Dr Simon Longstaff

Having completed his secondary education at Knox Grammar School in Sydney, Dr Longstaff spent time working on Groote Eylandt in the Safety Department of BHP subsidiary, GEMCO. Following his time in the Northern Territory he returned to take up full-time study, completing a Bachelor's Degree in Education in Tasmania.

Simon Longstaff spent five years studying and working as a member of Magdalene College, Cambridge, before returning to Australia in mid-1991. Having won scholarships to study at Cambridge, he read for the degrees of Master of Philosophy and Doctor of Philosophy. His research centred on related questions arising in the areas of political philosophy, ethics and the philosophy of education. Prior to returning to Australia, Dr Longstaff was lecturing at Cambridge and was working as consultant to the Cambridge Commonwealth and Overseas Trusts.

Dr Longstaff was inaugural President of The Australian Association for Professional & Applied Ethics and is a Director of a number of companies. He is a Fellow of the World Economic Forum and a member of the International Advisory Committee of the Foreign Policy Association, based in New York. His first book, Hard Cases, Tough Choices was published in 1997. He is currently preparing a second on the role of conscience. Simon Longstaff is a columnist for The Australian.

Dr Longstaff serves on a number of committees, some of which include:-

Cambridge Australia Trust, Chairman
Office of the Gene Technology Regulator, Ethics Committee
Accountants Superannuation Fund Nominees Pty Ltd
Advertising Federation of Australia (AFA) Ethics Working Party, Chairman
Professional Standards Council, NSW and WA
Australian Commercial Disputes Centre Ltd, Mediator Accreditation Board, Chairman
BHP, Global Conduct Committee
Energy Australia, Ethics Committee
MLC Life, Code of Conduct Committee, Independent Chairman
National Professional Engineers Registration Board
NSW Department of Corrective Services, Ethics Committee

Interview with Dr Simon Longstaff

Do you see yourself as a leader? What is the vision you are working towards?

In some senses I do see myself as a leader. The most obvious role that I play is as a leader for the people who work in and support the St James Ethics Centre. In that sense, I am a traditional leader of the 'plain vanilla' kind. I have to stimulate a sense of vision, hopefully help to make it a shared vision, play an active role to keep the ship afloat, act as a guide, ensure quality, provoke initiative - all of the usual things.

However, I suspect that I have inadvertently fallen into another role which involves the exercise of leadership without having any power. The Ethics Centre is a vulnerable organisation, it doesn't have the power to make rules, nor does it seek to regulate conduct. Our job is to encourage people to break out of the 'prison' of unthinking custom and practice. Given this, the kind of leadership that I can offer is to stand as an example of both the difficulty and the possibility of living an ethical life. I should be clear about one thing - I do not aspire to be seen as an especially 'wise' or 'good' person - just someone who cares about the importance of linking one's life choices (big and small) to an explicit ethical framework of values and principles; a person who cares about living an 'examined life'.

How did you become interested in the area of ethics?

I began with a more general interest in philosophy. I think that came from the good fortune of having an enquiring mind coupled with an early exposure to some of the BIG questions of life. My mother died when I was an impressionable seven year old and I am sure that this event, as much as anything else, led me to start thinking ... and wondering and perhaps, to my tendency to resist accepting anything as simply being a 'given'.

As to my interest in ethics - well, it's based on a fascination with the rich diversity of life and a belief that every action and every choice has an ethical dimension. The truth is, I often wonder how it could be that anyone is not engrossed by ethical questions. There are so many of them - each touching on the core of our identity as human beings.

What qualities do you feel are necessary to be the Executive Director of the St James Ethics Centre?

I think it crucial that you have a good sense of humour and a natural disinclination to take yourself too seriously. You also need to have a sound respect for intuition and a bias towards empathy and a gentle form of engagement with people who, although often vulnerable, still manage to 'push all your buttons'. Apart from issues of character, I think that you need to have a solid grounding in philosophy. People have spent centuries thinking through issues of fundamental importance to human life, and I think it to be important that we draw on that tradition of thought so that we do not condemn ourselves to going around and around the same old mulberry bush.

You define ethics as being "what ought one to do." Can you clarify how this can be determined given that this consideration is subjective and is dependent on one's personal framework of principles that is further influenced by many variants, including culture and religion? Or is there a universally acceptable quality that ethics is predicated on that encompasses such divergence?

Once you ask the foundation question of, "what ought one to do" you then have to ask two others - "what is good/evil?" and "what is right/wrong?".

The way we answer these questions establishes a framework of values and principles respectively. There are, of course, many world views (religious, cultural, philosophical etc). What I find interesting is that, in the midst of this diversity, there is so much in common. Indeed, the list of values and principles that people adopt is fairly small. The differences are not in the overall list but in the priority that different cultures tend to give different values and principles. So, for example, people from a country like the USA tend to place a premium of liberty. People from a country like China are likely to place a premium on the value of harmony or order. Yet, people from both types of society will still value liberty and harmony respectively - but to differing degrees.

The whole question of how different people see such matters is fraught with difficulty. The one thing that I am confident of is that relativism - which denies the possibility of deciding between competing ethical claims about what constitutes a 'good' life - is mistaken. It may be difficult to discern how we ought to live. However, I am convinced that it is not true that 'anything goes' providing only that people believe this to be so.

What do you see as the consequence of failing to address ethical questions when choosing to act?

Sometimes the consequences for you and others are benign. This is often nothing more than a lucky escape. For me, the real consequences of not addressing the ethical dimension of life is that you miss out on the opportunity to express that part of you that is distinctly human. That is, I believe that we are most true to the kinds of beings we are when we engage in ethical reflection about what we ought to do.

It is more and more apparent that there is increasing recognition of the field of ethics and the issues raised by ethicists. Are we as a nation, becoming less ethical in our thinking? What do you attribute this to?

I don't think that we are becoming less ethical. I think instead, that we are becoming a nation that can no longer bear the weight of our disappointment at having our dreams of a better world dashed on the rocks of despair. If that sounds a little overblown, then let me put it this way. I think that people cherish the hope that it is possible (somehow, somewhere) to succeed in life without having to ditch ethics. Yet, the example of senior figures, within the community, often seems to deny this possibility. As time goes on the problems seem to get bigger and bigger.

People doubt that they can make a difference. They lurch into apathy and then despair. In these circumstances, caring about ethics can seem like hitting your head against a brick wall. So, rather than have to face perpetual disappointment, people just give up on the project altogether. When basically good people give up on the challenge to lead an ethical life, it sometimes seems as though they have given up their ethics at the most fundamental level. That's not what happens - it's hope that goes ... and that's at least as sad as the alternative.

You advocate that the answer to encouraging businesses and institutions to act ethically does not lie in implementing stronger laws and surveillance, but in encouraging business leaders "to "walk the talk" and practice what they preach by establishing and following values that limit scepticism and restore trust." (Canberra Times 19 April 01) Is there any evidence to indicate that the public and corporate world is adopting this philosophy? What are some of the difficulties that you encounter in promoting this philosophy?

A little evidence - but it's quite early days in Australia. Furthermore, as the noted social researcher, Hugh Mackay, has noted, Australians are in a mood for regulation. The most significant evidence for the power of this approach comes from the USA where numerous studies have demonstrated a link between successful commercial outcomes and the development of a solid ethical culture. The most obvious explanation for this link is that ethical organisations, that consistently apply their values and principles across the full span of their relationships, build trust and with that, social capital. The biggest challenge is to get business leaders to invest time and money in the process of making all of the changes needed to create a truly ethical organisation. The second biggest challenge is to get people to resist the temptation to treat the whole process as a PR exercise ... in other words, to make it real (and for the right reasons).

In the article, Comments - Humour in Ethics (Living Ethics Issue 43 Autumn 2001) you write, "Talking about ethics is difficult work - even for those who have a special expertise in the area. It is, however, vital that we learn how to speak about such matters with comfort." Do you think that as a nation we are talking openly and honestly about the issues surrounding the Refugee situation? In your opinion what ought one to do when faced with a boat full of refugees seeking to come to Australia?

The quality of our civic conversation is, alas, pretty tawdry. We really need to break out of the intellectual, emotional and ethical 'doldrums' and deal with the tough issues. On the question of a boat full of refugees ... first, a comprehensive solution is complex and will involve more than Australia. This aside, one simple point needs to be remembered.

History has taught us (again and again) that there are some situations so terrible that no one should begrudge people the opportunity to escape to safety - irrespective of whether or not the formalities have been completed. Every boat that comes over the horizon has the capacity to house one or more people escaping that kind of horror. At the very least we should take care to ensure that we do not replicate the punishing conditions from which the truly oppressed escape. I do not think that our security is worth the price of our souls.

What ethical dilemmas do you see for the nation with the current government's position on the following issues:

* to not say sorry to Indigenous Australians for the injustices they have experienced in the past

* to not ratify the United Nations' optional protocol on the convention on the elimination of all forms of discrimination against women

* to not sign and ratify the Optional Protocol on the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the sale of children, Child Prostitution and Child Pornography

Australians like to think of themselves as moderately decent people who enjoy popularity across most of the world. Ignoring our obligations is wrong in and of itself. However, one of the chief casualties of an overly harsh or discriminatory approach to human rights may be our sense of ourselves. In turn this could help to undermine the social compact that forms the basis for our preserving our polity as a stable and peaceful democracy able to incorporate people from around the world into one diverse society.

Beyond the issues mentioned, we need to ensure that popular understanding of ethical issues keeps pace with the technological development on which long-term prosperity will be based. No matter how good the economics and science, popular revulsion at the thought of some forms of technical development (especially in the area of biotechnology), still has the power to derail innovative developments.

What advice would you give to women interested in leading ethically in a workplace or personal context? What key steps should managers take to develop an ethical culture in the workplace?

Work out 'who you are and what you stand for'. Be true to yourself. Dare to dream big dreams. Let your conscience and feelings loose - and trust their guidance in the light of mature reflection. Think ... to create a better world.