RL
It is very interesting to note that people support criminal behaviour in the pursuit of profits. From the Commonwealth Attorney General:

“Since 1999, it has been a criminal offence (Commonwealth Criminal Code Act 1995) to bribe a foreign public official, whether in Australia or in another country. An Australian in another country who bribes or attempts to bribe an official of that country can be prosecuted for bribery in an Australian court.

Australian law provides for up to ten years in prison for Australian citizens, residents and companies found guilty of bribing a foreign public official either in Australia or while in foreign countries. A court could impose a fine instead of, or in addition to, imprisonment.” http://www.ag.gov.au/agd/WWW/criminaljusticeHome.nsf/D2801B61EABE80A2CA256809001328BA/D35A2494C35B6CD1CA256F5600028D8A

It pays to know what is legal if you are doing business because ignorance of the law is no excuse before the law. Further, not to know whether what you are doing is legal or not is negligent, and, if it is a criminal offence, criminal negligence.

It is a pity that the likes of wre are inconsistent in their arguments. If the wheat can find a market in China, then what is the problem with holding the Government to account for poor supervision of the AWB participation in the Oil for Food program? If you are arguing that no damage has been done by the bribes (because the wheat will be sold in China), why berate the opposition for doing its job?

Perhaps because a Chinese buyer could use this little incident to force the price down – after all, the Chinese can say that they are sure the US and Canada are more ethical and honest in their pricing and business practices. Yes, I know the US and Canada are not, but they haven’t been caught yet. Once again, the pigeons of corruption come home to roost at the expense of the wheat farmers. How is this better than ethical dealings in the first place.

And then there is the matter of $100M of the taxpayers’ money involved in this corruption (the tax deduction on $300M).

odsoc

Odsoc- 'bribing'is illegal. But if it is so clear cut that bribery occured in the case of AWB why is the term 'kickback' being coined with such regularity?

It seems the same people who condone cultural relativism in circumstances such as the imposition of customary law or the taking of ten wives don't like the taste when it has a capitalist flavour to it. Should we now turn to examing what Keating knew of 'donations' paid to Suharto and Mahattir? Was it just incidental that Tommy Suharto made billions from road and infrastructure projects both in Indonesia and Australia? Was this a coincidence?

I realise we aren't talking about Suharto now. But this has far ranging implications. It is obvious some of the above posters haven't been exposed to the business world and couldn't stomach it if they were. It is even more obvious that cultural relativism is only popular sometimes. Do companies not do business in Africa, Asia and South America because doing so involves appeasing the ruling regimes and dictators? Do companies stp taking foreign officials on golf trips or signing contracts that stipulate transport by state owned means

What a joke, odsoc. Has it ever dawned on you that just about any migrant from a third world nation would have had to commit the crime of bribery of an official numerous times before they even got their first kid into school. Would you bar them from entry to the country on the basis of their criminal past?

AWB has merely done the same thing that every single Iraqi had to do to even scratch themselves, let alone do business, under the Baathist regime. So are you seriously suggesting that our exporters should refuse to do business with corrupt regimes anywhere in the world? And do you really believe that would enhance our standing in the world community? We wouldn't have a wheat industry at all if you had your way

The critical thing is that the AWB was aiding and abetting an enemy, a country with which we had been to war, were in long-term dispute with and were soon to be at war with again - the latter being evident long before hostilities resumed; and doing so in direct contravention of UN resolutions aiming at constraining Saddam;s capacity to develop WMD. Whatever one's views on bribery, this is surely unconscionable. The AWB put their own self-interest ahead of any other consideration, and need a wholesale clear out at the least. As for the single market, I've seen several studies over the years which found no evidence that it generated higher returns, it may help the smaller farmers but stifles innovative products and marketing from the more entrepreneurial. Give the guys who want to trade solo their head, and I'm sure that they'll market for smaller farms as well.

As for the Government, the best we can say is culpable negligence, it's hard to see how they could have not known what was going on if they applied due diligence to publicly available information.

rlindsay,

What do you reckon if a kickback was falsley claimed as trucking expenses - would that be illegal under Aussie taxation laws?

I'm pretty sure that isn't impropriety... what do you thnk?

Interesting that rlindsay and Perseus join wre in defense of potentially criminal activities.
Firstly, the investigation is into potential breaches of Australian law, not just "impropriety".
Here is an extract from the Ausgov website on the Cole enquiry:

"By Letters Patent dated 10 November 2005, the Hon TRH Cole AO RFD QC was appointed Commissioner to conduct an inquiry into and report on whether decisions, actions, conduct or payments by Australian companies mentioned in the Final Report (“Manipulation of the Oil-for-Food Programme by the Iraqi Regime”) of the Independent Inquiry Committee into the United Nations Oil-for-Food Programme breached any Federal, State or Territory law."

Secondly, the suggestion that bribery is a way of life throughout Asia, Africa and the Middle East is an extraordinary claim. No evidence is offered in support of this claim. I've worked in Japan and South Korea and was never once offered a bribe, never offered a bribe myself and never saw any evidence of such activity.
From my experience, it simply isn't as prevalent as some would have you believe.
These countries, self evidently, are not located in the Middle East, but they are two of the three biggest economies in Asia. I'm not saying that no bribery occurs, but laws in SK and Japan concerning corruption are broadly analogous to Australia's. Recent high-profile prosecutions in these two countries demonstrate genuine law-enforcement attempts.

But focus on what is relevant - there is an investigation into potentially criminal conduct. Prima facie there appears to be a breach, the question is the relevant intent.
It might find criminal conduct, it might not.
All Australians should support the rule of law because it underpins our society - remember "started by a document, not a war".
An attack on the investigative process itself shows a deep-rooted contempt for the law, as do suggestions of:
"oh, c'mon, nudge, nudge, wink, wink, everybody does it, why shouldn't we?"

Or maybe wre, rlindsay and Perseus would prefer bribery to be legal in Australia... yeah, that would lead to a better country.
You must really love this place.