David Pope |
This blog is open to any who wish to comment on Australian society, the state of the environment or political shenanigans at Federal, State and Local Government level.
"I think that people are owed an explanation of what happened."
— News Breakfast (@BreakfastNews) November 28, 2022
Niki Savva's new book 'Bulldozed' details Scott Morrison's fall and Anthony Albanese's rise - and it's already causing some major rumblings in Australian politics. pic.twitter.com/KbGKbiXpuq
"A censure motion will be moved in federal parliament against former prime minister Scott Morrison." Australian Associated Press, 28 November 2022. IMAGE: Mick Tsikas/AAP PHOTOS |
The Echidna, newsletter, 2 December 2022:
IN CASE YOU MISSED IT:
Australia's information commissioner has begun an investigation into Medibank's data-handling practices as the hackers behind the breach dumped the last customer information they stole on the dark web. The health insurer reported the breach on October 13 and the Russian ransomware group has been releasing customer information in a staged manner since early November. The Office of the Australian Information Commissioner confirmed it was examining Medibank after preliminary inquiries found enough evidence to press further.
Health authorities have issued a warning for all green thumbs using potting mix after a Sydney woman in her 60s died from Legionnaires' disease. Legionnaires' disease is a type of pneumonia caused by exposure to legionella bacteria. It is life-threatening but rare. Symptoms include fever, chills, a cough, shortness of breath and aching muscles. Associate Professor and specialist in infectious diseases at the Australian National University Sanjaya Senanayake said gardeners should wear a face mask and gloves while handling potting mix.
Bushfire season has officially begun in Australia, and despite copping a drenching from La Nina, the country could still see devastating burns. NSW is facing its most significant grassfire risk in a decade, with two years of rain creating conditions for "prolific vegetation growth". Forecast hotter and drier conditions for the second half of summer also means the overall impact this season could be much worse than many are expecting. Grassfires can move up to three times faster than a bushfire, generating enormous amounts of heat, and flames up to five metres high.
To sign up for this newsletter go to: https://www.theechidna.com.au/
Clarence Valley Independent, 30 November 2022:
If you’re under 18 and are thinking about sneaking into a licensed premises, be warned – new liquor accord rules in the Lower Clarence mean you’ll have to wait until you’re at least 19 before you can enjoy a drink with friends at a pub or club.
President Chris Durrington said the new rule, which received the full support of local licensing police, and was ratified at the October meeting of the Lower Clarence Liquor Accord targets fake identification and under-age drinking.
“If you’re 17 and you get caught under-age drinking on premises, your barring starts from when you turn 18,” he said.
“You can’t go into a pub or club or restaurant that is a licensed premises until you are 19.
“If you get caught again a second time, your ban from licensed premises will extend until you’re 20.”
The new rule for 18’s has been implemented successfully in other areas including Coffs Harbour.
Presenting fake identification becomes more prolific in holiday periods, Mr Durrington said.
“Especially around this time of year at the pubs, a lot of kids from Sydney bring up fake id’s…there’s a few fake apps that they use that look 100 per-cent, but there are a few things we look for to identify it’s fake,” he said.
“The licensing police have increased their presence recently and have been doing walk-throughs of premises at least every couple of weeks.”
Stiff penalties apply for licensed premises selling alcohol to a minor with a fine of $11,000 or up to 12 months imprisonment, or both, for both the person selling the alcohol and the licensee.
Mr Durrington said the new rule for under 18’s will work hand-in-hand with the liquor accords barred from one, barred from all policy.
“We’ve had the barred from one, barred from all, successful initiative that’s been going for a few years,” he said.
“If you commit an offence in any club, pub or any licensed establishment you can be put on the barred list, so you will be barred from anywhere in the Lower Clarence that sells alcohol.
“Restaurants, bottle shops, clubs, pubs, every licensed premises.”
Since the implementation of the barred from one, barred from all initiative, Mr Durrington said all venues had experienced a dramatic drop in offences committed at premises.
“Since we started the barred from one, barred from all, crime rate in the clubs and pubs is down about 80 per-cent,” he said.
“They see the sign, especially if they’re locals, that they can’t go to the pub or the club for a year and it just stops them.”…..
One of the consequences of this new agreement among liquor outlets is that adults of any age may find it difficult to access home delivery from local bottleshops.
I'm not sure that Mr. Durrington, Operations Manager of the Yamba Golf and Country Club or the Coffs-Clarence Police District commander, foresaw that situation.
An instance of politically reaping what one has sown came to pass for Scott John Morrison yesterday when a motion of censure was put to Parliament......
House of Representatives, Parliamentary Business, Chamber documents, Live Minutes, 30 November 2022:
Question put— 12:02:04 PM
Division 81 — 12:02:17 PM
The House divided (the Speaker, Mr Dick, in the Chair) —
AYES, 86
Mr Albanese Mrs Elliot Ms McBride Dr Scamps
Dr Aly Ms Fernando Mr Marles Ms Scrymgour
Dr Ananda-Rajah Dr Freelander Ms Mascarenhas Ms Sharkie
Mrs Archer Dr Garland Ms Miller-Frost Mr Shorten
Mr Bandt Mr Georganas Mr B Mitchell Ms Sitou
Mr Bates Mr Giles Mr R Mitchell Mr Smith*
Mr Bowen Mr Gorman Dr Mulino Ms Spender
Mr Burke Mr Gosling Mr Neumann Ms Stanley*
Ms Burney Dr Haines Mr O’Connor Ms Steggall
Mr Burns Mr Hill Ms O’Neil Ms Swanson
Mr Butler Mr Husic Ms Payne Ms Templeman
Dr Chalmers Mr Jones Mr Perrett Mr Thistlethwaite
Mr Chandler-Mather Ms Kearney Mrs Phillips Ms Thwaites
Ms Chaney Mr Keogh Ms Plibersek Ms Tink
Dr Charlton Mr Khalil Dr Reid Ms Vamvakinou
Ms Chesters Ms C King Mr Repacholi Ms Watson-Brown
Mr Clare Ms M. M. H. King Ms Rishworth Mr Watts
Ms Coker Ms Lawrence Ms Roberts Ms Wells
Ms Collins Mr Laxale Ms Rowland Mr Wilkie
Mr Conroy Dr Leigh Ms J Ryan Mr J Wilson
Ms Daniel Mr Lim Dr M Ryan Mr Zappia
Mr Dreyfus Ms McBain
NOES, 50
Ms Bell Mr Hamilton Mrs Marino Mr Taylor
Mr Birrell Mr Hastie Mr Morrison Mr Tehan
Mr Boyce Mr Hawke Mr Ted O’Brien Mr Thompson
Mr Broadbent Mr Hogan Mr Pasin Mr Vasta
Mr Buchholz Mr Howarth Mr Pearce Mr Wallace
Mr Coleman Mr Joyce Mr Pike Ms Ware
Mr Conaghan Mr Katter Mr Pitt Dr Webster
Mr Coulton* Ms Landry Ms Price Mr Willcox
Mr Dutton Mr Leeser Mr Ramsey* Mr R Wilson
Mr Entsch Mr Littleproud Mr Robert Mr Wolahan
Mr Fletcher Mr McCormack Mr Stevens Mr Wood
Dr Gillespie Mrs McIntosh Mr Sukkar Mr Young
Mr Goodenough Ms McKenzie
* Tellers
And so it was resolved in the affirmative.
It is noted that all the Independent MPs — with the exception of Ms. Dai Li the Member for Fowler — voted in support of the censure motion. Ms. Dai Li appears to have abstained.
It is further noted that Mrs. Bridget Archer the Liberal Member for Bass voted in support of the censure motion, while Karen Andrews the Liberal Member for McPherson appears to have abstained. UPDATE: It appears that Sussan Ley the Liberal Member for Farrer & Deputy Leader of the Liberal Party may also have abstained.
A further 5 members of the Coalition Opposition were
— perhaps 'diplomatically' — absent from the House at the time the vote was taken. They were Alan Tudge (Lib Aston), Lew O’Brien (LNP Wide Bay), Andew Gee (Nats Calare), Bert van Manen (LNP Forde) on leave, Darren Chester (Nats Gippsland) on leave.
The Greens Members for Melbourne, Griffith and Ryan all voted in support of the censure motion, as did Ms. Sharkie the Centre Alliance Member for Mayo. Mr. Katter the KAP Member for Kennedy voted against the censure motion.
The text of the Censure Motion to which those 86 members of the House of Representatives agreed.......
House of Representatives, Hansard, 30 November 2022, excerpt:
MOTIONS
Member For Cook
Censure
Mr BURKE (Watson—Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations, Minister for the Arts and Leader of the House) (09:06): Given the nature of the motion I am about to move, I think it would suit the convenience of the House for the normal speaking times which apply to all members to not apply to the member for Cook, should he rise to speak. I think, given the nature of the motion, it's appropriate that the member for Cook, should he wish to speak, be able to make whatever length of contribution he chooses.
I move:
That the House:
(1) notes:
(a) the Constitution provides for 'responsible government', described by the High Court of Australia as a 'system by which the executive is responsible to the legislature and, through it, to the electorate';
(b) in the Inquiry into the Appointment of the Former Prime Minister to Administer Multiple Departments, the Honourable Virginia Bell AC found that while the Member for Cook was the Prime Minister of Australia he:
(i) had himself appointed to administer:
(A) the Department of Health on 14 March 2020;
(B) the Department of Finance on 30 March 2020;
(C) the Department of Industry, Science, Energy and Resources on 15 April 2021;
(D) the Department of Treasury on 6 May 2021; and
(E) the Department of Home Affairs on 6 May 2021; and
(ii) did not inform:
(A) Cabinet;
(B) the relevant Departments;
(C) the House of Representatives; or
(D) the Australian public;
about these additional appointments; and
(c) as found by the Honourable Virginia Bell AC, the actions and failures of the Member for Cook:
(i) 'fundamentally undermined' the principles of responsible government because the Member for Cook was not 'responsible' to the Parliament, and through the Parliament to the electors, for the departments he was appointed to administer; and
(ii) were 'apt to undermine public confidence in government' and were 'corrosive of trust in government'; and
(2) therefore censures the Member for Cook for failing to disclose his appointments to the House of Representatives, the Australian people and the Cabinet, which undermined responsible government and eroded public trust in Australia's democracy.
Today's motion is not how any of us wanted to make history. In any other circumstance, for any other former Prime Minister and, certainly, even for the member for Cook, had the disclosure not been made available about the multiple ministries, we would not be here now. But a censure, while rare, has its place. The last time this parliament censured a member of parliament, it was a former minister, and it was done so unanimously. It was done so unanimously in relation to a former minister on the following basis: the decision was made that he—and I'll read this—'fell below the standards expected of a member of the House'. It wasn't that he had acted unlawfully; it was that he had fallen below the standards expected of a member of the House. That is the test. The test for censure, while rare, is not the test: would the courts overrule it? The courts are the place to determine whether or not something was lawful. In the parliament we determine whether or not something was appropriate.
I ask all members to think back to the first moment they heard about the multiple ministries and what their
reaction was. Some gave their reaction on the record and many more gave their reaction off the record. Nobody, except the member for Cook himself, had the reaction or said that this was acceptable or it met the standards expected of this House.
There are many democracies that have a system different to ours. There are many democracies around the world where the system of government is that the executive are quite separate to the legislature. Our system is responsible government. The executive are here in this room for the purpose of being held to account every day the legislature sits. That entire concept of responsible government only works if the parliament and, through the parliament, the
Australian people know which members of the executive are responsible for what.
This is not some small matter. It goes to the absolute core of the principle of responsible government. Responsible government was what Ms Bell referred to specifically. In her report she said:
… the principles of responsible government were "fundamentally undermined" …
She also said:
… the lack of disclosure of the appointments to the public was apt to undermine public confidence in government.
She also said:
… the secrecy with which they had been surrounded was corrosive of trust in government.
If we could unanimously determine that the conduct of Bruce Billson fell short of the standards, how on earth can the multiple ministries—and in question time after question time we, in fact, did not know where portfolios had been allocated—meet the standard? Question time is viewed as the most significant part of the parliamentary day.
It's when every member turns up. It's not a requirement that every member turns up; it is a convention. We have to defend our conventions too.
The core of responsible government was breached with the multiple appointments. In doing so, the member for
Cook did not tell the ministers themselves that he had been sworn into their portfolios. His cabinet was not told.
The department secretaries were not told. The parliament was not told. Through the parliament, the Australian people were not told. In doing this, the member for Cook did not just fall below the standards expected; he undermined them, he rejected them, he attacked them and he abused them.
How do we even know that all this happened? We know because at the same time that the member for Cook was not telling his colleagues, not telling this parliament and not telling the Australian people he was telling some
journalists writing a book. He thought it was interesting to contribute to the publication of a book, but not important to let anybody know where it was directly relevant to them.
The defences that have been offered, including the defences offered by the member for Cook through his lawyers to the Bell inquiry, are logically impossible. The member for Cook's lawyers said for him:
However, this in no way suggests that he did not expect that the usual practice would apply and that PM&C would publish the appointments in the Gazette.
It beggars belief that the member for Cook is now arguing that it was somehow just presumed it would have been made public in the Gazette and yet he was making sure he didn't tell the ministers themselves. When asked about the ministers, he said on 17 August the reason he didn't want to tell them was, 'I did not wish ministers to be second guessing themselves.' Both cannot be true. It cannot be the case that it was presumed it was going to come out in the Gazette and that it was important for people to not be told. To this day, the different versions being offered by the member for Cook cannot reconcile themselves with each other.
In the same way, when this started to emerge, when only Health, Finance and Industry, Science and Resources appointments had been known, on radio the member for Cook said this. He was asked, 'Just to be clear: are there other portfolios you assumed any control over?' The answer was: 'Not to my recollection. I don't recall any others being actioned.' It beggars belief that anyone in Australia's history could forget that they had been appointed Treasurer. It beggars belief.
At the start of question time each day, when a minister is not present, every prime minister has an obligation to
allow the House to know who is answering questions on their behalf. And, yet, at those exact moments the former Prime Minister never once said that he in fact was sworn into different portfolios and could answer those questions as well. The pathway of question time, the pathway of what this House did last term, was different because we were deceived. It was different. Questions were asked in different forms to different people because we weren't told.
It is true that what happened here was the end of a long process of enabling. When conventions were attacked, one after another, it led in a direct line to where we ended up, when we had the situation of there being constant silencing of opposition voices, when we had a cabinet committee with only one member, when we had a circumstance where, for the first time in living memory, a Speaker, a member of their own party, made a recommendation for a privileges reference which could have led to censure of one of their own. But they used their numbers to prevent the independence of the Speaker being recognised to defend—
An opposition member: It's just politics.
Mr BURKE: I hear the comment there—'It's just politics.' If that's the attitude then you never would have censured Bruce Billson. Every single threshold that has previously resulted in a censure being given of a member is met today and is met more strongly today than it ever has been before.
This place runs on rules and conventions. The mere existence of the office of Prime Minister and the existence of a cabinet is a convention. It's not in the Constitution. It's not required. It is a convention on which our system of government hangs. The concept that the parliament knows who has which job is essential to responsible government.
You cannot have responsible government if you don't know what people are responsible for, and for two years we didn't know. For two years, the ministers themselves did not know. For two years, departmental secretaries were unaware of who the ministers were to whom they had responsibility.
The gravity of what we are dealing with today is a censure motion beyond what the parliament has previously dealt with. Previously what we have dealt with is the conduct of one member being sufficiently bad that we needed to defend the House as a whole to say, 'That is not allowed to happen.' On this occasion, the conduct of one member prevented the House from doing its job. The conduct of one member prevented the House from knowing who was responsible for what. The fact that that one member was also the Prime Minister of Australia means that what we are dealing with now isn't just unprecedented, could not have been predicted, but is so completely unacceptable.
For members today I say to those opposite: there will be some thinking, yes; they oppose it but their party's made a decision. They've got to lock in; they've got to follow what their leader wants, and that's just where they're at. I'd just remind those members opposite of this: that is exactly what happened for the whole of the last term. It is exactly how every precedent was trashed. It is exactly how the principles of responsible government ended up being attacked in ways that hadn't happened before.
There is no previous Liberal Prime Minister where this sort of motion would ever have been moved. But the conduct that happened in the last term, that we now know about, was unacceptable, fell below the required standards and we have no choice but to support a censure.
It is noted that 21 MPs rose to their feet to debate the censure motion:
Mr Morrison, 9:21:46 AM. Mr Dreyfus, 9:45:46 AM. Mr Fletcher, 9:56:40 AM. Ms C King, 10:06:44 AM. Mr Katter, 10:16:30 AM. Ms M. M. H. King, 10:27:59 AM. Mr Leeser, 10:38:05 AM. Ms O’Neil, 10:47:30 AM. Mrs Archer, 10:52:47 AM. Mr Albanese, 10:56:44 AM. Mr McCormack, 11:16:08 AM. Mr Bandt, 11:29:29 AM. Dr Haines, 11:38:37 AM. Dr M Ryan, 11:41:49 AM. Ms Chaney, 11:47:27 AM. Dr Scamps, 11:49:02 AM. Ms Spender, 11:53:13 AM. Ms Daniel, 11:55:30 AM. Ms Steggall, 11:57:43 AM. Ms Tink, 11:59:57 AM.
This morning. Wednesday 30 November 2022, Trump-lite is to get some of the comeuppance he deserves.....
Go to House of Representatives live at:
https://www.aph.gov.au/Watch_Read_Listen
30/11/2022 9:00AM - 8:00PM AEDT
The censure motion will be put to the Parliament by Leader of the House, Tony Burke, MP for Watson, Minister for Employment and workplace Relations, Minister for the Arts.
Note:
BACKGROUND
ABC News, 28 November 2022:
The federal government will move a censure motion against former prime minister Scott Morrison over his decision to secretly appoint himself to a number of extra ministries.
Prime Minister Anthony Albanese announced today that cabinet had agreed to move the motion this week, the final sitting week for the year.
As Labor has a majority in the House of Representatives, the motion will pass.
Mr Morrison secretly appointed himself to administer several ministries throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, including to the treasury and home affairs portfolios.
Late last week, a report into his actions found they were "corrosive" to trust in government.
Mr Albanese said cabinet had agreed to implement all six recommendations from the report.
"We will introduce legislation later this week to make sure that this can never, ever happen again," he said.
"And this week, as well, the house will be moving a censure motion [against] the member for Cook as a result of the findings of Virginia Bell and the inquiry.
"This is about accountability of our democratic system, and whether the parliament was functioning properly, and about the relationship between the prime minister and the people of Australia, who expect [elected officials] to be held to account through our parliamentary processes."
One question remains: What was Morrison thinking?
Bell's report shreds any last remnants of credibility the former prime minister might have in regards to his disdain for proper process and in the way he treated his colleagues and the public.
Censure motions allow MPs to express their disapproval of their colleagues but do not have any direct legal consequences.
They are uncommon and it is very rare for a former prime minister to face one…..
Hi! My name is Boy. I'm a male bi-coloured tabby cat. Ever since I discovered that Malcolm Turnbull's dogs were allowed to blog, I have been pestering Clarencegirl to allow me a small space on North Coast Voices.
A false flag musing: I have noticed one particular voice on Facebook which is Pollyanna-positive on the subject of the Port of Yamba becoming a designated cruise ship destination. What this gentleman doesn’t disclose is that, as a principal of Middle Star Pty Ltd, he could be thought to have a potential pecuniary interest due to the fact that this corporation (which has had an office in Grafton since 2012) provides consultancy services and tourism business development services.
A religion & local government musing: On 11 October 2017 Clarence Valley Council has the Church of Jesus Christ Development Fund Inc in Sutherland Local Court No. 6 for a small claims hearing. It would appear that there may be a little issue in rendering unto Caesar. On 19 September 2017 an ordained minister of a religion (which was named by the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse in relation to 40 instances of historical child sexual abuse on the NSW North Coast) read the Opening Prayer at Council’s ordinary monthly meeting. Earlier in the year an ordained minister (from a church network alleged to have supported an overseas orphanage closed because of child abuse claims in 2013) read the Opening Prayer and an ordained minister (belonging to yet another church network accused of ignoring child sexual abuse in the US and racism in South Africa) read the Opening Prayer at yet another ordinary monthly meeting. Nice one councillors - you are covering yourselves with glory!
An investigative musing: Newcastle Herald, 12 August 2017: The state’s corruption watchdog has been asked to investigate the finances of the Awabakal Aboriginal Local Land Council, less than 12 months after the troubled organisation was placed into administration by the state government. The Newcastle Herald understands accounting firm PKF Lawler made the decision to refer the land council to the Independent Commission Against Corruption after discovering a number of irregularities during an audit of its financial statements. The results of the audit were recently presented to a meeting of Awabakal members. Administrator Terry Lawler did not respond when contacted by the Herald and a PKF Lawler spokesperson said it was unable to comment on the matter. Given the intricate web of company relationships that existed with at least one former board member it is not outside the realms of possibility that, if ICAC accepts this referral, then United Land Councils Limited (registered New Zealand) and United First Peoples Syndications Pty Ltd(registered Australia) might be interviewed. North Coast Voices readers will remember that on 15 August 2015 representatives of these two companied gave evidence before NSW Legislative Council General Purpose Standing Committee No. 6 INQUIRY INTO CROWN LAND. This evidence included advocating for a Yamba mega port.
A Nationals musing: Word around the traps is that NSW Nats MP for Clarence Chris Gulaptis has been talking up the notion of cruise ships visiting the Clarence River estuary. Fair dinkum! That man can be guaranteed to run with any bad idea put to him. I'm sure one or more cruise ships moored in the main navigation channel on a regular basis for one, two or three days is something other regular river users will really welcome. *pause for appreciation of irony* The draft of the smallest of the smaller cruise vessels is 3 metres and it would only stay safely afloat in that channel. Even the Yamba-Iluka ferry has been known to get momentarily stuck in silt/sand from time to time in Yamba Bay and even a very small cruise ship wouldn't be able to safely enter and exit Iluka Bay. You can bet your bottom dollar operators of cruise lines would soon be calling for dredging at the approach to the river mouth - and you know how well that goes down with the local residents.
A local councils musing: Which Northern Rivers council is on a low-key NSW Office of Local Government watch list courtesy of feet dragging by a past general manager?
A serial pest musing: I'm sure the Clarence Valley was thrilled to find that a well-known fantasist is active once again in the wee small hours of the morning treading a well-worn path of accusations involving police, local business owners and others.
An investigative musing: Which NSW North Coast council is batting to have the longest running code of conduct complaint investigation on record?
A fun fact musing: An estimated 24,000 whales migrated along the NSW coastline in 2016 according to the NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service and the migration period is getting longer.
A which bank? musing: Despite a net profit last year of $9,227 million the Commonwealth Bank still insists on paying below Centrelink deeming rates interest on money held in Pensioner Security Accounts. One local wag says he’s waiting for the first bill from the bank charging him for the privilege of keeping his pension dollars at that bank.
A Daily Examiner musing: Just when you thought this newspaper could sink no lower under News Corp management, it continues to give column space to Andrew Bolt.
A thought to ponder musing: In case of bushfire or flood - do you have an emergency evacuation plan for the family pet?
An adoption musing: Every week on the NSW North Coast a number of cats and dogs find themselves without a home. If you want to do your bit and give one bundle of joy a new family, contact Happy Paws on 0419 404 766 or your local council pound.