IPA owns the Liberal Party

IPA aka the Institute of Public Affairs, is openly hostile to the Australian Labor Party (ALP) and the Greens. Have you noticed?

The ALP is the political arm of Australia’s trade union movement. Rather than trying to dissociate itself from trade unions, the ALP should rejoice in representing working class people in our parliaments.

Representing working class people is no reason for embarrassment or shame. It’s essential for the ALP’s future political prospects to reconnect with its working class roots.

With its roots inrepresenting the working class, the ALP is a prime target for the IPA.

Liberal Party: a slave to business and the IPA

In contrast with the ALP the same altruism does not hold true with the Liberal Party. The Liberal Party is the political arm of vested interests like big business like the banks, mining magnates and the IPA. Who all put profits before people.

Consider the bad behaviour uncovered during the Banks Royal Commission for example. Consider also that the IPA thought the Banks Royal Commission was a really, really, REALLY bad idea.

Caring about the poor and vulnerable is anathema to the IPA and its political arm — the Liberal Party. Dog eat dog is the bottom line for them both.

It’s no secret why the IPA opposes progressive policies. It’s a right wing “think tank” groaning at its seams with hard-core “libertarians“. It’s representatives are for sale to its donors.

What do we know about the IPA?

Firstly, it is highly secretive about its inner workings. Secondly, it will not reveal its donor funding sources. Thirdly, it has charitable status. Therefore, it doesn’t pay its fair share of taxes.

In other words, the IPA is as parasitic on our society as its tax minimising billionaire donors and corporations.

Why should you care if the IPA is in Parliament?

Scions of the Liberal Party are “fellows” of the IPA. Consequently, there is a  cannibalistic relationship between the Liberal Party and the IPA. Just like a dog eating its own vomit. This may explain why Georgina Downer failed to get elected.

As a result of the Abbott Government’s election in 2013 many of the IPA’s policies are now already in place. Above all because the IPA has infiltrated Parliament, the Liberal Party is now a subsidiary of the IPA. Or is it the other way around?

It does my head in. Wikipedia has a more comprehensive analysis. This includes a concise history and commentary on “notable” past and present members. For a more extensive expose of notorious IPA members visit SourceWatch.

Image: IPA and LNP - we need an investigation - from @Talaolp on Twitter

Image: IPA and LNP – we need an investigation – from @Talaolp on Twitter

Who are the IPA stooges in Parliament?

Several IPA members are elected to the current Federal Parliament. They include:

Other notorious members with deep ties to both organisations include Michael Kroger, Peta Credlin, Tony Abbott, Eric Abetz, Simon Birmingham, Michaelia Cash, George Christensen, Mathias Cormann, Josh Frydenberg, Ian MacDonald, James McGrath, Scott Morrison, Kelly O’Dwyer, Scott Ryan, Tony Smith, and Alan Tudge .

Subsequently, it is little wonder that most recently:

Invidious policies like these, and more, are on the IPA wish list.

Urgent: stringent funding and donor transparency required.

Political parties must declare donations. Similarly, trade unions have stringent financial reporting requirements. Contrast this with influential but secretive organisations like the IPA which are exempt.

I want more transparency on funding and finances because these “think tanks” have enormous influence. They constantly lobby and tell Prime Ministers what to do.

Why? It’s not illegal to be a lobbyist. True, but it is unethical to lobby government without declaring it. More importantly, the Liberal Party is so enmeshed with the IPA, donor transparency is vital.

Besides, there’s little harm in greater transparency of its funding sources. After all, those who donate to one probably donate to the other. Additionally, in my opinion, donor transparency should be fundamental for keeping its tax free status.

Outcomes from more stringent funding reporting

Requiring more transparent funding reporting should have beneficial results. For example an improvement in our social policy development and public programs. In short, knowing who funds these “think tanks” results in us better understanding their true motivations.

Other positive outcomes should flow from more stringent reporting arrangements for these think tanks.

The foundations for the Australian way of life is lending a helping hand and a fair go. Further, we need to save our public services from being sold. Without public services our society suffers and so does its citizens.

Because once these services are gone — they’re gone forever.

Stop backdoor government by billionaires/corporations

Importantly, parasites like Gina Rinehart and Rupert Murdoch should not be able to force their desires on the rest of us. To clarify, anonymous funding for think tanks whose members later get elected into Parliament should stop. Moreover, I believe anonymous funding of these think tanks is against the interests of the wider community.

In conclusion, funding transparency is vital for future generations of Australians who rely on us to protect their interests.

How about you? Do you want to see greater transparency of  “think tank” funding sources?

G'Day! Feel free to leave a Reply