Lobby group giving farmers a bad name

The Guardian, 2 May 2019:

The Queensland farm lobby AgForce has deleted more than a decade worth of data from a government program that aims to improve water quality in the Great Barrier Reef, in response to state government moves to introduce new reef protection laws.

Guardian Australia revealed in June that the state’s auditor general had raised concerns that agriculture industry groups had refused to share data from the “best management practices” program due to privacy concerns.

In recent months, AgForce and others had campaigned against the imposition of new reef protection regulations, which set sediment “load limits” in reef catchments and impose new standards on farmers.

The proposed new laws, which have been introduced to state parliament, also include a provision to allow the environment minister to obtain data from agricultural groups……

The Queensland environment minister, Leeanne Enoch, told the Courier-Mail the decision flushed “so much work and the taxpayer dollars that have been supporting it out to sea”.

“AgForce often claims that they are true environmentalists but this decision is not the action of a group that wants to protect the environment,” she said.

The Queensland audit office last year found that the success of the best management practices program could not be properly measured because the agricultural groups that receive government funding would not provide data on whether producers had actually improved their practices.

“This detailed information is currently held by the industry groups,” the report said. “Despite this work being funded by government, the information is not provided to government due to privacy concerns from the industry.

“These data restrictions mean government does not have full visibility of the progress made and cannot measure the degree of practice change or assess the value achieved from its investment of public funds.

“This means that the reported proportion of lands managed using best management practice systems could be overstated.”

People in rural and regional Australia – those bearing the brunt of climate change, drought, floods, limited services and inadequate infrastructure – deserve to know how the Morrison Government is spending their hard-earned tax dollars

Scratch the surface of that mismanaged super federal government department – the Dept. of Home Affairs in the portfolio of Minister for Home Affairs & Liberal MP for Dickson Peter Dutton – and one finds disturbing information.

Usually this information concerns the abuse of detained asylum seekers' human rights, including right to timely medical treatment and legal advice/representation.

This latest concerns a corporate entity variously identified as the Paladin Group (Paladin Australia Pty Ltd, formerly Paladin Group Pty Ltd, High Risk Security Group (Asia-Pacific) Pty Ltd, Nepean Bay SA), Paladin Solution PNG Ltd (Nepean Bay SA) and Paladin Holdings PTE Ltd (Singapore) and its est. $423 million in federal government contracts paid for from the taxpayer's dollar.

It is Paladin Holdings PTE Ltd out of Singapore (reportedly owned by Craig Trupp and Ian Stewart) which now appears to hold the primary government contract.

Despite Paladin's thin capitalisation, despite lack of corporate transparency, despite allegations of poor service delivery, despite Craig Trupp/s less than stellar business history and the fact that it appears he is no longer allowed entry to Papua New Guinea and despite another director of Paladin Solutions PNG Ltd allegedly being investigated for fraud/money laundering the Dept. of Home Affairs continues to make exclusive contacts with the Paladin Group.

This Paladin contract is fast shaping up as the new catchphrase for suspected political corruption………..

Paladin premises, Port Moresby. Image Dan Ilic

Financial Review, 17 February 2019:

The family of one of PNG's most powerful politicians is directly benefiting from Paladin's $423 million worth of security contracts on Manus Island, awarded by the federal government in a closed tender.

Documents released under Freedom of Information show in January last year Paladin Solutions PNG entered into an agreement with Peren Investment, a company controlled by the brothers of PNG's parliamentary speaker, Job Pomat.

Mr Pomat is the local member for Manus, a key ally of Prime Minister Peter O'Neill and deputy leader of the ruling People's National Congress. His family are among those who claim traditional ownership of the land where the refugees are being housed.

The agreement, for local employment and the provision of other services, came just a month after landowners blockaded the refugee transit centre in December 2017, demanding a greater share of the money being spent on the island.

When asked about any link between Paladin and PNG politicians, Attorney-General Christian Porter said it was not in his portfolio area, but such claims warranted further investigation.

"I don't have any line of sight into those sorts of claims and they have to be investigated thoroughly," he told the ABC's Insiders program on Sunday.

The issue is set to be examined further at Senate Estimates hearings on Monday and Tuesday, after a series of articles in the The Australian Financial Review raised questions about how the thinly capitalised Paladin, which had little experience, a poor reputation and no corporate structure, was awarded such a lucrative contract.

The contracts were awarded as part of a "limited tender", which typically means only one party was invited to bid.

In the days following the first Financial Review articles Paladin shuffled its ownership structure, removed information from its website and changed its Australian registered office from a beach shack on Kangaroo Island to a serviced office in Canberra. That office did not have the phone connected on Friday.

Financial Review, 15 February 2019:

One issue that raised concern was Paladin's peculiar head office set-up. The Kangaroo Island address had no listed phone number and could not receive mail from Australia Post, highlighting a general air of secrecy around the company.

The Financial Review, 13 February 2019:

Home Affairs Minister Peter Dutton has moved to distance himself from a controversial government contractor that is providing security on Manus Island, arguing he had "no sight" of the tender process and it was a matter for department officials.

In the first public comments since The Australian Financial Review revealed little-known company Paladin was earning up to $17 million a month to provide security at three refugee centres on Manus Island after a closed tender process, Mr Dutton said those responsible were "the secretary of the department ultimately or delegated to someone within the department".

The Financial Review, 11 February 2019:

The key beneficiary of a $423 million government contract to provide security for refugees on Manus Island left a string of bad debts and failed contracts across Asia, raising further questions about how the Paladin group won such a lucrative tender.

As pressure builds on the government to explain the hefty cost of its offshore processing regime, further details have emerged about the Paladin founder, Craig Thrupp, and his time in East Timor and Indonesia.

The Financial Review, 10 February 2019:

As federal Parliament prepares for another fractious debate around refugees on Monday, an investigation by The Australian Financial Review has found the Department of Home Affairs overlooked allegations of deception, lying during the tender process and questionable payments when it extended Paladin's contract on January 3. These allegations emerged during a bitter legal dispute between Paladin and its former chief executive for PNG, Craig Coleman, who is suing the company for breach of contract.

In addition, Paladin's founder and key executive, Craig Thrupp, is no longer able to enter PNG, while another local director, Kisokau Powaseu, was detained in Port Moresby last month and charged with misappropriating funds and money laundering……

Paladin, controlled by Mr Thrupp, a former Australian soldier, and his business partner Ian Stewart, has also recently purchased the contentious PNG security outfit Black Swan, a company repeatedly forced to deny rumours it has links to the family of Prime Minister Peter O'Neill…..

"Australian taxpayers are expending a huge amount of money but we don't see much of it being utilised on the ground in Manus," said Abdul Aziz, a Sudanese refugee who has been on the island for five years.

"The maintenance service is very poor … and they have not bought any new equipment in many years," says Mr Aziz.

This was confirmed by a UNHCR report published last July which noted rooms at the East Lorengau camp were below international shelter standards for accommodation over three months, while other areas had leaking pipes, a lack of fire alarms and showers that were not working.

The report did however note improvements in other areas like the ratio of toilets and the general accommodation conditions in other camps.

Calculations by the Financial Review indicate Paladin is being paid on average $20.8 million a month by the government to provide security at all three sites and manage the East Lorengau Transit Centre. That amount has risen 48 per cent from an average of $14 million a month last year. A Home Affairs spokesperson said there were now 422 people housed at the three camps – 213 at East Lorengau, 111 at West Lorengau and 98 asylum seekers at Hillside Haus.

That means on a daily basis it now costs the Australian government over $1600 to house each refugee on Manus, not including food and welfare services, more than double the price of a suite at the Shangri-La hotel in Sydney.

Typically, profit margins are as much as 40 per cent on these contracts because of the risks involved. However, Paladin's margin is "unbelievable", according to one source familiar with the this type of work. That's because the company uses mostly local staff and its security guards earn about $2 an hour.

The company is believed to have just over a dozen expatriate staff, who might be earning $150,000 each. Home Affairs says it provides security, transport, IT services and emergency management. Even if you build in generous contingencies for evacuations, emergency response teams and local consultants, Paladin's total costs are estimated to be less than $3 million a month. That means they are pocketing more than $17 million a month to manage the East Lorengau centre and secure the three camps, which have been used as primary accommodation for refugees and asylum seekers since the offshore processing centre at the nearby Lombrum naval base was closed in October 2017.

The Guardian, 17 February 2019:

Penny Wong has indicated Labor will target the Paladin offshore detention security contract in Senate estimates this week, accusing the government of failing to explain why the company was awarded $420m in contracts through closed tender…..

Wong told reporters in Adelaide the Paladin contract had “a lot of questions around it” and it was “deeply concerning” a company with “such a poor track record” was awarded $420m.

Wong accused Porter of giving answers that were “not consistent” with Dutton’s because “this went to a closed tender – not an open tender, [it was] not an open competitive process”.

Wong accused Dutton of “trying to wash [his] hands of it”. “Tomorrow is Senate estimates – what I’d say to the government is: stop hiding.

“Why don’t you front up and tell the truth about why that contract is awarded in such circumstances, why it went to closed tender?”

Financial Review, 18 February 2019:

Paladin, the security firm at the centre of the $423 million contract scandalhas a secret office in Canberra, just three kilometres from Parliament House.

The Australian Financial Review visited an office location near the fashionable Kingston Foreshore precinct in which Paladin staff are based.

That address, however, is different to the Canberra location that was provided to corporate regulators as the company's registered office and principal place of business, in a filing last week.

Paladin had previously advised the corporate regulator that its registered office and principal place of business was a remote location on Kangaroo Island in South Australia that had no post box and was therefore unable to receive mail.

But as coverage of the secretive company, which has been awarded contracts totalling $423 million to provide security on Manus Island, has intensified, Paladin has since made changes to its address and shareholder structure.

Paladin Australia notified regulators that its shareholding had transferred from the company's Hong Kong-registered entity to the Singapore company, which is the entity granted a government contract worth $333 million. The company is owned by 38-year-old, Canberra-born former soldier CraigThrupp and 41-year-old Ian Duncan Stewart.

On Thursday, Paladin Australia also changed its registered address to a serviced office in the suburb of Barton. As of Friday, the company had not been set up with phones to receive calls.

But sources with knowledge of the company, said Paladin actually operated out of another Canberra location on Eyre Street in the Kingston district.

That address is two kilometres away from the Servcorp address provided to regulators.

There's no signage or branding of any kind outside the office and apartment block and the ground floor workspaces are covered by heavy blinds.

When the Financial Review buzzed the intercom for the unmarked offices on the ground floor, a woman answered and Mr Thrupp came to the entrance.

He did not identify himself or make any comment before going back inside the locked entrance.

Staff walked back and forth between the two secure office areas, using electronic access cards to enter and exit.

The secret office location raises further questions about Paladin and its apparent attempts at hiding its principal place of business.

Paladin's previously registered office in Kangaroo Island had no mail box, which made it near impossible for the company to receive mail and be served legal documents.

Financial Review, 19 February 2019:

Paladin affair: Fact-checking what Home Affairs said in Senate Estimates

The beach shack

Home Affairs dismissed Paladin having its Australian head office at a "beach shack" on Kangaroo Island as unimportant, saying that entity was not involved in the Manus Island contract.

Court documents show Paladin's former chief executive, Craig Coleman, who was the project director for Manus Island and exercised control over the Commonwealth contract was employed by the Australian company, which was registered to that beach shack on Kangaroo Island.

In November 2017, two months after Paladin Solutions signed its first letter of intent with the Australian government it registered with Australian regulators as a foreign entity. The registered office it provided was the "beach shack". Both directors provided this location as their address.

Fraud and money laundering

Home Affairs said the Paladin director Kisokau Powaseu who has been charged with 106 counts of fraud and one of money laundering was not a director of any entities contracted to the Commonwealth.

Under questioning Home Affairs conceded Mr Powaseu was a director of Paladin Solutions, the entity which received $89 million of payments after a letter of intent was signed in September 2017.

Paladin Solutions is registered in PNG and is a wholly owned subsidiary of Paladin Singapore, the entity which currently holds the $333 million government contract. Mr Powaseu was appointed a director of the company in May 2018.

In court documents relating to Paladin's dispute with its former CEO Mr Coleman, the company agrees Mr Powaseu was a director of Paladin Solutions PNG which was "engaged with the Australian government".

The Paladin web

The department expanded and contracted the Paladin group of companies at its convenience. On the issue of Powaseu, the department was quick to stress the point that this individual had no ties to Paladin Singapore, the entity contracted by the Australian government. (This was later found to be inaccurate - see the Fraud and money laundering section of this story.)

However, when the department wished to demonstrate Paladin's long track record, it was prepared to refer to other companies in the group including Paladin Solutions, Pomwan Paladin and Paladin Aus.

'Global' Company

Home Affairs also relied on Paladin's collection of subsidiaries in stressing it was "a global company" with clients across the region. Deputy secretary Cheryl-Anne Moy said Paladin has "a very extensive and a very experienced operation" listing among its key clients the Australian Defence Force, which used it for APEC security support and the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade for which it had provided security in Port Moresby for nearly three years.

The department later clarified that those clients had come to the firm via Paladin's mysterious purchase of one of PNG's biggest private security firms, Black Swan, in July last year. That was followed by an interjection from one of the senators who said the purchase had come about because "you gave them so much money." At the time the government awarded Paladin the sizeable contract, it did not have these clients.

Home Affairs also conceded Paladin's lack of experience in dealing with sizeable contracts had been one of the risks identified during the tender process. While Paladin had been operating on Manus Island, as a subcontractor to Broadspectrum and Wilson Security, these had been much smaller contracts.

In his statement of claim, former CEO Mr Coleman claimed just three weeks before being awarded the September 2017 contract Paladin was "not well prepared to perform the role provided for under the Proposal".

"Paladin did not have the corporate structure, human and other resources or processes that would permit it … to perform the roles required under the Proposal," he alleged.

Money up front

When asked whether Paladin was advanced $10 million of funds by the government prior to delivering services as part of the contract, Home Affairs initially said this was false.

Upon further questioning, it emerged Paladin was paid $5.5 million as part of a letter of intent ahead of any services it provided and subsequently received further payments totalling $89 million before a formal contract had been agreed.

Access denied

Home Affairs said it had to check whether it was made directly aware Paladin managing director and part-owner Craig Thrupp was unable to enter PNG.

That is despite the PNG government confirming on Monday "the visa of one of the directors of the company [Paladin] was cancelled because of the company not adhering to the government's position on recruitment of local labour".

Paladin also confirmed to the Financial Review a week earlier Mr Thrupp's APEC Permit (a regional visa) had been cancelled and said since then he had not attempted to enter PNG…..

BACKGROUND

Australian Government, AusTender, retrieved 18 February 2019:

CN ID: CN3496748-A2

Agency: Department of Home Affairs

Amendment Publish Date: 3-Jan-2019

Category: Management support services

Contract Period: 28-Feb-2018 to 30-Jun-2019

Contract Value (AUD): $333,546,146.40

Amendment Value (AUD): $109,239,312.00

Amendment Start Date: 1-Jan-2019

Description: Garrison Services at ELRTC & additional sites PNG

Parent CN: CN3496748

Procurement Method: Limited tender

Limited Tender Condition: 10.3.e. Additional deliveries by original supplier intended as replacement parts, extensions, or continuation for existing goods or services for compatibility.

Confidentiality - Contract: No

Confidentiality - Outputs: No

Consultancy: No

Agency Reference ID:0070021821

Supplier Details

Name: PALADIN HOLDINGS PTE LTD

Postal Address: 4 Battery Road China Building

Town/City: Singapore

Postcode: 049908

State/Territory: Outside Australia

Country: SINGAPORE

ABN: Exempt

____________________________________

CN ID: CN3496748-A1

Agency: Department of Home Affairs

Amendment Publish Date: 29-Oct-2018

Category: Management support services

Contract Period: 28-Feb-2018 to 30-Jun-2019

Contract Value (AUD): $224,306,834.40

Amendment Value (AUD): $47,430,000.00

Amendment Start Date:

1-Nov-2018 Description: Garrison Services at ELRTC & additional sites PNG

Parent CN: CN3496748

Procurement Method: Limited tender

Limited Tender Condition: 10.3.e. Additional deliveries by original supplier intended as replacement parts, extensions, or continuation for existing goods or services for compatibility.

Confidentiality - Contract: No

Confidentiality - Outputs: No

Consultancy: No

Agency Reference ID: 0070021821

Supplier Details

Name: PALADIN HOLDINGS PTE LTD

Postal Address: 4 Battery Road China Building

Town/City: Singapore Postcode: 049908

State/Territory: Outside Australia

Country: SINGAPORE

ABN: Exempt

____________________________________

Provision of Garrison Services at East Lorengau Refugee Transit Centre, Manus

CN ID: CN3470670

Agency: Department of Home Affairs

Publish Date: 27-Nov-2017

Category: Management support services

Contract Period: 21-Sep-2017 to 28-Feb-2018

Contract Value (AUD): $89,243,817.76 [contract value delivered by four separate letters of intent as per Senate Estimates Legal and Constitutional Affairs Legislation Committee evidence on 18.02.2019]

Original: $39,743,817.76

Description: Provision of Garrison Services at East Lorengau Refugee Transit Centre Manus

Amendments:

CN3470670-A2 - change to contract term & value (23-Feb-2018)

Amendment Value (AUD): $16,500,000.00

CN3470670-A1 - Increased value and extended end date (28-Dec-2017)

Contract Value (AUD): $72,743,817.76

Procurement Method: Limited tender

Limited Tender Exemption: Paragraph 2.6 was applied in some part. [This contract was a direct approach to Paladin by way of an initial special measures arrangement as per Senate Estimates Legal and Constitutional Affairs Legislation Committee evidence on 18.02.2019. A departmental decision was later taken to include future contacts with Paladin Holdings Singapore as special measures rather than conduct open tenders]

ATM ID: RFQ1750034

Confidentiality - Contract: No

Confidentiality - Outputs: No

Consultancy:No

Agency Reference ID: 0070020581

Supplier Details

Name: PALADIN SOLUTIONS PNG LTD

Postal Address:

PARK TOWER ANNEX, SECTION 25, ALLOTMENT 35, HUNTERS STREET, GRANVILLE

Town/City: NATIONAL CAPITAL DISTRICT

Postcode:125

State/Territory: Outside Australia

Country: PAPUA NEW GUINEA

ABN: Exempt

The lies Liberals tell on the subject of aged care

The Australian, 7 February 2019:

Aged Care Minister Ken Wyatt was handed a departmental briefing report showing the “winners and losers” from the Coalition’s $2 billion savings drive in the aged-care sector shortly after Scott Morrison announced a royal commission and denied funding cuts.

Documents obtained by The Australian under Freedom of Information laws show the proportion of “losers” almost tripled to 53 per cent following the budget savings revealed in late 2015.

In the three-year period to 2018, aged-care services that had been classified as “winners” almost halved to 47 per cent, according to the brief sent to Mr Wyatt.

A series of “hot issue briefs, question time briefs and general briefs” sent to Mr Wyatt last year acknowledged the budget hit to the Aged Care Funding Instrument — which is the basic taxpayer care subsidy paid to all nursing homes — together with “increasing cost pressures will be putting pressure on the sector”.

Mr Wyatt was also made aware of reports of “cut backs to staffing”. At a press conference announcing the royal commission into aged care in September, the Prime Minister was questioned about two cuts to the ACFI in the 2015 mid-year economic update and the 2016 budget but denied any had been made.

“No, no, the Labor Party said that. I don’t accept that,” he said. Two days later, a question time brief prepared for Mr Wyatt offered advice on what to say if asked about funding cuts to ACFI.

The ministerial brief also contains a breakdown of funding changes by domain, revealing that average annual taxpayer subsidies per resident increased by just $400 between 2016-17 and 2017-18 despite the growing frailty and complexity of Australians as they enter residential aged care older than ever before.

For the first time, funding for the two areas that provide extra boosts for nursing home residents with significant behavioural problems and complex healthcare requirements went backwards by $300 a person.

The peak body for aged-care providers, ahead of the April 2 budget, has urged the Coalition to include an additional payment of almost $700 million each year.

“This estimate reflects a range of factors, including the value of foregone indexation (through ACFI),” Leading Age Services Australia (LASA) says in its pre-budget submission, seen by The Australian. “This is approximately a 5.2 per cent increase in residential care funding in 2019-20, noting that this is difficult to calculate as forward estimates for residential and home care are no longer separately reported.” LASA said it considered the money to be a “down payment” and a notably larger funding boost might be needed following the findings of the royal ­commission.” The commission, which is due to release its interim report in Oct­ober and the final version by the end of April 2020, has already highlighted the widespread industry practice of “doping” nursing home residents, which doctors, nurses and consumer groups attribute to overworked staff. [my yellow highlighting]

OUR ABC: the fate of public broadcasting is in your hands at the 2019 federal election

Use your vote wisely.......

abc.net.au, 23 October 2018:

Statement by David Anderson, Acting Managing Director of the ABC, to the Senate Environment and Communications Legislation Committee 

Thank you Senators. 

I am appearing today as Acting Managing Director of the ABC. It is a privilege to be in this role, overseeing one of Australia’s most loved and respected cultural institutions. 

There is no doubt Senators will have many questions about recent events and strategies. I will do my best to answer them in my acting capacity and from my management position. Accountability is part and parcel of being a national broadcaster. 

So too is independence. I have already stressed in my early conversations with employees that the great faith and trust the community invests in the ABC is built on the foundation of independence. 

The ABC is funded by government and it is ultimately answerable to the people of Australia. They are the ones who expect us to report without fear or favour, to live up to standards of quality and excellence, to shun commercial and other agendas, to hold the national conversations and to reflect the nation back to itself. 

The other absolute I have, as a long-term content manager within the Corporation, is the primacy of content. Across the ABC’s history we have been adept at using technology to improve the ways we bring our programs and services to our audiences. 

Even in my time at the national broadcaster, the distribution platforms and channels we use have changed dramatically. They will need to change even more over the next decade as we seek relevance and reach in a challenging digital media landscape. 

But it is the content that we carry on those platforms that ultimately matters. 

 Vibrant new kids’ programs that delight and educate our children; 

 Agenda-setting journalism that shines a light into dark corners and holds regulators and lawmakers to account; 

 The rich, direct and often lifesaving conversations we have with our regional and rural audiences; 

 The insightful work of Radio National; 

 Our commitment to the promotion and support of cultural endeavours, particularly music, the arts and creative communities; 

 Colourful dramas like Mystery Road that use local actors, local crews, local locations and local stories to entertain us; 

 And our ability to unite the nation, whether it be on Australia Day, the approaching Remembrance Day/Armistice celebrations or through our in-depth coverage of the drought; 

 And this week, of course, the Invictus Games. 

It is the distinctive content that makes the ABC unique and a priceless national asset. 

While the recent weeks have been testing, I am very proud of the passion and energy shown by our 4000 employees. They have not been distracted. They remain committed to serving Australians. 

As the Acting Managing Director, my early objective has been to work with the Board, bring stability to the organisation, demonstrate leadership and to press for the resourcing we need to deliver the Charter remit and the services the community expects. 

I note there has been a lot of talk recently about ABC budgets and future demands. I would like to bring these facts to the table: 

 20 per cent of the ABC Budget is actually fixed costs for transmission – the infrastructure that delivers our programs to audiences across the nation. 

 The $84 million efficiency cut over three years comes on top of the 2014 decision to cut the ABC budget by $250 million over five years. The cumulative impact of these measures is a significant reduction in our operating budget at a time when we are facing rising costs of production and the need to increase our investment in digital products. 

 We have been given no certainty about the future of funding for a program that directly employs 81 journalists, including specialist reporters and outer suburban bureaus such as Geelong, Parramatta and Ipswich. 

As a long-serving content manager and leader, I can personally attest to the financial pressures affecting the Corporation. I can vouch for the efforts of management to maximise every dollar spent on audiences and to plough efficiency savings into content. 

I am making it clear to stakeholders that the next triennial funding round, scheduled for resolution in next year’s Budget, should be used as an opportunity to reposition the ABC for the future. 

If the ABC is important now in bringing diversity to the media landscape, then it will be even more essential over coming years in providing quality, independent, local content to Australians. The ABC will be the innovator. We will provide the creative jobs that are necessary for this new era. We will continue to provide the highest quality independent journalism. 

Thank you. I am happy to take questions.

Twitter, 24 October 2018:

It appears the Australian Government's $487.6 million* grant to the Great Barrier Reef Foundation may end up paying for little more than ‘feel good’ greenwashing exercises

The Guardian, 26 September 2018:

Great Barrier Reef scientists were told they would need to make “trade-offs” to the Great Barrier Reef Foundation, including focusing on projects that would look good for the government and encourage more corporate donations, emails tabled in the Senate reveal.

The documents, including cabinet briefing notes, contain significant new details about the workings of the foundation and the government decision to award it a $443m grant, including:

The executives of mining, gas and chemicals companies – and international financial houses that actively back fossil-fuel projects – were among the guests at a six-star retreat hosted by the foundation less than a month after the grant was announced;

The media companies Foxtel and Fairfax and the tech giant Google are among a tightly held list of donors to the foundation;

The only CSIRO employee contacted about the grant before the announcement in April was in Patagonia, and did not get the email. Documents have previously revealed that the government’s peak science agency was cut out of the decision to award the grant;

In August, as scrutiny of the grant intensified, public servants pushed to block a long-planned meeting between the then science minister, Michaelia Cash, and the head of the foundation, Anna Marsden, because of concern about the “optics”.

Emails sent by staff at the Australian Institute of Marine Science outline how government expectations, the ability to leverage private donations and public perceptions “may drive the [foundation] to prioritise shorter-term research initiatives in order to demonstrate progress and return on investment”.

“Where it becomes challenging is that … interventions with the largest future benefit also take the longest to develop,” the institute’s executive director of strategic policy, David Mead, wrote in an email to colleagues. 

 “Among other trade-offs, we will need to determine to what degree we focus on quick wins or whether we progress longer-term strategic interventions and accept that we will only partially progress them during the next five years (perhaps with little outward visibility of success/progress).”

The emails also reveal an initial state of uncertainty about how a $100m allocation for reef restoration and adaptation would be handled.

Three weeks after the announcement about the money, Mead was trying to get answers about how the grant would be allocated.

“I followed up with the granting agreement, did not really get an answer other than they are working on it over the next month,” Mead wrote on 18 May. “So we will just have to watch this space.

“Once the thing is signed by GBRF we are going to need them to make some definitive statements one way or the other, as everyone is wondering and I don’t want the team to destruct … ”

Emails between staff at the industry, innovation and science department reveal discussion about the “optics” of a long-planned meeting between Cash, Marsden and the chief executive of institute, Paul Hardisty.

Note

* The total Great Barrier Reef Foundation grant was for $487,633,300.