You wouldn’t know it from the pages of our daily newspapers, but the rate of growth in rents has been pretty modest … Average rents are barely any higher than they were at the start of COVID.
Such a take, from Associate Professor Ben Phillips in The Conversation, was always going to get a few hackles up regardless of whether you agree or believe its data foundations are sound. It runs contrary to what many people are saying about a crisis in housing in general and rents in particular.
Another detail that might further raise eyebrows is not in the copy. Phillips — an associate professor at the Australian National University — happens to be married to Labor backbencher Alicia Payne.
Under the disclosure statement which accompanies this piece, we’re assured that “Phillips does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment”.
And certainly by no means are we alleging a stone-cold conflict — Payne doesn’t hold a portfolio concerning housing, for example, and, regardless, partners obviously can hold different views. We’re big fans of the Bob Katter model, telling the register of interests, essentially: “The wife doesn’t tell me about her shares, and I respect that.”
Still, it’s a piece in a news service that applies academic rigour which argues that a touchy political issue is not actually all that big a deal, written by the partner of someone in a government tasked with improving that issue. Is that a connection that readers ought to know about?
The Conversation’s editor Misha Ketchell told Crikey it was the publication’s policy to disclose all relevant conflicts of interest, “and we err on the side of encouraging more disclosure rather than less”.
“But when it comes to spouses it’s difficult terrain as it could be construed as insulting or unfair to assume that an interest of someone’s spouse would influence their expert views,” he said. “To put it another way, people have a right to be considered as professional individuals who exercise independent judgment separate from their personal relationships.”
For this reason, he said, the publication doesn’t mandate author disclosure of their spouse’s affiliations and interests, and that includes membership of political parties.
“To my knowledge Ben Phillips has been an esteemed social researcher for at least a decade and is known for his rigour and professionalism,” he said. “I’d say it’d be a long bow to suggest his partner’s political role would influence his work in any way.”
‘when it comes to spouses it’s difficult terrain as it could be construed as insulting or unfair to assume that an interest of someone’s spouse would influence their expert views’. Let’s ask Clarence Thomas.
Point taken, but surely there is a difference between an academic providing expertise which can be accepted or ignored; and a Justice of the Supreme Court whose decisions affect all and are not subject to appeal?
Everyone and everything we come in contact with in our daily lives exerts influence to some degree – even ‘becks’! Supreme Court decisions can be appealed – your point would make for interesting grounds.
Not the US Supreme Ct
Misha Ketchel: “I’d say it’d be a long bow to suggest his partner’s political role would influence his work in any way.”
Yes, fair enough, reasonable opinion. But it would still be right to mention the partner’s political role and let readers decide what influence, if any, that might have. There is in general a very broad spectrum of possible influence a partner’s opinions or interests can have on an individual, and it’s not reasonable to assume in advance that it’s never relevant.
I am somewhat amused that the title The Conversation is being retained. The Lecturer would be more accurate since the number of articles open for BTL comments over the last two months could be counted on the fingers of one hand.
I receive an email copy early each morning, have been a subscriber, was a member of the earlier Community Council and have regularly made comments and responded to others’ comments. Now I hardly bother opening and reading it. I live in Alicia Payne’s electorate and am somewhat of a politics tragic. I remained totally unaware of this kerfuffle until now.
I was just thinking of the Bob Katter model. He either has to disclose his partner’s info or resign.
If his partner doesn’t want to disclose the info, it’s sad, but he has to resign. You can’t go into a job with a prerequisite and then say ‘nah, don’t wanna.’
you can’t just “do the right thing”, you have to be “seen doing the right thing”