Gina Rinehart paid $1.2 million to Australia’s Commonwealth Games swimmers. Is there any problem with that?

Australia’s swimming team dominated the pool at the Glasgow Commonwealth Games.

The Dolphins produced a record-shattering haul of 76 medals (including 37 gold), eclipsing the previous record of 73 medals in

Birmingham 2022 and Gold Coast 2018.

As well as winning medals and breaking records, many of Australia’s swimmers also walked away with much healthier bank balances, thanks to the country’s richest person, mining magnate Gina Rinehart.

Rinehart, a longtime financial backer of Australian swimming, paid out more than $1.2 million to those who won medals or broke records.

The bonuses raise several ethical questions.

Rinehart’s history with Australian sport

Prior to the Commonwealth Games, Rinehart revealed members of the Dolphins would receive bonuses ranging from $30,000 for a world record to $10,000 for a bronze medal, repeating a scheme that was in place for the 2024 Paris Olympics.

The money would be provided by Rinehart personally and her mining company, Hancock Prospecting.

Once the swimming events concluded, she said:

Few people, outside of the swimming families, truly understand the years of hard work, discipline and sacrifice required to compete at this international level.

I’m pleased to be able once again to provide financial rewards to our medal winners in the sports where I’m Patron. It’s a way of saying thank you and showing appreciation for their dedication and achievements, the pride they make Australians feel, right across our country, and for being the inspiring young ambassadors that they truly are.

Rinehart has been a generous donor for more than a decade to swimming and other sports. She is the patron of the Australian Dolphins swim team, Swimming WA, Swimming QLD, Rowing Australia and Artistic Swimming Australia.

There’s no denying the economic costs to swimmers and their families can be enormous. Not everyone can be like Grant Hackett or Ian Thorpe and translate their success into profitable post-swimming careers.

So it’s no surprise Rinehart’s generous bonuses are well received by most swimmers.

Lani Pallister, winner of three individual gold medals at the Glasgow games, enthusiastically supported Rinehart’s intervention by saying (in a Hancock press release): “we’re so incredibly grateful for everything she does for us and she continually goes above and beyond”.

This came despite media reports of Australia’s swimmers being warned not to publicly thank Rinehart during media interviews in Glasgow.

Some ethical dilemmas

While Pallister and others have good reasons to be thankful, it is important to recognise some possible ethical quandaries with the bonuses.

It could be argued Rinehart and Hancock Prospecting are riding the coattails of the successful swimmers at the very time the billionaire has redoubled her involvement in Australian politics by very publicly and specifically endorsing Pauline Hanson’s One Nation party.

Given this endorsement of One Nation, the rewards scheme could become an issue of freedom and coercion for those who accept the bonuses. There is nothing wrong with athletes agreeing to the bonuses provided they were aware of, and consent to, the possibility being limited to what they can subsequently say about Rinehart, her companies and her political associations.

Would a swimmer, who might have a problem with Rinehart’s political positions or her company’s practices, be comfortable voicing concerns?

Ethical issues have arisen in other circumstances. It is illuminating that the Australian Diamonds netball team was previously sponsored by Rinehart and Hancock Prospecting.

This sponsorship was withdrawn in 2022 when an Indigenous player, Noongar woman Donnell Wallam, reportedly opposed the logo of Hancock Prospecting on the uniform because of historically racist remarks from Rinehart’s father, Lang Hancock. Wallam was supported by many of her teammates.

Hancock Prospecting then withdrew its $15 million sponsorship and remarked in a statement:

Hancock and its Executive Chairman Mrs Rinehart consider that it is unnecessary for sports organisations to be used for social or political causes.

None of these issues have arisen at the Commonwealth Games. But when there’s money involved, it’s always worth asking if there are any strings attached.

A final question

Finally, it’s important to remember all Australian swimmers invest “years of hard work, discipline and sacrifice” (as Hancock stated recently) into their careers.

Is it fair then that the bonuses only go to medal winners and record-breakers? This could be perceived as rewarding only those at the very top of the tree.

While swimming is an individual sport, the Dolphins are in fact a team.

Michael Burke does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.