decision making process.

Five, did Norm Marlborough, and this is the key to it, receive any direct financial benefit from the five grand? Maybe Bill Johnston the state secretary of the ALP can tell us about that. Another question, is it inappropriate for Norm Marlborough, or any other Member of Parliament, to meet with people outside their own electorate to discuss matters concerning the business of those people? Is it inappropriate, if he’s the Member for Peel, for instance, should he be meeting with people who are say, in the electorate of Kalgoorlie, or Murray? Should he only restrict his political activities and conversations and meetings to people inside his own electorate?

Of course, the other question is, Norm Marlborough paying the price of being a friend of Brian Burke. Well Burkie can look after himself. He’s not a public servant, or a member of Parliament and how he conducts his business and earns his living is up to him. He’s not the only retired politician, by the way, who’s earned a quid as a lobbyist – let’s think, Bill Hassell, who else John Halden, Julian Grill, there’s a stack of others. But Norm Marlborough is a Member of Parliament, he is a Minister of the Crown and from what people who he deals with, he’s a very good one. And we need to know and this is the nub of it all, has he done wrong? Or has this now become a question of, well we can’t get Burke, let’s get Marlborough?

Or is it, as I’m starting to get after reading The West and other papers, is it a question of - 3 – some journalists believing that well, it’s all about perceptions? I think that got a run here somewhere, perceptions. Well whose perceptions, there’s? And that raises the question that should really matter here, honesty and worth. What about worth and while we’re at it, what about innocence or guilt? What about whether or not say, let’s forget the perceptions, what about someone is good at what they do or not corrupt, or have done no wrong? But in the minds of some people, perceived to have links or associations that a journalist or a broadcaster or political opponents don’t approve of, what about that?

Do we ignore the sum of a person’s worth and then go out and destroy that person on the basis of perceptions? If we do, well I think we’re cowards. If we don’t talk about it on air, I think we’re cowards. If people like Bill Johnston won’t come on air today as state secretary of the ALP and that’s where the money stopped, if he won’t come on air and talk about it, he’s a coward. We’re going to try and ring him.

And I might say, that if we destroy people on the basis of perceptions, those that encourage us and condone us to do it, they’re cowards too, you’ve got to have more than someone’s perception. They’ve got to be either guilty or not guilty. They’ve got to be right or they’ve got to be wrong. If Norm Marlborough’s broken any law and I have got a 30 year friendship with him, he’s my Member of Parliament and I get on good with him, if Norm Marlborough’s broken any law, is in any way corrupt or his guilt is established, then I will damn him on this program. But so far, no evidence has emerged that he’s guilty of any wrongdoing, despite the headlines, by the way, suggesting that he has.

And while those who are so concerned about propriety of perceptions are getting so heated up about the issues of links to developers or other vested interests, let’s get fair dinkum about it all. Let’s strip away the bullshit. Let’s examine the whole question of who buys influence and how. Let’s see who buys tickets to fundraising dinners to meet premiers, prime ministers, treasurers and other decision makers. Who sits with whom? What do they talk about? Those decision makers, premiers, prime ministers, candidates, ministers – they’re out of their own electorates and they’re somewhere else on some night raising funds for the party. People pay a thousand, fifteen hundred dollars a ticket to eat crook tucker and get access to the decision makers. What do you think they talk about? The price of the food? Of course they don’t. They’re there because they want to get involved with the decision makers who get their voice heard.

So let’s see who sits with whom, what they talk about and why. The perception is.. the perception is that they want to get to those people by buying a ticket, to listen to a boring speech and eat so-so tucker, is because they want to carry favour with the decision maker or have their voice heard. No need to meet him in his office, just buy a ticket and get access.

And what about premiers and prime ministers and members of Parliament whose parties accept donations from developers, banks, public companies, rich individuals, year in and year out? And serving members and ministers who accept invitations to private dinners and parties and days at the footy in swish private boxes, what about the perception they may be discussing matters other than footy? My perception is that they are accepting largesse from a rich developer and by doing so, by being there and listening to him, are compromising themselves. But as these decision makers, who enjoy the hospitality of rich - 4 – developers with lavish private boxes would say, we are doing nothing wrong. And I say but the perception is that by being there, you’re in bed with that person and they’re saying, that’s only your perception and perceptions can be dangerous. They sure can.

Now if we’re fair dinkum about all this, we’ll examine every donation of every kind made to every party or individual and every political decision maker who’s received hospitality, largesse and donations from the prime minister down and examine every meeting that every minister and member has held with anyone wanting help, whether it’s inside or outside their election(sic).. they’re electorate. But that’s hard work, isn’t it, to do that. Bugger that. Let’s just stick to perceptions. It might be cowardly, but it’s easy.

Now we’ll see if the state secretary of the ALP Bill Johnston is as cowardly as those people who rely on destroying people’s reputations and careers, whether he’s as cowardly as they who rely on those perceptions. Let’s try and get him on the phone and find out what happened to that five grand. Find out if Marlborough got any of it. And if he didn’t, well what’s that do to perceptions?

Ends…jg GOVERNMENT MEDIA MONITORING UNIT

DATE: NOVEMBER 3RD, 2006

TIME: 9.22AM

STATION: 6PR MORNINGS (MAUMILL)

SUBJECT: JOHNSTON - $5,000 DONATION TO NORM MARLBOROUGH

BOB MAUMILL

When we decided to devote the first part of the program to this matter today, we invited the state secretary of the ALP, Bill Johnston, to join us on the program, we also invited Danielle Blain – Danielle Blain is the secretary of the state Liberal Party – to come on the program as well. We’d just like to speak to both of them about political donations and who they accept them from and who they don’t accept them from. And we also, obviously, want to talk to Bill Johnston about the five grand that’s been nailed to Norm Marlborough’s backside and what happened to it.

And I said at the beginning of this program, but I want to repeat it, that Norm Marlborough is my member of Parliament, he’s been a friend of mine for 30 years or more, but if Norm Marlborough is found to have done anything wrong and anything corrupt, I will damn him on this program. So far, I’ve been unable, after speaking to people who are involved in this, to find out anything Marlborough’s done wrong.

But the state secretary of the ALP, Bill Johnston, has agreed to join us on the program today. It’s not a happy day for Mr Johnston, but he can throw some light on that five grand…(greetings not transcribed)…

Now Norm Marlborough, it was revealed before the CCC, was given a cheque for $5,000 from a company called Canal Rocks, behind which is David McKenzie, who was trying to get a development over the line at Canal … at Smith’s Beach, in the south-west. What was the five grand for?

BILL JOHNSTON

Well, the $5,000, which was 0.12% of the Labor Party’s income in the 2004/2005 financial year, was payment for David and some guests of his coming to a fundraising event - 2 – featuring Kim Beazley during our state election campaign.

BOB MAUMILL

Why give it to Norm?

BILL JOHNSTON

So far as I’m aware, it wasn’t given to Norm. This was a cheque made payable to the Labor Party and was banked into one of the Labor Party’s bank accounts.

BOB MAUMILL

The CCC obviously will follow the money trail. The $5,000 for the five tickets went to Norm Marlborough, it went into a Labor Party’s account… the Labor Party’s account and then would in the course of events be put into the Labor Party’s general revenue.

I need to ask the question, did the whole five grand go there and did Norm Marlborough in any way get a financial benefit from it?

BILL JOHNSTON

Look, it’s impossible … almost all the money out of that event went to the central party campaign. There was some money also shared out to individual marginal seat campaigns, but almost all of that money went here to the central office of the Labor Party to pay for our central campaign.

BOB MAUMILL

Now just, if I may?

BILL JOHNSTON

Sure.

BOB MAUMILL

It’s possible, isn’t it, for the CCC or any other investigative body to follow the trail of where the cheque went and where it ended up?

BILL JOHNSTON

If the CCC has any issues that they want to raise with the Labor Party, they’re very welcome to contact us, because as yet they have not contacted us about this matter or any other matter.

BOB MAUMILL

- 3 –

Just on the question of fundraising for events like the Kim Beazley celebration of regaining the leadership dinner, or whatever it was, the tickets are sold at, what… what were they, a grand each?

BILL JOHNSTON

$1,000 each.

BOB MAUMILL

And say you sell one hundred and…

BILL JOHNSTON

…116 I think were sold to that event.

BOB MAUMILL

So that’s 116 grand. You hope to put on the function for about 30 or 40 and make something for the party?

BILL JOHNSTON

Of course. We … you know, part of my duty is to raise money for the Labor Party. I don’t apologise for that. It’s a very expensive business. I remember quite a number of our ads running on 6PR, on Paul Murray’s program…

BOB MAUMILL

…oh, we’re in this as well?

BILL JOHNSTON

That’s right.

The point I’m getting to is that, you know, I don’t think that me buying ads on 6PR during the state election campaign – and remember, I had more ads on 6PR than any other radio station in the state…

BOB MAUMILL

…hang on, don’t hang this on us.

BILL JOHNSTON

No, no, I’m just pointing something out. I don’t believe that our sponsorship of 6PR during the election campaign changed Paul Murray’s presentation of the big issue of that campaign, which was the canal. Paul Murray was a very, very strong supporter of the idea - 4 – of a Kimberley canal, and yet the Labor Party, we ran ads on 6PR during the election campaign when Paul Murray was supporting the canal and we weren’t.

So I don’t believe in any way I was influencing Paul Murray’s presentation of his opinion by us paying for air time on 6PR with the money that David McKenzie and other people gave to us during the election campaign.

BOB MAUMILL

But people who buy tickets to go and see … to listen to John Howard, Peter Costello, Kim Beazley or anyone else involved in politics and pay between $1,000 and $1,500 for it, they’re not going there because they want to hear the speech, they’re going there because they want to be seen to be onside and supporting either that individual or the party.

BILL JOHNSTON

There’s another reason. Most people who give money … most businesses who give money to the Labor Party usually give money to the Liberal Party at the same time. The reason that they do that is because they want democracy to happen in Western Australia. People forget, our budget for that year was over $4 million, that’s what people expect us to do, they want us to have ads on TV, they want us to have… tell them what our policies are. They want us explaining why they should vote for us.

BOB MAUMILL

But you can…

BILL JOHNSTON

…and we can only do that if we have the resources to campaign.

BOB MAUMILL

Unless, of course, the public funds the elections.

BILL JOHNSTON

I don’t expect the public to fund every single cent of the campaign. Public funding is about funding oppositions. Governments will always be able to raise enough money to campaign, oppositions often have trouble raising money.

BOB MAUMILL

Now, Bill…

BILL JOHNSTON

….public funding before, that it’s not going to replace community support of political - 5 – parties, but what it does do is mean is that all oppositions will have enough resources or minor candidates, or third party candidates will have enough resources to make sure their message is heard.

BOB MAUMILL

Now we’ve … do you draw the line at accepting donations from … well, anyone in business, developers, for instance… property developers, for instance? Do they tip into the ALP?

BILL JOHNSTON

The Labor Party’s code of conduct for fundraising makes it clear that there are two types of donations we’re not allowed to receive. The first one is from tobacco companies and the second one is from anybody who expects to get an outcome because of their donation.

So there cannot be, there never is and we would not allow any occasion where a person came along and gave money because we’re going to do X or because we’re not going to do Y.

BOB MAUMILL

But, Bill, you can see where this whole business… where Marlborough is supposed to have … well did, in fact, arrange a meeting from someone outside his electorate with someone in the public service, you can see where the whole thing becomes a non argument, when political parties – one of which you’re the state secretary, and we’ve invited Danielle Blain from the Liberal Party to join us on the program today to talk about this matter – it just becomes silly when you consider that there were 116 people at that fundraising dinner, there would have been members of Parliament there from all sorts of electorates and they would have been talking to people who on that night had access to them after the wine started to flow about a range of issues.

It just… and the Liberal Party does it, when the Prime Minster comes over, and no doubt the National Party does it as well, it just seems … it seems to be silly to me that we’re saying well Marlborough met with McKenzie and a public servant and McKenzie’s outside Marlborough’s electorate. When you people organise these functions, where everyone meets with everyone, from the Prime Minster down, and I don’t think they ain’t necessarily talking about the food.

BILL JOHNSTON

Look, there’s no question that people have a range of motives for doing things, but that’s not what I’m responsible for. I’m responsible for the behaviour of the Labor Party. And what I want to make clear is that on no occasion has there been … you know, in my stewardship of the Labor Party, there is no connection between us, our fundraising and the outcomes of policy. And I tell people that when they come to talk to me about… or I go to them to talk about political fundraising, I say you cannot buy an outcome.

- 6 –

BOB MAUMILL

Yeah, but you’ve dropped the ball here yourself, Bill, haven’t you?

BILL JOHNSTON

Yeah…

BOB MAUMILL

…because when the five grand got to you, where did it go and how was it recorded?

BILL JOHNSTON

There’s been… look, there’s no question this is intensely embarrassing in the circumstances for me. I’ve said to other journalists that of course it’s bizarre that this is the first occasion that my disclosure amendment has become a topic of conversation. I’ve made mistakes in the past, you can go and look at the Australian Electoral Commission website, you’ll see my disclosure return and then an amendment sitting underneath it, because I make mistakes. I’m not infallible. I’m not the Pope. I get things wrong. I got something wrong this time.

It’s become intensely embarrassing, not because I got something wrong, but because of the presentation of the matter in the CCC.

BOB MAUMILL

And… well you’ve done something wrong, but is there anything in the money trail that suggests Minister Marlborough’s done anything wrong?

BILL JOHNSTON

I can’t see any suggestion that Norm Marlborough, backbench MP, as he was in February 2005 – which is the time we’re talking about – did anything wrong.

BOB MAUMILL

Is Norm Marlborough a good fundraiser for you?

BILL JOHNSTON

When he was… when Norm Marlborough was… like many backbench MPs, Norm helped me with fundraising, of course, as a minister, he doesn’t. Our code of conduct is clear, ministers are not to canvass for political donations. And so far as I’m aware, none of them do.

BOB MAUMILL

- 7 –

Thanks for joining us on the program today, Bill. And my final question to you would be, will you be appearing before the CCC?

BILL JOHNSTON

If … I can’t understand why the CCC would want to talk to me. If they wanted to talk to me, they would be very welcome to. But so far, they’ve not made any attempt … made no attempt to speak to me and I’ve… I wasn’t aware that they were inquiring into any of the matters relating to the Labor Party.

BOB MAUMILL

Thanks, Bill, good on ya. That’s Bill Johnston, state secretary of the Australian Labor Party. Yes, the Australian Labor Party have received donations from a range of interests, including property developers. We invite our friends from the Liberal Party to join us on the program to tell us if they’ve… Danielle Blain, we’ve put in a call, if the Liberal Party has received donations from property developers. I think there’s something… I’ve got to choose my words carefully here, but I would be uncomfortable, as a political party, to accept donations from property developers. But I’ve got a thing about them, as you probably gathered.

But is it any worse that accepting, I don’t know, big donations from unions and considering the influence that they would then expect to have on a party? Or is it any worse that expecting big donations from banks or big companies or individuals? Like Len Buckeridge, has been a huge donor to the Liberal Party over the years, and, in fact, when Liberal members of Parliament have lost their seat, I think Graham Kierath went to work for him. It’s all very murky, isn’t it?

And it’s one of the reasons why I’ve always said that it warps democracy, this question of donations, it warps democracy. In the United States, it’s my view, if you’ve got enough money, you can almost buy yourself a president. And some people would argue that’s what’s happened with George W Bush, who was backed by the oil and gas and energy industry, to the tune of many millions of dollars.

Getting back to where we started, well, Norm sold some tickets, he gave the money to the state… or to the ALP’s head office. He received no direct benefit. He met with a bloke outside his electorate at an arranged meeting, because the bloke had a problem. He didn’t attempt to influence anything that went on at the meeting. But there’s a perception there , in some people’s minds, that that’s enough reason for him to resign.

Are you kidding me?

Ends… dr