Andrew Forrest’s charity has made an undisclosed donation to the Australia Institute, raising transparency concerns about the funding of influential advocacy groups.
The donation to the progressive thinktank, which has been confirmed by several sources familiar with the deal but not authorised to comment, highlights differing disclosure standards across the research and advocacy sector.
The institute, which lobbies for policy change, did not confirm or deny funding from Minderoo. But two sources described the donation as “substantial” and one alleged it was worth “six figures”. Minderoo did not disclose the value of its support.
It is unclear when the donation was made, and there is no suggestion it influenced the institute’s conduct. Nor is there any suggestion of wrongdoing on the part of the institute or Minderoo in respect of the donation.
The institute’s public campaigns on emissions reduction are closely aligned to those run by the mining magnate’s charity and his company, Fortescue, which has publicly lobbied the Albanese government.
The Australia Institute, Minderoo and Fortescue have all criticised the use of carbon offsets to reach net zero emissions by 2050 and have instead championed a “real zero” strategy, which calls for total decarbonisation.
Minderoo, which was founded by Forrest and his partner Nicola in 2001, lists the promotion of the real zero strategy as a key focus. Its website carries quotes from Forrest including his criticism of net zero as a “meaningless mantra that just buys companies and governments time while they continue to burn fossil fuels”.
Forrest was Minderoo’s co-chair until September 2024, when he became a non-executive director. When announcing the change, Forrest said it would enable him to “focus on driving the global adoption of real zero”.
Sign up: AU Breaking News email
Fortescue, which was founded by Forrest in 2003, has committed to achieving real zero emissions in its own operations by 2030 and has campaigned for other companies to follow.
In February, Fortescue organised an open letter calling on the government to introduce a real zero policy, which was welcomed by the Australia Institute. In the same month, Fortescue’s chief climate scientist outlined the real zero approach at a summit organised by the institute.
In recent months, the institute has praised Forrest’s commitment to real zero and called on the rest of industry to “get on the same path”.
An Australia Institute spokesperson said its research was independent and that “protecting the privacy of our donors is important”.
“Unfortunately, in Australia, some donors to other charities have been targeted, rather than praised, by powerful voices for their generous support for work designed to highlight the problems of rising inequity and greenhouse gas emissions,” the spokesperson said.
Similar reasons for withholding the names of donors have been used by the conservative thinktank the Institute of Public Affairs (IPA). In 2012 the IPA said it did not reveal donors as they had previously been “intimidated” by political opponents.
Other research groups do disclose donors. The Grattan Institute lists all financial supporters, including individuals, who provide more than $1,000. The Centre for Public Integrity lists key funders on the second page of research reports.
John Daley, who was the founding chief executive of the Grattan Institute from 2009 to 2020, said thinktanks “had a status in public debate” and their donors should be disclosed as a matter of transparency.
Speaking generally, not in relation to the Australia Institute, Daley said he was not convinced of the need to keep donors secret.
“If they are subject to an attack as they look like they are trying to buy a thinktank, then I am not very sympathetic,” Daley said. “If they are subject to attack for other reasons, it’s hard to see why that would be so unpleasant.
“We force people to disclose donations to political parties and they go ahead and do it.”
The best public interest journalism relies on first-hand accounts from people in the know.
If you have something to share on this subject you can contact us confidentially using the following methods.
Secure Messaging in the Guardian app
The Guardian app has a tool to send tips about stories. Messages are end to end encrypted and concealed within the routine activity that every Guardian mobile app performs. This prevents an observer from knowing that you are communicating with us at all, let alone what is being said.
If you don't already have the Guardian app, download it (iOS/Android) and go to the menu. Select ‘Secure Messaging’.
SecureDrop, instant messengers, email, telephone and post
If you can safely use the tor network without being observed or monitored you can send messages and documents to the Guardian via our SecureDrop platform.
Finally, our guide at theguardian.com/tips lists several ways to contact us securely, and discusses the pros and cons of each.
The Australia Institute spokesperson said: “We barrack for ideas not political parties and, in turn, do not accept donations from political parties, nor would the Australia Institute accept donations to fund work that conflicts with or seeks to direct our research.”
A Fortescue spokesperson said the company had never donated to the Australia Institute and that there was “clear separation between Minderoo and Fortescue, with robust government systems and policies in place”.
A Minderoo spokesperson said the charity was an entirely separate organisation to Fortescue and that its “climate advocacy is underpinned by rigorous and evidence-based research”. They said the charity was “free from commercial influence and guided solely by evidence, public interest, and long-term impact”.
A 2015 report by the group Transparify, which tracks the transparency of thinktank funding globally, found Australia had a “remarkably opaque policy research landscape”.
“Thinktanks can play a positive role producing independent, in-depth policy research to inform politicians, media and the public,” said Hans Gutbrod, Transparify’s executive director.
“As key players in democratic politics, they have a responsibility to be transparent about their operations.”
• Do you know more about who funds Australia’s thinktanks? Contact henry.belot@theguardian.com
