| JUNE 2008 Pages - Page 1 |
| THIS IS PAGE 1 OF JUNE 2008 PAGES - JUNE0801 |
WINTER OF DISCONTENT
Winter has arrived.
In NSW the question is whether the Premier will turn this winter of discontent around for
his government, or whether he will allow it to become the fallow of his government's
destruction.
If he wants to lead a government into the 2011 election, it is this winter that he must take
the bold steps to enable him to do so. That means a cabinet reshuffle - of monumental
proportions to remove once and for all the culture of the Terrigals.
THAT is unlikely because he does not appear to have the intestinal fortitude for it, and
because over the last 6-12 months he appears to have become a captive of the
Terrigals.
His options are therefore to proceed ahead, doing nothing and acting as if there is no tomorrow, either with the intention of throwing the towel in,
late in 2009 (and handing over to someone else who may then be able to lead Labor to a victory in 2011) or, provided there is no palace revolt
in the meantime, hoping to lead a Terrigals team to victory in 2011. Either of these options, inevitably mean the end of the Iemma government =-
either before or at the 2011 poll.
The question is whether Premier Iemma has the desire to continue beyond 2011. One suspects this winter will be seminal in that question's
determination.
=================================================================================================================
Winter has arrived.
In NSW the question is whether the Premier will turn this winter of discontent around for
his government, or whether he will allow it to become the fallow of his government's
destruction.
If he wants to lead a government into the 2011 election, it is this winter that he must take
the bold steps to enable him to do so. That means a cabinet reshuffle - of monumental
proportions to remove once and for all the culture of the Terrigals.
THAT is unlikely because he does not appear to have the intestinal fortitude for it, and
because over the last 6-12 months he appears to have become a captive of the
Terrigals.
His options are therefore to proceed ahead, doing nothing and acting as if there is no tomorrow, either with the intention of throwing the towel in,
late in 2009 (and handing over to someone else who may then be able to lead Labor to a victory in 2011) or, provided there is no palace revolt
in the meantime, hoping to lead a Terrigals team to victory in 2011. Either of these options, inevitably mean the end of the Iemma government =-
either before or at the 2011 poll.
The question is whether Premier Iemma has the desire to continue beyond 2011. One suspects this winter will be seminal in that question's
determination.
=================================================================================================================
FRIENDLY LEAKS
There are different kinds of leaks. There are the "bad" leaks, which lead to witch-hunts to track down the leaker.
There are anonymous leaks which are made by the government, to satisfy some base political purpose.
Then there are "good" leaks, made by government Ministers themselves.
So for a good news story ahead of the NSW State budget we have the "good" leak by both Treasurer Michael Costa
and Premier Iemma himself, concerning increased expenditure on "maternity". Perhaps it is just part of the "good" news cycle. Leak the good
news out slowly, and continue to re-announce the good news stories (as iif they were new good news), but put all the bad news stories out in one
hit, and hope they will drown each other out.
The announcement of increased spending for maternity overlooks one important issue : Whats the point of throwing money at Health in NSW
whilst ever the person in charge of it's administration, is apparently incapable of understanding the issues, and certainly is unresponsive to them.
THE best good news story Premier Iemma could deliver to the NSW community is that he has appointed a new Minister for Health.
AND the best good news story Reba Meagher MP could deliver - is that she is going.
SOURCE :
Sarah Price & Lisa Carty, Costa's $46 million baby bonanza, Sun-Herald, 1 June 2008.
=================================================================================================================
There are different kinds of leaks. There are the "bad" leaks, which lead to witch-hunts to track down the leaker.
There are anonymous leaks which are made by the government, to satisfy some base political purpose.
Then there are "good" leaks, made by government Ministers themselves.
So for a good news story ahead of the NSW State budget we have the "good" leak by both Treasurer Michael Costa
and Premier Iemma himself, concerning increased expenditure on "maternity". Perhaps it is just part of the "good" news cycle. Leak the good
news out slowly, and continue to re-announce the good news stories (as iif they were new good news), but put all the bad news stories out in one
hit, and hope they will drown each other out.
The announcement of increased spending for maternity overlooks one important issue : Whats the point of throwing money at Health in NSW
whilst ever the person in charge of it's administration, is apparently incapable of understanding the issues, and certainly is unresponsive to them.
THE best good news story Premier Iemma could deliver to the NSW community is that he has appointed a new Minister for Health.
AND the best good news story Reba Meagher MP could deliver - is that she is going.
SOURCE :
Sarah Price & Lisa Carty, Costa's $46 million baby bonanza, Sun-Herald, 1 June 2008.
=================================================================================================================
TERRIGALS THROWING WEIGHT AROUND
We wrote the piece WINTER OF DISCONTENT above, before we stumbled over an article in the Sunday Telegraph of 1 June 2008, by Lnda
Simalis, Bitter rifts in Iemma ranks , which seems to suggest that there is a 4th option that Iemma may take - namely turning his government
into a Terrigals empire by removing all vestiges of any alternative point of view.
According to Simalis :
At the heart of the ructions are Treasurer Michael Costa, Ports Minister Joe Tripodi and powerful backbencher Eddie Obeid, who are
being blamed for a smear campaign against Mr Della Bosca over his role in the power privatisation debate.
The Premier's chief of staff, Josh Murray, was caught up in the tensions when he was fingered by senior ALP staffers as the author of
an embarrassing mock video clip featuring Mr Della Bosca as Hitler, which appeared on YouTube last week. He denied any
involvement.
Yesterday a rival video using the same footage, but this time portraying Hitler as Mr Iemma railing against Mr Costa and referring to Mr
Murray, was also posted on YouTube.
The tit-for-tat video battle comes as Labor MPs plan a revolt on the floor of parliament over the privatisation legislation.
The Sunday Telegraph understands at least five MPs in the Upper House are threatening to cross the floor to oppose the power sale:
Peter Primrose, Penny Sharp, Michael Veitch, Linda Voltz and Ian West.
A growing number of MPs in the Lower House are also said to be considering defying Mr Iemma, including Robert Coombs, Sonia
Hornery, Paul Gibson and Grant McBride.
With the majority of independents privately indicating they will oppose the package, Mr Iemma will rely on the Liberal-National coalition
to push the legislation through.
A senior NSW MP said Mr Della Bosca believes his political enemies are trying to make him out to be a liability so that Mr Iemma has no
option but to have him removed from Cabinet.
"Della feels like he's being targeted for trying to find a compromise over the energy sale,'' the MP said.
"They're doing this so that he's viewed as a liability and is demoted.
"It's really time Morris stepped in and tried to patch up what has become clearly a major risk within the Cabinet.''
A senior Labor source claimed Mr Obeid has been telling MPs that Mr Sartor needs to be moved out of the controversial portfolio.
Mr Sartor is understood to have threatened to quit if he is demoted.
Mr Della Bosca was at the centre of a stand-off between unions and Mr Costa, Mr Tripodi and Mr Obeid over the proposed sale.
However Linda Burney MP (Canterbury) denies many of the claims.
Sartor, Della Bosca rumours 'nonsense' , Sydney Morning Herald, 2 June 2008.
NOW THIS IS GOOD : Watch Iemma's Dilemma - ROFLMAO.
THE SCRIPT .
(In a bunker beneath the NSW Parliament PI meets with his generals).
We wrote the piece WINTER OF DISCONTENT above, before we stumbled over an article in the Sunday Telegraph of 1 June 2008, by Lnda
Simalis, Bitter rifts in Iemma ranks , which seems to suggest that there is a 4th option that Iemma may take - namely turning his government
into a Terrigals empire by removing all vestiges of any alternative point of view.
According to Simalis :
At the heart of the ructions are Treasurer Michael Costa, Ports Minister Joe Tripodi and powerful backbencher Eddie Obeid, who are
being blamed for a smear campaign against Mr Della Bosca over his role in the power privatisation debate.
The Premier's chief of staff, Josh Murray, was caught up in the tensions when he was fingered by senior ALP staffers as the author of
an embarrassing mock video clip featuring Mr Della Bosca as Hitler, which appeared on YouTube last week. He denied any
involvement.
Yesterday a rival video using the same footage, but this time portraying Hitler as Mr Iemma railing against Mr Costa and referring to Mr
Murray, was also posted on YouTube.
The tit-for-tat video battle comes as Labor MPs plan a revolt on the floor of parliament over the privatisation legislation.
The Sunday Telegraph understands at least five MPs in the Upper House are threatening to cross the floor to oppose the power sale:
Peter Primrose, Penny Sharp, Michael Veitch, Linda Voltz and Ian West.
A growing number of MPs in the Lower House are also said to be considering defying Mr Iemma, including Robert Coombs, Sonia
Hornery, Paul Gibson and Grant McBride.
With the majority of independents privately indicating they will oppose the package, Mr Iemma will rely on the Liberal-National coalition
to push the legislation through.
A senior NSW MP said Mr Della Bosca believes his political enemies are trying to make him out to be a liability so that Mr Iemma has no
option but to have him removed from Cabinet.
"Della feels like he's being targeted for trying to find a compromise over the energy sale,'' the MP said.
"They're doing this so that he's viewed as a liability and is demoted.
"It's really time Morris stepped in and tried to patch up what has become clearly a major risk within the Cabinet.''
A senior Labor source claimed Mr Obeid has been telling MPs that Mr Sartor needs to be moved out of the controversial portfolio.
Mr Sartor is understood to have threatened to quit if he is demoted.
Mr Della Bosca was at the centre of a stand-off between unions and Mr Costa, Mr Tripodi and Mr Obeid over the proposed sale.
However Linda Burney MP (Canterbury) denies many of the claims.
Sartor, Della Bosca rumours 'nonsense' , Sydney Morning Herald, 2 June 2008.
NOW THIS IS GOOD : Watch Iemma's Dilemma - ROFLMAO.
THE SCRIPT .
(In a bunker beneath the NSW Parliament PI meets with his generals).
G1 :
PI :
G2:
G3:
PI:
G4:
PI:
G4:
PI:
F!:
PI:
PI :
G2:
G3:
PI:
G4:
PI:
G4:
PI:
F!:
PI:
The ALP conference has rejected privatisation. They have got all the union votes and 95% of the branches across the state. The
rank and file took great delight in ridiculing us...and then rejoiced after we were obliterated 7 to 1 on the floor of the conference.
This conference is irrelevant !!! As Costa says "f**k the conference" . I've got the caucus.
Premier some of .......
Some of the left want to cross the floor. Even some in the right are considering it.
(After a period of studied concentration)
Everybody except Costa, Tripodi and Obeid - get out.
(The assembled crowd withdraws from the room except the named three. PI is in a rage)
F**king Macca was supposed to have delivered the left and now you tell me he can't deliver s**t. Those f**king imbeciles in caucus
are killing me ! At the conference Kenneally and Meagher were hopeless. They're both useless.
(Outside in the corridor two females comfort each other)
....and you Costa what was that ? That's not bipolar you've got, it's f**king tourettes !
And Tripodi where were you ? F**king off organising doughnuts !
Premier, don't blame Kenneally and Meagher.
Too busy at the gym !. What do they care about privatisation ?
Premier, you cant blame them for spending time at the gym.
Well then the caucus is about as useful as a f**king knife in a gunfight. All they are interested in is becoming ministers. The cabinet is
a shambles. Costa screaming at Della. Costa screaming at Roozendaal. Rail, health, education all f**ked up. No wonder my approval
rating is at f**kig 28%. I should never have listened to you Costa - your ego and ideological fanaticism have f**ked me. All along I
have said "lets just do retail" - but no you want to do the whole f**king lot. Once a trot, always a trot ! As for you two boneheads -
"Trust Macca, he'll deliver ...we'll deliver" . F**king useless cretins .
(Descending into a calmer mood )
How am I supposed to get anything done ? And what do I tell Keating and Carr ? There will be no job with Bob if I can't deliver. And
what about when the media realises there's going to be no Metro ? I am not finished with those Unions. If I am to f**king well feel the
pain ,then so can those f**king f**k-wits ! I'll fix Kruse in local government, Riordan somewhere else - and as for the so-called Left
unions....I'll make them wish they had never let Ferguson become vice-president. This is all Costa's fault not mine....
(OUTSIDE IN THE CORRIDOR - one female to another)
I told you last year we should have dumped Morris for me
(BACK IN THE ROOM A DESPONDENT PI)
Maybe I can get Keating and Unsworth to write another letter or what about John Howard ?
He understands my vision. We can still win this. Threaten their preselections,
Karl can't save them . We just have to keep bullshitting and threatening - get Josh to
make another video about Della. If I am going to be f**ked by the party - then I'll f**k the party.
rank and file took great delight in ridiculing us...and then rejoiced after we were obliterated 7 to 1 on the floor of the conference.
This conference is irrelevant !!! As Costa says "f**k the conference" . I've got the caucus.
Premier some of .......
Some of the left want to cross the floor. Even some in the right are considering it.
(After a period of studied concentration)
Everybody except Costa, Tripodi and Obeid - get out.
(The assembled crowd withdraws from the room except the named three. PI is in a rage)
F**king Macca was supposed to have delivered the left and now you tell me he can't deliver s**t. Those f**king imbeciles in caucus
are killing me ! At the conference Kenneally and Meagher were hopeless. They're both useless.
(Outside in the corridor two females comfort each other)
....and you Costa what was that ? That's not bipolar you've got, it's f**king tourettes !
And Tripodi where were you ? F**king off organising doughnuts !
Premier, don't blame Kenneally and Meagher.
Too busy at the gym !. What do they care about privatisation ?
Premier, you cant blame them for spending time at the gym.
Well then the caucus is about as useful as a f**king knife in a gunfight. All they are interested in is becoming ministers. The cabinet is
a shambles. Costa screaming at Della. Costa screaming at Roozendaal. Rail, health, education all f**ked up. No wonder my approval
rating is at f**kig 28%. I should never have listened to you Costa - your ego and ideological fanaticism have f**ked me. All along I
have said "lets just do retail" - but no you want to do the whole f**king lot. Once a trot, always a trot ! As for you two boneheads -
"Trust Macca, he'll deliver ...we'll deliver" . F**king useless cretins .
(Descending into a calmer mood )
How am I supposed to get anything done ? And what do I tell Keating and Carr ? There will be no job with Bob if I can't deliver. And
what about when the media realises there's going to be no Metro ? I am not finished with those Unions. If I am to f**king well feel the
pain ,then so can those f**king f**k-wits ! I'll fix Kruse in local government, Riordan somewhere else - and as for the so-called Left
unions....I'll make them wish they had never let Ferguson become vice-president. This is all Costa's fault not mine....
(OUTSIDE IN THE CORRIDOR - one female to another)
I told you last year we should have dumped Morris for me
(BACK IN THE ROOM A DESPONDENT PI)
Maybe I can get Keating and Unsworth to write another letter or what about John Howard ?
He understands my vision. We can still win this. Threaten their preselections,
Karl can't save them . We just have to keep bullshitting and threatening - get Josh to
make another video about Della. If I am going to be f**ked by the party - then I'll f**k the party.
KEV THE REV's BUTLER
According to the Sunday Telegraph Kev the Rev's butler earns $78,000 per year and is a party boy.
He partied at The Stonewall Inn when he accompanied the Rev to New York.
He thought Macy's department store was a hoot as it represented "shopping galore".
His favourite quote is "Don't go stomping your last season Prada shoes at me, honey''
His favourite films are Legally Blonde, Pretty Woman and "anything to do with Madonna''.
Isn't it about time we stopped stereotyping people, because of their occupations ???
SOURCE :
Sharri Markson , Meet Kevin Rudd's party boy butler , Sunday Telegraph, 1 June 2008.
================================================================================================================
According to the Sunday Telegraph Kev the Rev's butler earns $78,000 per year and is a party boy.
He partied at The Stonewall Inn when he accompanied the Rev to New York.
He thought Macy's department store was a hoot as it represented "shopping galore".
His favourite quote is "Don't go stomping your last season Prada shoes at me, honey''
His favourite films are Legally Blonde, Pretty Woman and "anything to do with Madonna''.
Isn't it about time we stopped stereotyping people, because of their occupations ???
SOURCE :
Sharri Markson , Meet Kevin Rudd's party boy butler , Sunday Telegraph, 1 June 2008.
================================================================================================================
ENTERTAINMENT
According to Kerry-Anne Walsh and Lisa Carty of the Sun Herald -
THE case of the snoozing security guard will be centre stage at the NSW Industrial Commission over the next three days. On Tuesday,
parliamentary Speaker Richard Torbay will take to the stand to explain why he sacked the guard after he was caught napping during a
night shift. It's the first time in about a decade a speaker - technically the employer - has given evidence in the commission, because
most cases are settled. Not this time. Torbay is said to have the security guards in his sights and is keen on replacing the 16 employed
by parliament - supplemented by several from Chubb, the security firm - with special constables. The Public Service Association,
representing the guard, is expected to argue he and his colleagues have been the victims of poor management. Part of their case is
likely to centre on a claim that sleeping on the job was common practice and known to the bosses, and it's unfair that the guard should
be singled out. Unfortunately for him, a break-in on the night of the nap brought things to a head. Six security guards' shirts were
stolen by thieves who entered the building through a door left unlocked so the guards could pop out for a smoke. The guard was put
on restricted duties in November, losing shift penalties and overtime, and sacked in February.
Kerry-Anne Walsh & Lisa Carty , Naked Eye, Sun Herald. 1 June 2008. p. 59
Mr Torbay is no stranger to appearing in court to give evidence against former employees. When Mr Torbay was the "boss" of another
organisation, the UNE Union, before he entered parliament, he appeared in the Armidale Local Court as a witness in the case of an employee of
that organisation. He was cross-examined by then Armidale solicitor (now a NSW Local Court magistrate) Roger Prowse, who appeared for the
employee. From all reports it was a fiery exchange, and it has been said the presiding magistrate appeared to have enjoyed the spectacle.
The latest case is to be heard by Commissioner Murphy.
.=================================================================================================================
According to Kerry-Anne Walsh and Lisa Carty of the Sun Herald -
THE case of the snoozing security guard will be centre stage at the NSW Industrial Commission over the next three days. On Tuesday,
parliamentary Speaker Richard Torbay will take to the stand to explain why he sacked the guard after he was caught napping during a
night shift. It's the first time in about a decade a speaker - technically the employer - has given evidence in the commission, because
most cases are settled. Not this time. Torbay is said to have the security guards in his sights and is keen on replacing the 16 employed
by parliament - supplemented by several from Chubb, the security firm - with special constables. The Public Service Association,
representing the guard, is expected to argue he and his colleagues have been the victims of poor management. Part of their case is
likely to centre on a claim that sleeping on the job was common practice and known to the bosses, and it's unfair that the guard should
be singled out. Unfortunately for him, a break-in on the night of the nap brought things to a head. Six security guards' shirts were
stolen by thieves who entered the building through a door left unlocked so the guards could pop out for a smoke. The guard was put
on restricted duties in November, losing shift penalties and overtime, and sacked in February.
Kerry-Anne Walsh & Lisa Carty , Naked Eye, Sun Herald. 1 June 2008. p. 59
Mr Torbay is no stranger to appearing in court to give evidence against former employees. When Mr Torbay was the "boss" of another
organisation, the UNE Union, before he entered parliament, he appeared in the Armidale Local Court as a witness in the case of an employee of
that organisation. He was cross-examined by then Armidale solicitor (now a NSW Local Court magistrate) Roger Prowse, who appeared for the
employee. From all reports it was a fiery exchange, and it has been said the presiding magistrate appeared to have enjoyed the spectacle.
The latest case is to be heard by Commissioner Murphy.
.=================================================================================================================
SPENDING THE MONEY BEFORE THE SALE
At the Labor Conference in May 2008 Unions leader John Robertson argued it was possible to keep electricity
assets in state ownership and at the same time fund health and education.
Terrigals foot soldier Reba Meagher MP, poo-pooed Mr Robertson's claims, saying it was just not possible to
do so and it was an irresponsible attitude - to borrow money.
For a You Tube Video - State Conference 2008 - Privatising Electricity, to hear the arguments go HERE .
One month down the track, and "leaked" budget information suggests that the Iemma government is now embarking
on a $58 billion infrastructure spending splurge, which will increase state debt by $21 billion
over the period to 2012-13
So it seems the Premier can't decide whether he is Agnes or Morris, whether debt is responsible or irresponsible or whether to spend the sale
money now or later (even though there has been no sale).
Premier Iemma seems like a drunken driver wobbling across the road, apparently unable to make a decision as to which lane to drive in.
SOURCES :
Iemma: Debt man walking with 2008 State Budget plan , Daily Telegraph, 2 June 2008.
Brian Robins , $58b splurge to hit surplus , Sydney Morning Herald, 2 June 2008.
=================================================================================================================
At the Labor Conference in May 2008 Unions leader John Robertson argued it was possible to keep electricity
assets in state ownership and at the same time fund health and education.
Terrigals foot soldier Reba Meagher MP, poo-pooed Mr Robertson's claims, saying it was just not possible to
do so and it was an irresponsible attitude - to borrow money.
For a You Tube Video - State Conference 2008 - Privatising Electricity, to hear the arguments go HERE .
One month down the track, and "leaked" budget information suggests that the Iemma government is now embarking
on a $58 billion infrastructure spending splurge, which will increase state debt by $21 billion
over the period to 2012-13
So it seems the Premier can't decide whether he is Agnes or Morris, whether debt is responsible or irresponsible or whether to spend the sale
money now or later (even though there has been no sale).
Premier Iemma seems like a drunken driver wobbling across the road, apparently unable to make a decision as to which lane to drive in.
SOURCES :
Iemma: Debt man walking with 2008 State Budget plan , Daily Telegraph, 2 June 2008.
Brian Robins , $58b splurge to hit surplus , Sydney Morning Herald, 2 June 2008.
=================================================================================================================
INTERESTING GOVERNANCE AFFAIRS
Two articles in The Australian newspaper of 2 June 2008 provide food for thought
in relation to matters of governance.
1. Glenn Milne, Battle for Rudd's mind , The Australian, 2 June 2008.
The message ....(is) ..... that there are governments dedicated to "actions" and there
are governments dedicated to "outcomes". And in Ferguson's judgment federal Labor's
state antecedents were in the former category; lots of largely meaningless activity that
captured the 24-hour media cycle, but which ultimately amounted to not much in
policy terms.
...it comes to a choice ...(of) .....mak(ing) a difference over the long term in favour of
the nation's prosperity and wellbeing....(or)..... simply perpetuat(ing).... (oneself)....in
office.
This (is the) "actions" v "outcomes" paradigm ..
In an article to be published by the Institute of Public Affairs in coming weeks, Tony Barry...(propounds).....(a).... thesis .... that Liberal state oppositions across the
past decade contributed unwittingly to the ascendancy of Carr, Beattie and Bracks by adopting a "small target" strategy, based on a mistaken view that this
would allow voters to concentrate on the failing of the Labor governments.
What it actually did, according to Barry, was to allow the Liberal Oppositions to slip out of the tightly government-controlled 24-hour media cycle.
"Liberal oppositions across the country are using an old game plan-where a 'small target' strategy could pave the way to government," says Barry.
"Unless they figure out why this strategy is failing, these oppositions will remain in the political wilderness. Contemporary Australian politics has become an
exercise in tactical media contact and tight news cycle management. Unfortunately this recent development has come at the expense of values-based
leadership and outward looking policies."
Particularly in state politics the small target strategy no longer works as hard. In the early 1990s the prevailing political wisdom for oppositions was "don't be the
issue". Today, the new strategic paradigm for oppositions is "don't be irrelevant".
Barry's answer is: "The strategic imperative for oppositions is to avoid irrelevance by showing leadership, alternative and differentiated ideas and perceived
competence to back that up. This requires engagement to get over the oxygen debt typically experienced by oppositions in non-election years while
simultaneously avoiding soft voter perceptions that they are only engaging at the 'last minute'."
2. John McDonnell , The reason our public service is revolting , The Australian, 2 June 2008.
A fundamental precept........ is that there are no circumstances in which the public service is justified in leaking. When I asked John
Stone over lunch a few years ago whether treasury would have been justified in leaking the material it had on the Khemlani affair,
given it was unable to get that material in front of prime minister Gough Whitlam and it was in the national interest that it do so, Stone
was appalled. He made it plain that not even this would justify leaking. In the event that the leaks on FuelWatch are sourced to public
servants, the bureaucrats deserve to be dismissed.
The first understanding is that the public service is not part of the political apparatus. This is not simply a question of public servants
objecting to having to take calls from staffers at 5.30am so that a minister can make the morning news; it goes to the difference
between politics and government. Politics is about the announcement of programs and claiming credit for their outcomes. This is the
job of politicians. Government is about the efficient implementation of programs. This is irreconcilable with the need to meet the
demands of a 24-hour news cycle and the requirements of the Government's public-relations machine. In extreme cases where a
government seeks to distort the work of a public servant to suit its political purposes, as the Blair government did with the work of
David Kelly, the public servant has no option other than to resign but must still remain silent (that Kelly felt enormous guilt at having
breached the code and leaked was undoubtedly a cause of his suicide). As a corollary, a government has a duty to protect the ability of
its public servants to do their work as honestly and efficiently as possible.
Secondly, the public service is responsible for ensuring that any policy to be implemented is good policy. Just because a government
believes it has a mandate for its policy doesn't make it good. The public may not have been presented with contrary analysis at the time
of an election or circumstances may have changed. Policies may be inconsistent; think emissions trading and anti-inflationary policies.
The politician's duty to stick to policies right or wrong derives solely from the fact that they look stupid if they admit a mistake. A public
servant's duty to resist bad policy is even greater where there is no mandate, since the policy may have been influenced by the
activities of lobbyists and interest groups.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The questions for NSW are :
1. Is the Iemma government more interested in outcomes than actions :One suspects the answer is actions - with spin-meisters however trying
to spin the opposite, despite all the evidence. Certainly many ministerial appointments are made, and continue to be held, based on "mates",
rather than outcomes delivered. Reba Meagher MP, is the shining example of where outcomes play second fiddle to "mates".
2. Is the NSW Opposition relevant ? - The answer would seem to be, apart from electricity privatisation, the NSW opposition have yet to
announce any policies. However, in the privatisation debate they have been highly relevant (see ABC News, MP still worried about power
privatisation price rises, 30 May 2008 - the Unions are in consultation with the opposition after ending their consultations with the
government).. Whether, the government then blames the short-comings of privatisation on the opposition (for allowing the government to
implement it's own plans) is yet to be seen.
3. Does NSW have a fiercely independent public service ? The answer seems to be NO - as Labor ministers continue to parachute mates into
jobs in preference to others.
=================================================================================================================
Two articles in The Australian newspaper of 2 June 2008 provide food for thought
in relation to matters of governance.
1. Glenn Milne, Battle for Rudd's mind , The Australian, 2 June 2008.
The message ....(is) ..... that there are governments dedicated to "actions" and there
are governments dedicated to "outcomes". And in Ferguson's judgment federal Labor's
state antecedents were in the former category; lots of largely meaningless activity that
captured the 24-hour media cycle, but which ultimately amounted to not much in
policy terms.
...it comes to a choice ...(of) .....mak(ing) a difference over the long term in favour of
the nation's prosperity and wellbeing....(or)..... simply perpetuat(ing).... (oneself)....in
office.
This (is the) "actions" v "outcomes" paradigm ..
In an article to be published by the Institute of Public Affairs in coming weeks, Tony Barry...(propounds).....(a).... thesis .... that Liberal state oppositions across the
past decade contributed unwittingly to the ascendancy of Carr, Beattie and Bracks by adopting a "small target" strategy, based on a mistaken view that this
would allow voters to concentrate on the failing of the Labor governments.
What it actually did, according to Barry, was to allow the Liberal Oppositions to slip out of the tightly government-controlled 24-hour media cycle.
"Liberal oppositions across the country are using an old game plan-where a 'small target' strategy could pave the way to government," says Barry.
"Unless they figure out why this strategy is failing, these oppositions will remain in the political wilderness. Contemporary Australian politics has become an
exercise in tactical media contact and tight news cycle management. Unfortunately this recent development has come at the expense of values-based
leadership and outward looking policies."
Particularly in state politics the small target strategy no longer works as hard. In the early 1990s the prevailing political wisdom for oppositions was "don't be the
issue". Today, the new strategic paradigm for oppositions is "don't be irrelevant".
Barry's answer is: "The strategic imperative for oppositions is to avoid irrelevance by showing leadership, alternative and differentiated ideas and perceived
competence to back that up. This requires engagement to get over the oxygen debt typically experienced by oppositions in non-election years while
simultaneously avoiding soft voter perceptions that they are only engaging at the 'last minute'."
2. John McDonnell , The reason our public service is revolting , The Australian, 2 June 2008.
A fundamental precept........ is that there are no circumstances in which the public service is justified in leaking. When I asked John
Stone over lunch a few years ago whether treasury would have been justified in leaking the material it had on the Khemlani affair,
given it was unable to get that material in front of prime minister Gough Whitlam and it was in the national interest that it do so, Stone
was appalled. He made it plain that not even this would justify leaking. In the event that the leaks on FuelWatch are sourced to public
servants, the bureaucrats deserve to be dismissed.
The first understanding is that the public service is not part of the political apparatus. This is not simply a question of public servants
objecting to having to take calls from staffers at 5.30am so that a minister can make the morning news; it goes to the difference
between politics and government. Politics is about the announcement of programs and claiming credit for their outcomes. This is the
job of politicians. Government is about the efficient implementation of programs. This is irreconcilable with the need to meet the
demands of a 24-hour news cycle and the requirements of the Government's public-relations machine. In extreme cases where a
government seeks to distort the work of a public servant to suit its political purposes, as the Blair government did with the work of
David Kelly, the public servant has no option other than to resign but must still remain silent (that Kelly felt enormous guilt at having
breached the code and leaked was undoubtedly a cause of his suicide). As a corollary, a government has a duty to protect the ability of
its public servants to do their work as honestly and efficiently as possible.
Secondly, the public service is responsible for ensuring that any policy to be implemented is good policy. Just because a government
believes it has a mandate for its policy doesn't make it good. The public may not have been presented with contrary analysis at the time
of an election or circumstances may have changed. Policies may be inconsistent; think emissions trading and anti-inflationary policies.
The politician's duty to stick to policies right or wrong derives solely from the fact that they look stupid if they admit a mistake. A public
servant's duty to resist bad policy is even greater where there is no mandate, since the policy may have been influenced by the
activities of lobbyists and interest groups.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The questions for NSW are :
1. Is the Iemma government more interested in outcomes than actions :One suspects the answer is actions - with spin-meisters however trying
to spin the opposite, despite all the evidence. Certainly many ministerial appointments are made, and continue to be held, based on "mates",
rather than outcomes delivered. Reba Meagher MP, is the shining example of where outcomes play second fiddle to "mates".
2. Is the NSW Opposition relevant ? - The answer would seem to be, apart from electricity privatisation, the NSW opposition have yet to
announce any policies. However, in the privatisation debate they have been highly relevant (see ABC News, MP still worried about power
privatisation price rises, 30 May 2008 - the Unions are in consultation with the opposition after ending their consultations with the
government).. Whether, the government then blames the short-comings of privatisation on the opposition (for allowing the government to
implement it's own plans) is yet to be seen.
3. Does NSW have a fiercely independent public service ? The answer seems to be NO - as Labor ministers continue to parachute mates into
jobs in preference to others.
=================================================================================================================
