So how do you get access to the Qantas chairman’s lounge? Alan Joyce has some tips
Alan Joyce, Qantas's former chief executive, has detailed for the first time how the airline decides who gets into its exclusive chairman's lounge, in a new memoir that also denies the perk was ever used to sway politicians. The revelations matter because the lounge's secretive membership process has long fuelled speculation, including at a Senate inquiry, about whether Qantas used privileged access to curry favour with lawmakers, judges and journalists.
In the book, Riding the Jet Stream, Joyce writes that he and the Qantas chair had only occasional input into invitations, with a small group of senior executives approving members. Core membership typically covers federal and most state politicians, High Court and federal judges, national newspaper editors, select journalists and celebrities, while companies spending around $1m a year on Qantas flights are likely to receive a rotating membership. He notes the airline once had to strip memberships when numbers grew "out of control", and that senator Jacqui Lambie was banned for six months after an incident in the Melbourne lounge. Joyce insists status cannot be bought and rejects claims of political influence, pointing out Qantas has lost cases in the High Court and Federal Court.
In short
- Alan Joyce's memoir explains how Qantas selects chairman's lounge members
- Core members include politicians, judges, editors and big-spending firms
- Joyce denies the lounge was used to influence politicians
Steelman: both sides, in good faith
The strongest fair case each way — we don't pick a winner.
The case for
Major corporations routinely maintain relationships with key stakeholders—and airlines particularly benefit from established connections with senior policymakers, regulators, judges and media figures. Qantas's disclosed membership criteria, based on professional standing and demonstrated Qantas spending, are transparent and non-arbitrary rather than purely discretionary. Members can be removed for misconduct, and the airline's losses in the High Court and Federal Court demonstrate that lounge access yields no guaranteed advantage. If these relationships are managed according to stated principles and applied consistently, there is nothing inherently improper about business hospitality of this kind.
The case against
Regardless of stated criteria, providing exclusive access to judges and politicians by a major corporation raises serious ethical concerns about institutional integrity. Federal judges in particular should not maintain special relationships with any corporation that may litigate before them, as this creates an unavoidable appearance of impropriety that risks undermining confidence in the judiciary's impartiality. The practice's long history of secrecy, combined with revelation only through a memoir rather than transparent disclosure, suggests even Qantas recognised its sensitivity, and such concerns demand structural safeguards rather than merely procedural assurances.
Explained simply
Qantas operates an exclusive chairman's lounge that provides access to senior politicians, judges, journalists and business figures. The airline has kept the membership process secret, which has fuelled speculation and official inquiries about whether privileged access is used to curry favour with important decision-makers.
The concerns centre on potential influence over politicians involved in aviation policy, judges who might decide cases involving Qantas, and media figures who cover the company. Senate inquiries have examined these questions, reflecting broader concerns about how well-connected organisations can exert power over government and institutions.
The lounge has historically included federal and state politicians, judges, senior journalists and celebrities, though the exact criteria for membership have remained opaque. This secrecy has meant that the decision-making process and the identities of those involved have rarely been publicly disclosed.