Theft across major sectors of Australia's economy is a "Game of Mates", where James and his well-connected mates syphon off billions from the economy and typical Aussies, like Bruce, to line their own pockets.
At its core, the underlying power that game villain, James, co-opted when playing the Game of Mates in property and transportation, was the discretion of the politicians and the bureaucrats to make rezoning decisions and determine the content of infrastructure contracts.
James’ wealth in those sectors came from these discretionary decisions over the allocation of things that have large private value but are not priced. They are "grey gifts". And they are the currency of "grey corruption". In a world with clearly defined rules and no political and bureaucratic discretion, there are no grey gifts. The game is thus about "wriggle room".
The reality is that politicians and top bureaucrats regularly make decisions that have private winners and losers; decisions that can make millionaires out of some and paupers out of others. Their power comes from being able to choose who gets the massive economic value of their grey gifts — all the while not having to bear any personal costs. Instead, typical Aussie Bruce bears the costs.
Game of Mates: The story -
— lynlinking (@lynlinking) May 1, 2017
how Australia became one of the most unequal societies in the Western world https://t.co/r0MX2jjtLh
The problem is particularly large if there are frequent decisions that are not well observed by the electorate. Complex, hard-to-read, regulatory environments require politicians and top bureaucrats to rely on their judgement and discretion to interpret and enforce the rules. Which way they err can make millions of dollars of difference to the people and companies operating under those rules. In a sense, they control an "economic honeypot".
And where there is honey, you attract flies. James and his ilk swarm about to get a taste of millions of dollars on offer from grey gifts. In property, the value given away is the right to change the usage of land. Who gets the property right is decided with a great deal of discretion in the political and bureaucratic system, but outside that system that property right has a market value. In infrastructure, the tax receipts of current and future generations are put in the hands of private owners of infrastructure projects through negotiated and flexible contractual arrangements, the value of which is capitalised into the value of the PPP companies.
A great example of how easily grey gifts are given – and how hidden they can be in complex rules systems – played out in Queensland in 2016 during a review of planning laws. The State planning laws and regulations determine the processes by which major projects are approved for development — including the rules councils must comply within their own planning system. It was proposed that instead of council officers assessing a developer’s application, developers would be able to nominate a private certifier to make the discretionary assessment of the merits of their application.
Why we need ICACs more than ever ...
— Colly Campbell (@Colly77) November 29, 2016
Meet James, the man who always wins Australia's Game of Mates https://t.co/YkgrDhzNoU via @smh
This put the developers totally in charge of development and thus bypassed councils: all the big players would befriend their own private certifiers, leaving only the very small developers (such as Bruce) facing any real problems in getting their planning applications approved. This tiny hidden rule could be worth tens of millions of dollars to those who can capitalise on it.
A simple test to help see whether a grey gift is being given is to ask whether the recipient would be willing to pay for the decision if they were made to. Would a developer pay a higher fee to choose their own assessor? Would they pay for rezoning? They would, because in places they are made to, they do.
Would a toll road owner pay to close alternative roadways that compete with it? When the answer is yes, you have identified a grey gift and, in doing so, identified a social environment ripe for the formation of a Game of Mates. And this same method of identification provides one of the first clues about how to combat the Game of Mates — charge the market value of grey gifts to those who benefit! Make James pay!
This is an excerpt from Game of Mates: How favours bleed the nation (Chapter 4). Dr Cameron Murray teaches at the University of Queensland, blogs at fresheconomicthinking.com, tweets @DrCameronMurray and his Facebook page is Fresh Economic Thinking.
Dr Murray also recently appeared as an expert witness at the Queensland Crime and Corruption Commission's Operation Belcarra, investigating corruption in the most recent local government elections in South-East Queensland. You may view a transcript of his evidence HERE.
Details for the Brisbane book launch of Game of Mates on 23 May 2017 are available here.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Australia License
Brisbane book launch event of Game of Mates on 23rd May. If you're sick of Australia’s grey corruption, come along! https://t.co/kzogGUQwXy
— Cameron Murray (@DrCameronMurray) May 1, 2017
Monthly Donation
Single Donation
Just up now at CCC #OpBelcarra is @Rumplestatskin. You can livestream here https://t.co/Bn8ZGOzWru https://t.co/yvzRzJZhJu @IndependentAus
— Dave Donovan (@davrosz) April 28, 2017
It'll pay off. Subscribe to IA today.
