Centre for Policy Development's Blog, page 36

New legal opinion and business roundtable on climate risks and directors’ duties | LEGAL OPINION and ROUNDTABLE | October 2016

CPD has released a new legal opinion on the extent to which Australian corporate law permits (and indeed requires) company directors to take climate change into account when making decisions about company strategy, performance and risk disclosure. The opinion was commissioned by CPD in partnership with the Future Business Council, and provided by Noel Hutley SC and Sebastian Hartford-Davis on instruction from Sarah Barker and Maged Girgis of Minter Ellison Lawyers. CPD and FBC convened a high-level business roundtable in Melbourne on 21 October to discuss the opinion and its far-reaching implications for boards and directors.

Legal opinion: directors’ duties and climate risk 

The legal opinion shows that the bar for directors is rising as the links between social and environmental factors and financial risks and performance come into sharp focus. It demonstrates that directors who fail to consider the impact of foreseeable climate change risks on their business properly could be held personally liable for breaching the duty of due care and diligence they owe to their companies.

Key findings of the opinion include:

Climate change risks would be regarded as foreseeable by courts, and relevant to a director’s duty of care and diligence to the extent that those risks intersect with the interests of the company (for example, by presenting corporate opportunity or risks to the company or its business model).


Company directors are not legally restricted from taking into account climate change and related economic, environmental and social sustainability risks, where those risks are, or may be, material to the interests of the company.


Company directors certainly can, and in some cases should be considering the impact on their business of climate change risks – and that directors who fail to do so now could be found liable for breaching their duty of care and diligence in the future.

In Mr Hutley’s view, “it is likely to be only a matter of time before we see litigation against a director who has failed to perceive, disclose or take steps in relation to a foreseeable climate-related risk that can be demonstrated to have caused harm to a company.”

Key documents and media coverage 

Legal opinion by Noel Hutley SC

Media release: Australian company directors must consider and disclose climate change risks to escape liability for breach of duty 

Agenda and participant list for the CBD-FBC roundtable

‘Paris Agreement a watershed moment for corporate Australia‘ Adele Ferguson, Australian Financial Review

‘Business leaders heed warning on climate change risks‘ Damon Kitney, The Australian

‘Company directors to face penalties for ignoring climate‘ Jessica Irvine, The Age/SMH

‘Directors ignore climate risks at their own peril‘ Bryan Horrigan, Australian Financial Review

‘The Paris climate agreement is a game-changer – and business risks being left behind‘ Sam Mostyn, The Guardian

‘Company directors can be held legally liable for ignoring the risks from climate change‘ Sam Hurley, Travers McLeod and John Wiseman, The Conversation

‘Big changes looming across the world but Australian’s could be left behind‘ Charis Chang, Daily Telegraph

‘Australian business woefully underprepared for climate change post Paris‘ Julian Vincent, The Age/SMH

This legal analysis reaffirms that directors are permitted to take a wide range of considerations into account when deciding what is in the best interests of a company, rather than focusing solely on immediate shareholder value maximisation. This includes climate risks and a range of other environmental, social and governance issues that influence the near and long-term performance of companies and of wider economy.

By exploring directors’ duties and sustainability through the prism of climate risk, we are seeking to highlight how crucial it is to elevate these issues to the boardroom level – and open up a constructive conversation about the skills, tools and strategies directors and boards need to improve sustainability risk management and disclosure. Encouraging and supporting directors to have proper regard to these issues is a key step towards ensuring that business is geared towards creating sustainable, long-term value and building an economy that recognises the interrelated economic, social, human and environmental drivers of prosperity and wellbeing.

***New: on 20 December, the Australian Institute and Company Directors Governance  Leadership Centre released a special newsletter on the implications of climate change for corporate governance, building on many of the issues discussed in the opinion and CPD-FBC roundtable. This included a discussion of the legal opinion by Sarah Barker, and a call for corporate leadership on climate by CPD fellow Ian Dunlop. The AICD work is available here: http://aicd.companydirectors.com.au/a...

 

CPD-FBC Business Roundtable on Directors’ Duties, Climate Risk and Sustainability

CPD and FBC convened over 30 senior business leaders, fund managers, legal experts and regulators to discuss the implications of the legal opinion at a business roundtable co-hosted by Minter Ellison Lawyers in Melbourne on 21 October. The roundtable, conducted on a Chatham House basis, considered the legal opinion and also heard from former Bank of England Executive Director Dr Paul Fisher, who highlighted how financial market participants and regulators internationally are stepping up their efforts to understand and respond to climate-related risks.

Participants included senior representatives from CBA, ANZ, BlackRock, Deutsche Bank, Aurizon, ASIC and APRA, leaders from some of Australia’s largest fund managers, and special guests former High Court Justice Kenneth Hayne AC QC and Shadow Attorney General Mark Dreyfus QC.

Dr Paul Fisher (left) addresses the roundtable

 

(Left to right) Participants Garry Weaven, Ed John and Lisa Nichols

 

Key conclusions and next steps 

Participants at the roundtable emphasised the importance of the legal opinion, and agreed that many Australian companies are particularly exposed to the physical, transition and liability risks posted by climate change. While many boards and directors are already actively considering these issues, the discussion highlighted the challenges many faced in terms of managing and disclosing sustainability-related risks at the level of sophistication increasingly being demanded by regulators and markets. Possible responses included greater investment in risk analysis and integrated reporting; a focus on technical support and consolidating measurement of sustainability-related risks; diversifying voices at the board table; embracing transparency and disclosure of all risks rather than just those specified by regulators; and stepping up concerted public advocacy on these issues on chairs, directors and regulators.

Following the constructive discussion at the roundtable, we will continue our policy work on these issues in coming months, with a focus on three priorities:

Increasing awareness in the director community of the importance of properly considering climate change and other sustainability risks – including, but by no means solely, to avoid possible breaches of directors’ duties.


Encouraging regulators to raise expectations about proper management and disclosure of environmental, social and governance risks, by providing clearer guidance on disclosure requirements and by stepping up supervision and stress testing for systemic sustainability-related risks or shocks.


Promoting constructive engagement by business leaders on long-term policy challenges, to support policies that can avert the need for sharper and riskier adjustments to inevitable trends and challenges like climate change.

 

Quotes from roundtable participants: 

We need to somehow put aside all the political considerations about whether people believe in climate change or whether its man-made. A lot of that is now irrelevant. This is a hard-headed commercial business risk issue, particularly for firms in the financial sector, which they need to be taking into account…

 

You don’t need to believe that climate change is man made, you just need to believe that governments are going to do something about it – which they are.  Previously people have said climate change is going to take a long time to come through – 30, 50 years, plenty of time to take action. But of course, financial markets are forward-looking, and as news accumulates they tend to jump and overshoot. The risk that we see, and that Mark Carney has been talking about, is that you get a sudden repricing of assets across the board in relation to news on climate – and that could generate financial stability concerns.

Dr Paul Fisher, former Executive Director of the Bank of England 

 

The roundtable was significant because of the quality of people in the room, the calibre of the legal opinion, and the collective recognition that climate and sustainability risks are becoming more pressing for directors, fund managers and regulators. Directors now have little choice but to understand how important climate change and sustainability risks are for them personally and for their companies, and act accordingly. 

 

Many forward-looking directors and executives have started grappling with this. There is only upside if everyone else gets up to speed, but we don’t have much time. Boards must ensure they have the targets, skills and processes in place to identify, disclose and respond to these risks – not just for legal or environmental reasons, but because the market demands we do so. One part of that equation is having a diverse set of voices around the table. Another part is working together so we can ask the right questions and get better answers. The roundtable and legal opinion have kickstarted the right conversation about how Australian directors, investors and regulators can be better prepared and show greater leadership as the issues come into sharp er focus. 

Sam Mostyn, Chair of Citigroup Australia

 

“I was impressed to see such high level representation at the round table from investors, corporate leadership, academia and the legal world, reflecting a recognition of the pervasive nature of climate change risk. The very practical focus on the foreseeability of climate change risk, not just physical but also transitional and regulatory, and the implication of this for me as a director right now, made me think about this issue afresh. A timely and compelling reminder that it is my duty as a director to review the steps being taken now by my companies to identify, assess, disclose and mitigate climate change risk.  

 

This is not a recipe to abandon energy intensive and resource industries but neither is it a matter to push off to the future.  The question to me as a director from investors and from the courts (heaven forbid) will not be whether I considered climate change risk but how I did so.  I need to be able to answer that question appropriately.”  

Russell Caplan, Director of Aurizon and former Chair of Shell Australia.  

 

 

CPD would like to thank all those who participated in the roundtable and in providing the legal advice, with special thanks to Noel Hutley SC, opinion co-author Sebastian Hartford-Davis, instructing solicitor Sarah Barker of Minter Ellison and our partners at the Future Business Council.

 

Related reading on this issue:

Breaking the tragedy of the horizon – climate change and financial stability - Mark Carney, 2016

Phase I Report of FSB Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures – FSB, 2016

Adapting portfolios to climate change – BlackRock Investment Institute, 2016

Directors personal liability for corporate inaction on climate change - Sarah Barker, 2015

The Next Boom - Future Business Council, 2015

 

 

The post New legal opinion and business roundtable on climate risks and directors’ duties | LEGAL OPINION and ROUNDTABLE | October 2016 appeared first on CPD.

New legal opinion and business roundtable on climate risks and directors’ duties

Today CPD is releasing a new legal opinion on the extent to which Australian corporate law permits (and indeed requires) company directors to take climate change into account when making decisions about company strategy, performance and risk disclosure. The opinion was commissioned by CPD in partnership with the Future Business Council, and provided by Noel Hutley SC and Sebastian Hartford-Davis on instruction from Sarah Barker and Maged Girgis of Minter Ellison Lawyers. CPD and FBC convened a high-level business roundtable in Melbourne on 21 October to discuss the opinion and its far-reaching implications for boards and directors.

Legal opinion: directors’ duties and climate risk 

The legal opinion shows that the bar for directors is rising as the links between social and environmental factors and financial risks and performance come into sharp focus. It demonstrates that directors who fail to consider the impact of foreseeable climate change risks on their business properly could be held personally liable for breaching the duty of due care and diligence they owe to their companies.

Key findings of the opinion include:

Climate change risks would be regarded as foreseeable by courts, and relevant to a director’s duty of care and diligence to the extent that those risks intersect with the interests of the company (for example, by presenting corporate opportunity or risks to the company or its business model).


Company directors are not legally restricted from taking into account climate change and related economic, environmental and social sustainability risks, where those risks are, or may be, material to the interests of the company.


Company directors certainly can, and in some cases should be considering the impact on their business of climate change risks – and that directors who fail to do so now could be found liable for breaching their duty of care and diligence in the future.

In Mr Hutley’s view, “it is likely to be only a matter of time before we see litigation against a director who has failed to perceive, disclose or take steps in relation to a foreseeable climate-related risk that can be demonstrated to have caused harm to a company.”

Key documents and media coverage 

Legal opinion by Noel Hutley SC

Media release: Australian company directors must consider and disclose climate change risks to escape liability for breach of duty 

Agenda and participant list for the CBD-FBC roundtable

‘Paris Agreement a watershed moment for corporate Australia‘ (Adele Ferguson, Australian Financial Review)

‘Business leaders heed warning on climate change risks‘ (Damon Kitney, The Australian)

‘Company directors to face penalties for ignoring climate‘ (Jessica Irvine, The Age/SMH)

This legal analysis reaffirms that directors are permitted to take a wide range of considerations into account when deciding what is in the best interests of a company, rather than focusing solely on immediate shareholder value maximisation. This includes climate risks and a range of other environmental, social and governance issues that influence the near and long-term performance of companies and of wider economy.

By exploring directors’ duties and sustainability through the prism of climate risk, we are seeking to highlight how crucial it is to elevate these issues to the boardroom level – and open up a constructive conversation about the skills, tools and strategies directors and boards need to improve sustainability risk management and disclosure. Encouraging and supporting directors to have proper regard to these issues is a key step towards ensuring that business is geared towards creating sustainable, long-term value and building an economy that recognises the interrelated economic, social, human and environmental drivers of prosperity and wellbeing.

 

CPD-FBC Business Roundtable on Directors’ Duties, Climate Risk and Sustainability

To begin that conversation, CPD and FBC convened over 30 senior business leaders, fund managers, legal experts and regulators to discuss the implications of the legal opinion at a business roundtable co-hosted by Minter Ellison Lawyers in Melbourne on 21 October. The roundtable, conducted on a Chatham House basis, considered the legal opinion and also heard from former Bank of England Executive Director Dr Paul Fisher, who highlighted how financial market participants and regulators internationally are stepping up their efforts to understand and respond to climate-related risks.

Participants included senior representatives from CBA, ANZ, BlackRock, Deutsche Bank, Aurizon, ASIC and APRA, leaders from some of Australia’s largest fund managers, and special guests former High Court Justice Kenneth Hayne AC QC and Shadow Attorney General Mark Dreyfus QC.

Dr Paul Fisher (left) addresses the roundtable

 

(Left to right) Participants Garry Weaven, Ed John and Lisa Nichols

 

Key conclusions and next steps 

Participants at the roundtable emphasised the importance of the legal opinion, and agreed that many Australian companies are particularly exposed to the physical, transition and liability risks posted by climate change. While many boards and directors are already actively considering these issues, the discussion highlighted the challenges many faced in terms of managing and disclosing sustainability-related risks at the level of sophistication increasingly being demanded by regulators and markets. Possible responses included greater investment in risk analysis and integrated reporting; a focus on technical support and consolidating measurement of sustainability-related risks; diversifying voices at the board table; embracing transparency and disclosure of all risks rather than just those specified by regulators; and stepping up concerted public advocacy on these issues on chairs, directors and regulators.

Following the constructive discussion at the roundtable, we will continue our policy work on these issues in coming months, with a focus on three priorities:

Increasing awareness in the director community of the importance of properly considering climate change and other sustainability risks – including, but by no means solely, to avoid possible breaches of directors’ duties.


Encouraging regulators to raise expectations about proper management and disclosure of environmental, social and governance risks, by providing clearer guidance on disclosure requirements and by stepping up supervision and stress testing for systemic sustainability-related risks or shocks.


Promoting constructive engagement by business leaders on long-term policy challenges, to support policies that can avert the need for sharper and riskier adjustments to inevitable trends and challenges like climate change.

 

Quotes from roundtable participants: 

We need to somehow put aside all the political considerations about whether people believe in climate change or whether its man-made. A lot of that is now irrelevant. This is a hard-headed commercial business risk issue, particularly for firms in the financial sector, which they need to be taking into account…

 

You don’t need to believe that climate change is man made, you just need to believe that governments are going to do something about it – which they are.  Previously people have said climate change is going to take a long time to come through – 30, 50 years, plenty of time to take action. But of course, financial markets are forward-looking, and as news accumulates they tend to jump and overshoot. The risk that we see, and that Mark Carney has been talking about, is that you get a sudden repricing of assets across the board in relation to news on climate – and that could generate financial stability concerns.

Dr Paul Fisher, former Executive Director of the Bank of England 

 

The roundtable was significant because of the quality of people in the room, the calibre of the legal opinion, and the collective recognition that climate and sustainability risks are becoming more pressing for directors, fund managers and regulators. Directors now have little choice but to understand how important climate change and sustainability risks are for them personally and for their companies, and act accordingly. 

 

Many forward-looking directors and executives have started grappling with this. There is only upside if everyone else gets up to speed, but we don’t have much time. Boards must ensure they have the targets, skills and processes in place to identify, disclose and respond to these risks – not just for legal or environmental reasons, but because the market demands we do so. One part of that equation is having a diverse set of voices around the table. Another part is working together so we can ask the right questions and get better answers. The roundtable and legal opinion have kickstarted the right conversation about how Australian directors, investors and regulators can be better prepared and show greater leadership as the issues come into sharp er focus. 

Sam Mostyn, Chair of Citigroup Australia

 

“I was impressed to see such high level representation at the round table from investors, corporate leadership, academia and the legal world, reflecting a recognition of the pervasive nature of climate change risk. The very practical focus on the foreseeability of climate change risk, not just physical but also transitional and regulatory, and the implication of this for me as a director right now, made me think about this issue afresh. A timely and compelling reminder that it is my duty as a director to review the steps being taken now by my companies to identify, assess, disclose and mitigate climate change risk.  

 

This is not a recipe to abandon energy intensive and resource industries but neither is it a matter to push off to the future.  The question to me as a director from investors and from the courts (heaven forbid) will not be whether I considered climate change risk but how I did so.  I need to be able to answer that question appropriately.”  

Russell Caplan, Director of Aurizon and former Chair of Shell Australia.  

 

 

CPD would like to thank all those who participated in the roundtable and in providing the legal advice, with special thanks to Noel Hutley SC, opinion co-author Sebastian Hartford-Davis, instructing solicitor Sarah Barker of Minter Ellison and our partners at the Future Business Council.

 

Related reading on this issue:

Breaking the tragedy of the horizon – climate change and financial stability - Mark Carney, 2016

Phase I Report of FSB Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures – FSB, 2016

Adapting portfolios to climate change – BlackRock Investment Institute, 2016

Directors personal liability for corporate inaction on climate change - Sarah Barker, 2015

The Next Boom - Future Business Council, 2015

 

 

The post New legal opinion and business roundtable on climate risks and directors’ duties appeared first on CPD.

Responding to North Korea: in conversation with Michael Kirby and Gareth Evans

In October, CPD was proud to once again partner with ANU to host a unique conversation between two of Australia’s most distinguished and influential experts on law, international relations and human rights: Professor the Honourable Gareth Evans, AC QC, and the Honourable Michael Kirby, AC CMG. Our two speakers were joined at ANU House in Melbourne by guests from diplomatic and policy community and media to discuss the topic ‘responding to North Korea’.

This is an issue close to both Michael and Gareth’s hearts as long-term and passionate advocates for protection of human rights both domestically and internationally. In addition to being one of Australia’s longest serving Foreign Ministers, Gareth Evans was former President Emeritus of the International Crisis Group and Co-Chair of the United Nations Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty. Michael Kirby, a former Australian High Court Justice, led the United Nations Commission of Inquiry into Human Rights Abuses in North Korea. The Commission called for urgent action by the international community to address North Korea’s decades-long pursuit of policies that “shock the conscience of humanity”. Needless to say, Gareth and Michael have a unique vantage point and perspectives on the human rights, security and diplomatic problems presented by North Korea, and on the wider international architecture and agenda for advancing human rights and non-proliferation.

The conversation was moderated by CPD Research Committee Chair and international security expert Jeni Whalan. It focused on strategies for addressing these grave human rights abuses, and the complex diplomatic interplay between the human rights agenda and international efforts to curb the growing nuclear ambitions and capabilities of Kim Jong-un’s regime. Gareth and Michael offered valuable and at times different perspectives on how these two crucial diplomatic and humanitarian agendas could be prioritised and reconciled.

 

Michael Kirby: “The two [strategic concerns and human rights] are linked because to the extent that North Korea is a human rights abusing country, it is an unstable country, and there are potentially lots of people who are really suffering there…There is a growing awareness within DPRK of what the world is saying. The issue is, will that cause the instability that so far has not really evidenced itself? That must be something that is concerning the regime…

 

The Council on Foreign Relations made the point that Gareth has made – this is not an irrational regime; these are not irrational steps. I suspect that Kim Jong-un has on his wall that pathetic photo of Saddam Hussein coming out of his hole and a picture of Gaddafi in a pipe and is determined that he will not get to either of those places. The nuclear strategy is a strategy of his and his regime to prevent that happening, and that is a rational policy on the part of an oppressive country that is doing great wrongs to its own people. [Yet] doing nothing is not an option, as doing nothing is to turn your back on crimes against humanity.”

 

Gareth Evans: “There’s a tension between whatever strategies you are talking about that are designed to put the pressure on on the human rights front, and what we might need to do to move forward on the nuclear front. There is no denying that tension. You could finesse it by saying well, the nuclear issue is itself a human rights issue, which it undoubtedly is because nuclear weapons are the most indiscriminately inhumane weapons ever devised, and such momentum as there is for disarmament at the moment is being generated by that humanitarian human rights impulse…

 

My instinct is the nuclear thing really is the key to just about everything else. If we can resolve the nuclear issue, and at the same time give the North Koreans some real confidence that regime change is not going to be an objective of any of their neighbours or the United States and that they can actually live and run their society without that external fear…then I think there is a chance over time that the environment you will so create will be one that is far more conducive to sanity and acceptable behaviour on the human rights front.”

A full transcript and recording of the conversation will be coming soon. 

It was an honour to facilitate this discussion and we thank the Honourable Gareth Evans and the Honourable Michael Kirby for sharing their decades of their wisdom and expertise, and a joke or two between old friends. We thank ANU House in Melbourne for co-hosting this enlightening discussion and look forward to working with them on future events.

 The Honourable Michael Kirby, Jeni Whalan, the Honourable Gareth Evans, and CPD CEO Travers McLeod

The post Responding to North Korea: in conversation with Michael Kirby and Gareth Evans appeared first on CPD.

Fellow Mark Triffitt on what Trump’s rise and fall means for US politics

While the successful candidacy of Republican Presidential nominee Donald Trump may appear to be increasingly unlikely, his rise and appeal to tens of millions of supporters remains an area of great concern for Fellow Mark Triffitt.

The post-Trump reality of American politics will be defined by an “entrenched and potentially toxic” divide between the Establishment and Anti-Establishment. Looking beyond the results November 8 election, Mark worries about the “new post-Trump breed of leaders”. This new class will emerge from grass-roots politics and be far more competent at expressing and sustaining the discontent of American populism.

Mark delves into American populist movements from the 20th century and firmly places the isolationist movement Trump has been leading in a dark historical context. Mark’s conclusion is concerning, for democracy and the world- “What we could be seeing is the emergence of fascism – American-style”.

Read his piece in The Conversation here.

The post Fellow Mark Triffitt on what Trump’s rise and fall means for US politics appeared first on CPD.

Chairperson Terry Moran’s vision for the ‘new age’ of Public Sector capability

In a speech to the Technology One conference in Brisbane, CPD Chairperson Terry Moran AC outlined the five principles and key reforms that the Australian Public Sector need to adopt to perform in a new age.

Terry outlined his view of the current problems with the public service and asserted that, in opposition to several former colleagues, increased transparency is not only a good thing for our government but desperately needed. Terry argues for “radical reform” of Freedom of Information laws, as making more government documents part of the public discourse will make our administration more reliable, accountable, and remove the “over-reliance on guess work”.

Increased transparency will be the hallmark of the fourth age of the Public Sector. We must develop new analytical tools to transform our public workforce and the enhance capability and effectiveness in the new digital era. New and innovative technologies such as Big Data and AI will greatly influence what Terry calls the era of ‘Public Administration 4’ which must respond to “digital disruptions linked to globalisation”. These are Terry’s five principles for improvement in transitioning to Public Administration 4.

Our public service analytical work needs to be rebalanced to treat distributive justice alongside technical efficiency.
New technologies will make it far easier to devolve more responsibility for delivery to the local level.
We will need a more strategic approach to planning and assessing investments in our major government systems.
Reforms will be more reliable if we transform our approach to placing planning and management documents before the public
The public sector should match, if not better, the private sector in responding to new technologies and improving efficiency.

Read the Mandarin’s take on Terry’s ideas here and the transcript of his full October 20th speech here .

The post Chairperson Terry Moran’s vision for the ‘new age’ of Public Sector capability appeared first on CPD.

Fellow Ian McAuley comments on prosthetics price reforms

Responding to Health Minister Susan Ley’s recent announcement on cost-cutting reforms to medical devices and prostheses, CPD Fellow Ian McAuley is cautious in assessing the utility and benefit of the policy.

Currently the cost of important devices and prosthetics, such as cardiac devices including pacemakers, hip and knee replacements, and lenses to treat eye degeneration are higher for consumers with private insurance than those in the public system. As part of the government’s ongoing review of the private insurance industry, the new policy intends to cut costs for insurers by $500 million over the coming six years.

The government hopes that these savings will be passed onto customers, but Ian points out that this may not materialise as intended due to the multitude of insurers in the market. For Ian, this is further evidence for the need for a single national insurer, an ongoing subject of his research.

Read Ian’s comments in the Guardian here.

The post Fellow Ian McAuley comments on prosthetics price reforms appeared first on CPD.

Fellows Chris Bonnor and Bernie Shepard continue to impact the education funding debate

Since the release of Uneven Playing Field: The State of Australia’s Schools, CPD has had a measurable impact on the public debate regarding the future of education policy. Our Fellows Chris Bonnor and Bernie Shepard continue to advocate for a fairer schools funding framework that addresses growing inequity and concentrating disadvantage across government and non-government schools in Australia.

It is a critical time to be influencing the debate, as Federal Education Minister Birmingham has begun negotiations with state and territory counterparts regarding a new schools funding agreement.

As these negotiations continue, the media coverage is increasingly highlighting the schools funding imbalance as well as promoting ideas for reform. For instance, the idea of introducing an independent schools resourcing body, which was recommended by the Gonski Panel Review and endorsed by CPD in Uneven Playing Field, is being debated in the public forum.

Highlighted below is Chris and Bernie’s recent presence in the public debate. For a summary of their earlier media appearances and comments surrounding Uneven Playing Field, see here.

On September 20, Chris commented on Fairfax’s findings that state schools are scrambling for funding and are increasingly divided by socio-economic status. See a link to his thoughts here.

In a September 21 essay for Inside Story, Chris and Bernie used data from Uneven Playing Field to illustrate the arbitrary and unfair nature of our current education funding system by comparing a series of similar schools on either side of the Victoria-NSW border. See a link to the essay here.

In late September, the expert opinion and analysis of Chris and Bernie on inappropriate and unfair funding packages featured prominently in The Age, following Minister Simon Birmingham’s comments on the ABC’s Q&A programme where he flagged that some non-government schools are “over-funded”. For Chris, Minister Birmingham’s acknowledgement is a very welcome development in the “very bruising debate” over funding inequality. Systemic funding inequities are particularly pronounced in Victoria as shown by Chris and Bernie’s data. You can read Chris and Bernie’s comments in The Age from 27 September here and here.

Chris wrote a pair of editorials for CPD Fellow John Menadue’s blog, Pearls and Irritations, on 24 September and 3 October. In his first piece Chris outlines the problems facing our education funding system, and argues that the current series of COAG meetings will be crucial for reform to create a fairer education funding system. In his second piece, Chris recaps and analyses an eventful week which saw “one school funding revelation after another” on Q&A and the media follow up surrounding the Ministers comments. You can read them here and here.

On 16 October, Chris was again called upon to comment on Fairfax Media’s independent analysis of New South Wales school funding levels. Fairfax’s findings aligned closely to those in Uneven Playing Field, in that private schools which have considerable sources of private income are continually receiving unfair government funding compared to similar state schools.  Read the SMH exclusive findings here.

Read Chris and Bernie’s full report Uneven Playing Field: The State of Australia’s Schools here.

The post Fellows Chris Bonnor and Bernie Shepard continue to impact the education funding debate appeared first on CPD.

Chairperson Terry Moran on the role of public service Secretaries

Our Chair Terry Moran was called on for comment by David Donaldson in his new Mandarin article on the differing views of the ideal tenure and longevity of top bureaucrats and secretaries.

Asked what is a suitable amount of time to enact meaningful change and impact for the top public servant job, Terry takes the position that there should be a minimum posting of five years. Terry was the Secretary of the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet, the most senior position in the Australian Public Service, for three and a half years under Prime Ministers Rudd and Gillard. He was also previously the Secretary of the Department of Premier and Cabinet in Victoria for eight years. Reflecting on his major tenures, Terry takes the position for a Secretary to be successful and have a strategic leadership role, “five years is not long enough”.

Read the article here.

The post Chairperson Terry Moran on the role of public service Secretaries appeared first on CPD.

Fellow Fiona Armstrong hosts health and climate round-table at Parliament House

Next Monday CPD Fellow Fiona Armstrong, who was recently recognised as one of Australia’s 100 most influential women, is hosting a leadership event and round-table discussion in Canberra. This will be Australia’s first meeting regarding the emerging threats to health resulting from climate change.

Through the Climate and Health Alliance, a grouping of health professionals dedicated to affecting climate change policy, which she founded and is an Executive Director of, Fiona will lead discussions between health sector leaders and prominent Parliamentarians from all sides of politics. This will be an opportunity to give the unique health care perspective of CAHA and their concern for climate change and carbon emissions directly to MPs, while sending a strong message to Australia’s wider health and medical community.

 

The post Fellow Fiona Armstrong hosts health and climate round-table at Parliament House appeared first on CPD.

Congratulations to Fellow Fiona Armstrong

CPD wholeheartedly congratulates Fellow Fiona Armstrong, who was named as one of the ‘100 Women of Influence 2016′ by the Financial Review and Westpac.

 

Fiona was deservedly recognised on the list of prominent Australian women this year for her work as the Founder and Executive Director of the Climate and Health Alliance. CAHA is a group of organisations and individuals in Australia’s health sector who are committed to realising concerted and effective action and policies on climate change. The quality and impact of CAHA’s reports and advocacy work under the leadership of Fiona shows her commitment to creating positive change for Australia, and places her among women such as Megan Davis, Elizabeth Shaw, Gillian Triggs, and many other extraordinary women.

Congratulations Fiona!

Read the full 2016 list of ‘100 Women of Influence’ here.

The post Congratulations to Fellow Fiona Armstrong appeared first on CPD.