An institute established to expose corruption in politics is now being accused of playing dirty politics itself.
The Wellington-based Integrity Institute is financing journalists to expose what it claims are corrupt practices in New Zealand politics.
But it is who the Institute is trying to expose and how they are going about it that is raising the questions about their own integrity.
Their current target is Federated Farmers, and the Institute has funded the website Newsroom to expose what it says is the “power of the farm lobby.”
The Institute was established after a wealthy Christchurch couple, Grant and Marilyn Nelson, who had funded the Institute for Governance and Policy Studies at Victoria University of Wellington, fell out with its director, Professor Jonathan Boston.
Instead, a researcher from that Institute, Bryce Edwards, broke away and set up the Integrity Institute with $3 million from the Nelsons.
The new Institute’s Trust Deed says its main purpose is to “facilitate research and public education on the importance of good, transparent and accountable public decision-making.”
But when that purpose is translated within the Deed into an actual work programme, it seems the emphasis has shifted to putting a priority on exposing what are alleged to be existing examples of corrupt Government decision-making.
The Deed says the exposure is to be done in collaboration with the media.
It should “widely disseminate information and give priority to the largest audiences” and “pay news media expenses to conduct a sting operation to record a lobbyist and a politician agreeing to arrange special favours.”
The Deed also proposes that the Institute “arrange with Stuff and other news media for a regular comment column op-ed. Avoid mentioning their competitors to help ensure publication.”
This does not appear to have happened.
Instead, it seems the Institute has done a deal with Newsroom.
The Trust Deed also lists the research and public education priorities for the Institute.
Only four organisations are singled out for study: Transparency International, the Taxpayers Union, the Maxim Institute and Federated Farmers.
Newsroom’s two stories (so far) centre on Federated Farmers’ role in rolling back Labour’s freshwater regulations.
The Feds certainly campaigned for that, and the rollback was a centrepiece of their 12-point election manifesto that they released before the last election.
But they say they have been transparent about their campaign.
Federated Farmers President, Wayne Langford, told POLITIK yesterday: “Not only do we make all of our submissions publicly available on our website – we also proactively publish the letters we send.
“We publicly released our policy platform for the 2023 election and sent it to all major political parties, asking them to adopt some of our policy positions as their own.
“This included follow-up meetings with all political parties currently in Government to discuss those policy positions – National, ACT, New Zealand First, Labour, Green, and Te Pāti Māori.”
Langford said Federated Farmers had never heard of the ‘Integrity Institute’ until last week, when they were clearly identified as the funders of a story by David Williams on Newsroom.
“We’ve since seen the organisation’s highly prescriptive trust deed and it’s safe to say we have some significant concerns – ironically, about what seems to be a lack of integrity,” he said.
“I think Newsroom, and in particular David Williams, have some serious questions to answer about whether they’re engaging in pay-for-play journalism and dirty politics.
“The fact that Newsroom have taken money from the Integrity Institute seriously calls into question their editorial independence and journalistic integrity.”
Newsroom co-editor, Tim Murphy, rejects those charges.
“The grant we received from the Integrity Institute came with no strings attached,” he said.
“We are free to investigate any lobby group we choose.
“The fact that we choose to do the influence of farming lobbies on freshwater regulations is purely a coincidence.
“Our reporter, David Williams, was already looking at this issue before our initial discussions with the Integrity Institute.
“The Institute has no editorial say in what we do and doesn’t want any.
“The first time they see what we have written is when it is published.
“We have a written agreement between us that ensures complete independence.
“The first piece could equally have been on the union, educational, transport or environmental lobbies Newsroom – not Integrity Institute – have on our list, but Dave was well advanced on these ag-water matters.”
The Integrity Institute’s Director, Bryce Edwards also rejects Federated Farmers charges.
“The Trust Deed for The Integrity Institute has been established by the trustees, rather than myself,” he told POLITIK.
“But for any organisation that wants to locate political influence – especially outsized influence on government decisions – then Federated Farmers is clearly one of the primary forces that needs scrutiny.
“It has existed for nearly a century, but has arguably become more politically powerful in recent years, but without a lot of media or academic study or challenge.
“So, we’re wanting to address that imbalance.”
But if the singling out of Federated Farmers for dodgy lobbying raises questions, the focus on Transparency International is even more questionable.
The first item in the Institute’s “first priority purpose work” is: “Research the track record of (Transparency International, NZ) TINZ to expose the myth they have created to help businesses make money by corrupting Government decision-making.”
Edwards knows the organisation well, as he is a former director.
Transparency International is a global movement working in over 100 countries to fight corruption.
They have a network of national chapters, which are independent organisations that operate within these countries, working to promote transparency, accountability, and integrity.
But apparently not in New Zealand, according to Edwards.
Transparency International publishes each year a Corruption Perception Index, which is prepared at the international level, not in New Zealand.
New Zealand’s score declined, from 85 to 83 in the 2024 Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI), resulting in a further slip in its global ranking, now to fourth, with Singapore moving into third place.
However, the Integrity Institute’s Trust Deed would seem to imply that it is fake and a cover-up.
The former National Party Minister who chairs Transparency International, Anne Tolley, said: “As our 2024 research shows, we need a zeitgeist shift in thinking about anti-corruption in New Zealand towards positive prevention.
“This includes stronger, more visible leadership by the Public Service Commission on public sector integrity, and a single well-funded agency with the primary and high-profile responsibility for anti-corruption monitoring, coordination, research and strategic operations.
“There is also a raft of legislation waiting, ready to be put in place; we need political will to push this forward on the legislative agenda.”
Edwards defends the focus on Transparency International.
“The local chapter of Transparency International is also in need of more scrutiny,” he said.
“Both the trustees and myself have previously been involved in or very supportive of Transparency International NZ (TINZ).
“Personally I served on its board for about seven years.
“Our experience of TINZ is that it has become a very conservative Establishment organisation that is too aligned with vested interests.
“We believe that TINZ has become more of an obstacle for the integrity agenda than a solution.
“Partly, this is because TINZ has been compromised by its funding and its networks, which are largely government agencies.
“TINZ appears to be conflicted by the involvement of partisan figures and businesspeople – it’s chaired by a former National Party Cabinet Minister.
“So, it’s because TINZ has become so much of an insider and Establishment force, that we believe that The Integrity Institute is now necessary.”
Meantime, Newsroom says its deal with the Integrity Institute commits it to “a year-long project tracking and disclosing lobbying and influence”, which the Institute will fund.
Given that the Institute’s Trust Deed also lists the Maxim Institute and Taxpayers’ Union as targets, it must be assumed these will be on Newsroom’s investigative list.
There are no hard and fast rules in New Zealand about what funding media can or cannot accept.
Usually, the “assistance” comes in the form of travel.
Some outlets have been willing to accept free travel from controversial countries like Israel or Taiwan.
POLITIK does not accept any travel from any foreign country.
There is also free travel on the Prime Minister’s plane, which POLITIK accepted for one leg of the Prime Minister’s recent China trip.
But the funding of reportage by an organisation with an overt political agenda is another matter.
More comment from Edwards
Our media partnership with Newsroom isn’t about paying for media coverage – we are simply commissioning them to carry out work that both of our organisations are interested in doing. The point of the partnership is not to obtain media coverage or promotion for ourselves – we have asked that when Newsroom publishes its investigative journalism that we have funded that they give some acknowledgement and transparency about The Integrity Institute’s involvement, but not to make it an advertisement for us with our logo etc.
We have been entirely transparent in our commissioning of Fox Meyer and David Williams to carry out investigations. And we have an arms length relationship, with zero contact with the journalists, and no involvement in how they carry out their investigations and what they publish.
Our only requirement is that they do in-depth investigations into some of the entities on our “NZ Lobbying and Influence Register”. How they do that is up to them. There are plenty of other instances of external funding of journalism around at the moment. One particular incidence that inspired this model that we are experimenting with is a couple of years ago the Listener magazine published a four-part series on poverty issues, investigated by journalist Rebecca Macfie, which was funded (transparently) by a philanthropist. We are doing something similar.
