Barry O'Farrell, Premier of New South Wales, announced today that he will resign due to accepting an expensive bottle of wine as a gift and failing to tell yesterday's ICAC hearing about it.
I make no judgement on him, but it did make me wonder why companies give out gifts. Why invite even a whiff of corruption by doing that?
I know several people who have received corporate gifts from companies trying to gain or maintain their business. These are relatively small things: tickets to a sporting match, a free dinner and drinks, movies tickets, etc. Those people all accepted the gifts, and apparently didn't consider them to be bribes. There seems to be a widespread acceptance that corporate gifts are a normal and legitimate promotional tool.
But surely most people would consider it to be bribery if a sales rep gives you $100 cash in a private meeting where he touts for business from your employer? So how is it different if a company gives you a $100 sporting ticket in a private email and calls it a 'corporate gift'? I don't see the distinction: for me, a corporate gift is a bribe.
There has been much scorn for the characters appearing at ICAC who gave away expensive corporate gifts; I'd like to see that same public scorn for all corporate gifts.
I think the reason we're too accepting of corporate gifts is that people mix them up with legitimate promotion.
When a company promotes itself to you, the primary value you should get out of the promotion is that company selling you a great product or service which helps your business. If the primary value you get out the promotion is the cash value of a gift, then it's a bribe.
My view is:
One thing I hope Australians learn from today's events is: don't associate yourself with the kind of company that thinks it's OK to hand out corporate gifts.