• Breadcrumb navigation uses Javascript

---

Power in politics

by Simon Longstaff

The great nineteenth century British liberal, Lord Acton, famously observed that "all power tends to corrupt, and absolute power tends to corrupt absolutely". He might have gone on to say that the “greater the absence of power, the greater the hunger for it”.

After thirteen years in opposition, the newly elected Commonwealth Government will have to be extremely careful that it is not corrupted by the power available to those who command the treasury benches. This will be a particular challenge for the Prime Minister, Mr Howard, who will have to use the authority of his office to keep in check those, within his own ranks, whose hunger for power is evident for all to see. Otherwise, his sincere hope that he can restore popular trust in the institutions of government will be forlorn.

In talking of 'corruption' I do not mean to imply that ministers and their supporters in parliament will be accepting the proverbial 'brown paper bags' (or their modern equivalents) in return for favours done or promised. This is only one kind of corruption. The more general form is when government, whether it be through patronage, purchasing or the exercise of its legislative and regulatory powers, confers advantages on individuals for reasons that have little, if anything, to do with the public interest.

For example, it is a little disturbing that there is open talk around town of well-connected individuals within the Coalition parties letting it be known that they hold the 'keys to the kingdom'. This may be nothing more than rumour based on overhearing the claims of braggarts. However, the fact that people are commenting about this as if it were true should start to ring the alarm bells in Canberra.

As noted above, Mr Howard has pledged to govern well for all Australians and, in doing so, to restore community trust in what was once justifiably regarded as the noble art of politics. I suspect people broadly accept the idea that a new government will wish to enlist the support of people who share its philosophy and who are committed to the implementation of its policies.

However, I also believe that there is less tolerance of decisions, appointments and so on that appear to have little to do with merit and more to do with rewarding past loyalty and support. It should be remembered that one of the factors working against Labor in the last election was a perception that, after thirteen years in power, its network of connections appeared to compromise the judgement of key institutions both in the public and private sectors.

Another form of corruption is when public power is used to settle old scores - particularly as revenge for a personal hurt previously suffered. We can understand what it must have been like to spend an entire parliamentary career being taunted by smug opponents in government. We can imagine the hurt caused by wounds inflicted by a government able to muster the resources of a group like the ANIMALS (the National Media Liaison Office).

Even so, I do not believe that it is appropriate for public power to be used for personal gain - even if it is purely psychological in form. Personal or political revenge is an ignoble end for power to serve.

The third form of corruption that I would warn against is the temptation to believe that the ends justify the means. No matter how noble the vision, there must be boundaries of propriety within which a government works. Achieving results is important - but not at any cost.

Having won such a handsome victory the government claims that it enjoys an ‘historic mandate’. This may be so. However, it does not mean that the community has written the government a blank cheque. In particular, it does not mean that it can go about its business in any manner that it happens to think fit. One of the dangers inherent in representative democracy is the tendency for governments to think that they are entitled to define the public interest in any way they happen to choose.

This is false. The very idea of democracy sets limits to what governments can do. For example, there are basic levels of education, health and so on that citizens must enjoy if they are going to be able to participate as effective members of the polity. Let it never be forgotten that all power comes from the people.

The other trap that governments should avoid is that of thinking that what is good for them is good for the people they serve. Many politicians sincerely believe that the other side is so bad an alternative that nearly any measure to keep them from taking power is justified. In these circumstances, it becomes difficult to discern the difference between; keeping power for the sake of the community, keeping power for the sake of the party and keeping power for its own sake.

The new government has very few members who have held power. Fortunately, Mr Howard is one of those who has experienced both its possibilities and its limitations. He will need to guide his ministry with care. One of the hardest lessons to teach will be in terms of how to respond to the frustrations of power.

This is because most of us wildly overestimate what it is that we can do with what little power we have. We fall prey to the fantasy that the obstacles we face could be overcome - if only we had more power, or if only we could use it with greater force. It is an illusion that has corrupted many.

There are no ready made prescriptions to ward off the baleful effects of power. Perhaps the best response is to approach the task of governing with humility and a sense of the awful responsibility that it entails. For what it is worth, I think I saw this recognition reflected in the Prime Minister's face on the night of the election. But what did we see in others?

discuss this article

---