Suppr超能文献

澳大利亚游说者登记册没有达到设计目的。

Australian lobbyist registers are not serving the purposes they were designed for.

机构信息

School of Psychology Deakin University, Geelong, Australia.

School of Medicine and Public Health, Newcastle University, Newcastle, Australia.

出版信息

Drug Alcohol Rev. 2018 Apr;37 Suppl 1:S218-S222. doi: 10.1111/dar.12583. Epub 2017 Jul 11.

Abstract

INTRODUCTION AND AIMS

There is widespread concern about the nature, extent and impacts of lobbying by industries selling unhealthy commodities, which threatens public health and undermines important democratic processes. In the last decade, all Australian jurisdictions (except the Northern Territory) have established lobbyist registers with the stated objective of increasing the capacity of government and the public to scrutinise lobbying. Our aim was to assess whether the registers are fulfilling this objective.

DESIGN AND METHODS

We conducted web searches of registers in Australian jurisdictions in 2014 and 2015 to determine what type of information they collected and whether data were accessible. We supplemented searches with e-mails and phone calls to registrars to clarify policies and seek additional information.

RESULTS

We found that the data were lacking in critical details and historical information was difficult or impossible to obtain. None of the registers required in-house lobbyists to register or to be bound by the Lobbying Codes of Conduct. None required that informal lobbying (e.g. by government relations staff within a company) be recorded, and none provided detailed information about the nature and extent of lobbying activities.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

The registers do not meet the stated objective of making lobbying activity transparent to the Australian public. Timely access to comprehensive information is essential to help promote the rational development of policy concerning tobacco, alcohol and gambling problems. There is an urgent need to reform lobbyist registers to ensure that they are comprehensive and transparent.

摘要

简介与目的

人们普遍关注销售不健康商品的行业的游说性质、范围和影响,因为这威胁到公众健康并破坏了重要的民主进程。在过去十年中,除了北领地之外,澳大利亚所有的司法管辖区都建立了游说登记册,其目的是提高政府和公众对游说的审查能力。我们的目的是评估登记册是否实现了这一目标。

设计与方法

我们在 2014 年和 2015 年对澳大利亚司法管辖区的登记册进行了网络搜索,以确定他们收集了哪些类型的信息,以及数据是否可以访问。我们通过电子邮件和电话与登记员联系,以澄清政策并寻求其他信息,对搜索进行了补充。

结果

我们发现数据缺乏关键细节,并且很难或不可能获取历史信息。没有一个登记册要求内部游说者进行登记或遵守游说行为准则。没有一个登记册要求记录非正式的游说(例如,公司内部的政府关系人员),也没有一个登记册提供关于游说活动的性质和范围的详细信息。

讨论与结论

登记册不符合让澳大利亚公众了解游说活动的既定目标。及时获取全面的信息对于促进有关烟草、酒精和赌博问题的政策的合理制定至关重要。迫切需要改革游说登记册,以确保其全面和透明。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验