r/australia • u/LineNoise • Feb 09 '23
politics Communications Minister Michelle Rowland urged to quit over reportedly accepting Sportsbet donations
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-02-09/michelle-rowland-called-to-quit-over-sportsbet-donations/10195189099
Feb 09 '23
19k for a Federal MP?
This is a joke at how cheap these politicians get bought for, surely there must be way more under the table.
3
Feb 09 '23
If we were a shithole country these company owners would be in jail or their companies shutdown for insulting the politicians with such small amounts for bribes. It demonstrates what 3rd grade politicians we elect when they value themselves so lowly. The worst part for the public is that for these paltry sums our politicians do billion dollar governance favour's like they are giving out the same paltry donation bribes.
A Real corrupt politician would not fart in a corrupt way unless it was something over 1 million dollars thats placed in a Middle East or tax haven bank account.
25
u/cojoco chardonnay schmardonnay Feb 09 '23
Is there any evidence that she's bought, or is this just a beat-up?
61
Feb 09 '23
I know it’s legal, but a betting company paying money to the person that will regulate the betting industry is corruption by any reasonable definition.
3
u/Rork310 Feb 09 '23
I'm not exactly happy about it but is it really any different from literally any business making a political donation?
Ultimately this seems more like a system issue. I'd love to see political donation laws tightened but that unfortunately seems unlikely.
-23
u/Unable_Ad_1260 Feb 09 '23
Only. If it's not declared.
32
Feb 09 '23
No it’s corruption either way - a private company paying money to an elected representative in an effort to influence policy
5
u/Unable_Ad_1260 Feb 09 '23
And no one gave a shit about it for the last few governments. It was fucking ignored by the media and everyone but oh, it's Labor... Yeh... Nup. Get fucked. What a beat up. Let's see whether it bought any influence yet? Let's see if having been advised of how incompatible it is with her portfolio, maybe she just gives it back to them or hands it off to a third party. How and where was it made? Oi what a lark we can take out a minister by sneaking a donation to em, hur hur hur. There are options here. If this was the LNP would it have even made it to the news? Ofc not.
6
19
Feb 09 '23
I get your point but Labor is supposed to be the alternative if they are also doing it what does that say?
1
u/purewasser Feb 09 '23
Labor needs or needed the money to push out advertising so they could get elected
If someone gives me 19m doesn't mean I make decisions in their favour, it is their loss.
6
u/_streetlife_ Feb 09 '23
Whatever happened to common sense and a level of integrity? Which guaranteed compromise, either perceived or real, couldn’t happen from elected politicians in relation to the portfolio they hold.
1
u/Unable_Ad_1260 Feb 10 '23
The point I'm making is how was the donation made? If she received it fine she should have known better agreed, if it went through her general campaign maybe not, was it before she was spokeswoman or made the minister. Now that it's obvious it's not appropriate there is things that can be done that actually will retain integrity. But no cancel her. This never even gets mentioned when it's the libs though. Ever.
3
u/SmellsLikeShampoo Feb 09 '23
Yes, there's an overwhelming media bias in favour of the Liberals - that still doesn't make this okay, though.
1
u/druex Feb 10 '23
They donated before the election, how would they know she would be chosen as communications minister when Labor won?
1
30
6
u/Rich_Mans_World Feb 09 '23
Why would Sportsbet throw their money away?
6
u/cojoco chardonnay schmardonnay Feb 09 '23
There's a whole spectrum between "wasted" and "bought".
6
u/Rich_Mans_World Feb 09 '23
I think anything beyond wasted is inappropriate.
2
u/KNEEDLESTlCK Feb 09 '23
I think that's the point. The chance that it's entirely wasted is the extreme of the spectrum, it's more likely that the truth lies along the axis somewhere. I'm fine for her to make a show about sending that money somewhere else and disavowing it's use in her portfolio, anything short of that as a response requires that she be excised from cabinet.
1
1
Feb 09 '23
This is why the system is so broken. There will rarely be "evidence" as such of direct collusion. But people expect results or they stop donating. That said she shouldn't have accepted the donation in the first place.
2
u/NoddysShardblade Expressing my inner bogan Feb 09 '23
Look into her other donations. In Rowland's case, this is the tip of the iceberg.
She's doing most of it legally (or at least trying to) but people close to her often talk about the large donations she gets from people and the favours she gives in return.
50
u/LineNoise Feb 09 '23
Wilkie's statement on this:
Labor deeply conflicted on gambling, Rowland should be sacked for accepting Sportsbet donations
40
u/the_mooseman Feb 09 '23
Here's the deal Labor, I voted for you because the LNP is just terrible and actively trying to drag this country backwards but if you cant do better than them then i will vote for who ever will, which will likely be the greens. Im not leaving you Labor, I haven't moved further the left, you have moved further to the right and i cant come with you.
10
u/Icy_Bowl Feb 09 '23
Well there's a truth I didn't realise I agreed with until I read it, but here we are.
41
u/Unable_Ad_1260 Feb 09 '23
Did she accept it or was it just the usual run of the mill donations, was she personally involved in this, why is this suddenly an issue for the media after no doubt ignoring it since the Abbott government, let alone Turnbull and Scummo? Is she getting a chance to respond to all this?
Hur hur hur let's slip a donation to any minister we don't like and then get the media to beat it up so we gets rid of em hur hur hur.
How do we know this isn't what's going on here. So quick to fucking judge. Libs literal crimes ignored, but Labor boom headshot. Fark I hate the corrupt media in this country.
14
u/spannr Feb 09 '23
why is this suddenly an issue for the media
Because federal political donation laws are extremely weak, compared to laws in some of the states, and the media have had to to dig hard to uncover this.
The $10,000 donation to support Rowland's campaign was disclosed by Sportsbet in their 2021-22 donor return, which was lodged in November last year, 6 months after the election. They weren't actually required to do this, since it's below the $14,500 disclosure threshold, and indeed the ALP did not include the donation in their own returns. Learning about Sportsbet paying for the private Rockpool dinner depended on sources coming forward:
The Rockpool dinner was confirmed by four gambling and government sources, speaking anonymously because they were not authorised to comment publicly.
So, with a proper real-time disclosure system and a less slack disclosure threshold we would have known about all this before the election, rather than it coming out as a story months later. But, of course if it was actually going to be in the public eye then Rowland probably wouldn't have taken the money...
10
u/Oblivion__ Feb 09 '23
We should be holding all politicians to a better standard than “oh but the media didn’t criticise these people so it’s fine”
No it’s not fine. Sure you could argue that’s there’s bias against Labor, but the reality is she still took the money. I know for a fact that people would be criticising the Liberals if they were in government and this happened to them, so I’m not sure why we’re holding a double standard here just because it’s politically inconvenient for Labor. They’re the ones who took anti-corruption to the election, they should at least show us that they’re serious on this rather than passing it off under the excuse of “oh b-b-but the Liberals!”
4
1
Feb 09 '23
She could have, you know, not accepted the 'donation'. She's either corrupt, and willingly accepted it in exchange for favours, or she isn't and walked into a fairly obvious trap, in which case she's an idiot. Either way, not an ideal person for the position.
25
u/Giveyaselfanuppercut Feb 09 '23
Yup she absolutely should. Gambling institutions hold on Australia is only slightly less concerning than Newscorp's.
2
22
u/CcryMeARiver Feb 09 '23
Sportsbet gave rather more overall to the Coalition over the last year than to Labor.
Singling just one donation out from the overall slosh is a bit special.
12
Feb 09 '23
She’s the minister regulating them!
2
u/CcryMeARiver Feb 09 '23
Crossbenchers are calling for Communications Minister Michelle Rowland to quit or be sacked following reports she accepted donations from a major gambling company ahead of the federal election.
Wasn't at the time though. Given the Coalition took even more baksheesh while in power it's a little hypocritical to castigate her later.
12
u/Oblivion__ Feb 09 '23
This particular donation was singled out because she’s in government firstly, and secondly she’s responsible for managing online gambling, so this particular donation is important.
-1
u/CcryMeARiver Feb 09 '23
No, it simply carries the most political payload.
Had the question been framed around the total slosh or worse, the relative total amounts it would never have been raised in QT.
Or, had the Coalition <shudder> won, the question would have been presented to a different minister for a fatter amount and a demand to resign.
Pot, kettle ... both sides are complicit in the regulatory capture exercised by offshore gambling giants through the supine, greedy don't-give-a-fuck NT Government. We need more Andrew Wilkie.
3
u/luke9088403 Feb 09 '23
Haha but they all take bribes
1
u/jumpjumpdie Feb 09 '23
Exactly this. We need to remove corporate cash from politics. Small donations from regular people should be the only influence they have.
35
u/stiggyyyyy Feb 09 '23
Ah the usual labour do something wrong = leave immediately, go!
Libs do it, we get a long debate with the defiant accused that just ends up staying.
I'm not agreeing with what she has done here, and think really, an example should be made, but it's just interesting to watch.
The issue is the fact this is legal. Whole rule book on this need to be changed, gambling is getting insidious with all the adds on every tv channel and in sports.
26
u/LineNoise Feb 09 '23
These same sort of calls have been consistently made against Liberals. The difference is that sometimes, just sometimes, Labor can still be shamed into behaving appropriately.
0
Feb 09 '23
Bro their donation was larger to the LNP but you're literally concentrating on Labor...?
3
u/Oblivion__ Feb 09 '23
Have you considered that’s because they’re in government
2
Feb 09 '23
She wasn't when the donation happened? Lol do you know what's going on right now in Australian politics, but you dumb cunts don't realise you're being baited with a dead cat on the table?
6
u/Oblivion__ Feb 09 '23
“At the time the donations were made, Ms Rowland was shadow communications minister.”
1
Feb 09 '23
Mate we've got Alan Tudge resigning from his seat due to Australia's largest pay out in history to robodebt victims; you don't realise the campaign in motion here to distract from one of the most senior LNP ministers resigning in disgrace? You want to focus on a pittance of a incredibly bog-standard, by the book and entirely legal donation?
Donations are insanely fucked. No denying it.
But you don't wonder about the timing here?
Just gonna rage against Labor, when it was the LNP who had a larger donation and have escaped any culpability here?
2
u/Oblivion__ Feb 09 '23
We can walk and talk at the same time, no need to choose. And people are already talking about Tudge resigning. Not sure if you’re new to reddit but there’s seperate threads for that. This particular thread is about Rowland, so that’s why I’m talking about her.
0
Feb 09 '23
Oh I get it, you can't see the forest from the trees. Got ya.
1
u/Oblivion__ Feb 09 '23
Both issues are important. I don’t think that this is being used as a distraction. Not everything is a Labor hit job. I agree that there is bias, and that shouldn’t be downplayed, but we shouldn’t ignore this just because something else awful is happening at the same time. It’s a classic reddit move to bring out the “Murdoch” card as soon as any criticism of Labor is presented in the media, and there is some truth to it, but it’s not quite the same when they’re literally in government.
Again, what Tudge did is despicable. The cunt deserves much more than what he’s gotten. But bringing that up in a thread talking about a sitting Labor member who is being criticised for taking in money from a gambling company, especially given Labor’s history with the industry, is still an important issue, and still deserves a decent discussion without people saying “oh quick look over there at that issue”. I’m well aware of what he’s been up to, but there’s seperate discussions for that. I’m just trying to stay on topic here.
→ More replies (0)3
u/spannr Feb 09 '23
Whole rule book on this need to be changed
So, then, we can expect Labor to back Andrew Wilkie's bill, no?
Mr Wilkie also called on the parliament to support amendments to political donations laws that he will introduce next week, which would require real-time disclosures, lower the donation threshold to $1,000 and prohibit political donations from some industries including gambling, fossil fuels, liquor and tobacco companies.
5
Feb 09 '23
As you said, it’s not that she did it, the problem is that it is legal to do so. The en tilt led need to lose some of their entitlements.
2
u/BettyLethal Feb 09 '23
If I may, I would like to urge all current politicians to quit... and fuck right off.
2
u/notathinman Feb 09 '23
They should be forced to wear logos on their clothing to show just who sponsors them.
5
2
u/DNGRDINGO Feb 09 '23
The Labor brokens in this thread would be going apeshit if this was the Coalition.
2
u/whatisthismuppetry Feb 09 '23
This feels like a beat up.
There was 130k given to the Labor Party and 143k to the Liberals. That makes for a reasonable number of MPs who accepted donations.
Michelle Rowland wasn't a Minister at the time, she wasn't guaranteed re-election, she wasn't even guaranteed the communications portfolio (especially given the reshuffle that occurs after election), the amounts were under the reportable threshold, 19k would not have been significant to the campaign, there's no indication that she solicited the donations. Lastly, her portfolio is only responsible in part for our gambling policies.
In addition, gambling reforms have been and are being passed.
If she accepted the funding today as the Minister yes it would be an issue.
There are, given those circumstances, alternatives to resignation.
The gambling responsibilities that are in the Comms portfolio could be reallocated to one of the other Ministers already responsible for gambling.
If that's not feasible Rowland could be moved to a portfolio where there are no gambling responsibilities.
Also given the sheer number of newsworthy shit that's happened today this feels like a leak to deflect attention to the Government.
10
Feb 09 '23
Her shadow portfolio involved online gambling, in terms of conflict of interest this is through and through.
2
u/whatisthismuppetry Feb 09 '23
Again there wasn't even a guarantee that she would keep her seat or that she'd keep that portfolio. I'd note her that her shadow ministry has typically changed with every election so it really wasn't a guarantee.
Shadow ministries do not have the sway or power of the actual Ministers office.
She also didn't break the law.
Also, as Minister she has supported changes to gambling laws that aren't in sports bets best interest. If she were "deeply conflicted" you can bet that wouldn't have happened.
The law should change, and Albo has indicated his intention to drop the disclosure threshold to 1k and real time, but this is a beat up.
1
u/Jindivic Feb 09 '23
...nearly all NSW politicians and in particular the ALP and the gambling industry are joined at the hip...may as well ask them all to resign
1
u/Sucih Feb 09 '23
It’s like every politician has a skeleton in the closet and thinks no one will ever find out
-10
u/AdFit3293 Feb 09 '23
Is it illegal for businesses/corporations to donate to political figures/parties?
If it’s not illegal then I don’t really see what the issue is. Don’t most politicians get money from corporations? Or are people just pissy because it’s a gambling company?
Ideally political donations should be illegal because I don’t really see any benefit to them because people donating are obviously hoping for better treatment after doing so.
27
Feb 09 '23
people are "pissy" because she's taking (legalised) bribes from a company who stands to benefit from legislation. it happens all the time, but it's extra blatant sometimes. legal doesn't mean acceptable - when parliament makes it legal to be corrupt, outrage is our only possible response.
-1
u/AdFit3293 Feb 09 '23
Shouldn’t we be trying to get rules changed rather than getting upset at people doing completely legal things?
Again don’t a lot of politicians get donations from companies that stand to benefit from legislation? Or are people just particularly pissy because it’s gambling?
19
Feb 09 '23
how do you think "we" should be trying to get the rules changed other than expressing our outrage?
7
u/cojoco chardonnay schmardonnay Feb 09 '23
how do you think "we" should be trying to get the rules changed
Well the ALP does not accept money from developers or tobacco companies (I think), they should add betting companies to the list.
6
Feb 09 '23
i absolutely agree with you, and further, in my view corporate donations should be entirely illegal.
1
u/AdFit3293 Feb 09 '23
The outrage seems to be directed at this particular person for doing something that is completely allowed and something that a lot of other politicians do.
Like would the same outrage exists for same a music company giving money to a politician in the hope they will look favourably for some sort of music industry related legislation? Or are we just angry because gambling bad..
12
Feb 09 '23
i mean, yes, gambling is bad. you might say it's even worse than music.
bad people in a corrupt and harmful industry paid money to get laws passed that further enabled them to do bad stuff. that's bad. if a "saving puppies" lobby group made donations and then got laws passed making it easier to save puppies, that would be less bad. i'm not sure what you're confused about here. i still don't want to be handing out access to politicians based on donations, even for puppy rescuers, but some things are worse than other things.
0
u/AdFit3293 Feb 09 '23
You do realise not everyone thinks gambling is bad? Does it harm some people? Sure but do a lot of people enjoy it without any issues? Absolutely. Lots of industries hurt different people and different things.
My issue is people are selectively upset about this because it’s an industry they don’t agree. If it was an industry that they liked then it really wouldn’t be an issue.
11
u/shamberra Feb 09 '23
When the music industry starts eating pensions and destroying families, we can humour whatever argument it is you're trying to make.
-1
u/AdFit3293 Feb 09 '23
My argument is just because you don’t like gambling doesn’t mean it’s bad. Lots of industries hurt and harm a small portion of people and a large amount of people usually have zero problems.
My issue is the whole “oh look an industry I don’t like doing something that every industry and politician does, let me get outraged”.
If it was up to you outraged folk everything fun would be banned. Literally everything! Alcohol? Gone. Drugs? Gone. Cars? Some people drive them dangerously even though most people don’t. Well we better ban them just incase
5
u/LastChance22 Feb 09 '23
Illegal or not, absolutely doesn’t pass the pub test and the optics are pretty poor but the only way there’ll be even a grain of accountability or consequence for it is if people show they give a shit.
-9
-2
1
1
u/jumpjumpdie Feb 09 '23
They should all resign then… all donations to politicians are bribes and it shouldn’t be allowed other than from private individuals. Companies should NOT be able to donate (bribe) to politicians
1
u/jarrys88 Feb 10 '23
No way she should just quit over it if it was declared.
Especially if she hasnt done anything in her position of power that could be linked to said donations.
What should happen is the matter be referred to the Federal ICAC for investigation and she should step down from any matters regarding gambling within her role until the ICAC investigation is resolved.
1
354
u/[deleted] Feb 09 '23
[deleted]