The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Worms in our political core > Comments

Worms in our political core : Comments

By John Warhurst, published 12/3/2007

Labor must take a large portion of the blame for our corrupt political culture: it needs to clean up its act.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. All
Keating finding fault in others; now that's pure gold.

To expect our politicians to clean up their act is a big call. I am of the opinion that you have to be bent, corrupt, easily tempted, easily led, have a fondness for overseas travel, possess the ability to be struck mute when called upon, economical with the truth or perhaps a stranger to the truth, prepared to operate outside the law and other entertaining qualities to enter politics. If these qualities were to be applied to those who frequent racetracks they would be termed a 'colourful character'.
Posted by Sage, Monday, 12 March 2007 10:04:27 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Re corruption, John Warhurst asks "what is the impact of all this?"
The impact some of us are looking at in horror is the trashing of Sydney's drinking water catchment by mining operations. The Sydney Catchment Authority was set up in 1999 to protect the health of the catchment and its precious rivers but these are in fact being cracked, polluted and depleted as we speak. Unbelievable at a time of severe water shortage. Experts ask that the mines be moved back a little from the rivers to protect them from permanent damage, but the mining companies are granted their every wish by the NSW Labor Government, taking every inch of coal they can get their hands on - never mind the environment or our water supply. We can only conclude that some corruption is taking place, probably at every imaginable level given the big bucks involved.
Posted by kang, Monday, 12 March 2007 10:19:44 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Mainstream politics is rotten to the core. It's time we turned to the army of willing independent candidates to bring some respectability to politics.
Posted by Lachlan Connor, Monday, 12 March 2007 10:44:22 AM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Does this Warhurst bloke actually get paid by the ANU to be this naive?

What exactly does he think is any different today to the way politics has always been played? Or is he just sharing the pain of his disillusionment with us?

At the end of the article the pious hope is expressed that independents will be elected. What a joke.

If Warhurst is really that angry with the ALP, then he should say "I will withhold my vote and my preference from the ALP until they meet the standard I require".

But what's the bet that at election time he will rationalise the ALP as the lesser of the two evils, and give them the only thing they want - his preference?

They DON'T CARE if you write articles saying how bad they are as long as they get back in power. So either stop whining, or come up with an actual plan to change things.

David Jackmanson
http://www.letstakeover.blogspot.com
http://www.lastsuperpower.net
Posted by David Jackmanson, Monday, 12 March 2007 11:28:04 AM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I don't think people should conflate the resignations of various Ministers in other States with the WA cases. I think most Ministerial losses have been to do with individual issues and not corrupt public behaviour.

That aside, there is a stench of petty municipal level corruption across the country, fortunately in WA the State Labor Government has recognised that Ozzie flesh is weak and set up the CCC with sweeping Royal Commission powers. The fact it has snared a number of politicians and public servants is just evidence of how dumb they are.

What we don't know is how corrupt other States and the Feds are. The AWB cracks a mention. I would be interested to have listened to the tapes of Federal Ministerial conversations about AWB.

Painting a target on Labor because of the CCC and trying to colour all political dismissals as evidence of corrupt behaviour is just peurile partisan politics. Without effective CCC type oversight we can only guess that the Federal Government is honest or that previous State Coalition Governments were honest. Let's not forget the mangled history of the Queensland Coalition.
Posted by westernred, Monday, 12 March 2007 1:49:32 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The professor is upset about sackings by state premiers but he is silent about the lack of sackings by the prime minister.

Which is worse, sacking a minister because he deserved it or not sacking ministers because the PM had the numbers and continually decided to tough it out? Then when it suited his bare knuckle politics the PM sacked (sorry, accepted the resignation of) a minister who doubtless will be rewarded handsomely later on.

As regards political lobbyists, there are plenty of them in Canberra too but I guess no-one wants to talk about that.
Posted by Cornflower, Monday, 12 March 2007 1:53:42 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Most posters in this thread again highlight the thought if you do not vote like me you are wrong!
And constant claims that those others are corrupt is laughable! it truly is.
Both sides and even the lost in between of politics claim democracy is the best way ,but can not except its results.
Coal, those who want to end its use and mostly now not in say ten years ,are so far away from average Aussie that they may just as well be on another planet.
The views we each hold are not granted sainthood because they are ours, they may even be wrong.
But evidence exists that conservative party's are out of touch with voters, every state government screams that message surely?
And make no mistake after the federal election no government other than a council will be ruled by conservatives in Australia.
At that time, finally the debate we should be having now will begin, a new leader or new direction for conservatives? both in my view now.
Posted by Belly, Monday, 12 March 2007 2:31:18 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I find this article a bit strange. It asked:

'What if Iemma and Debnam had to face a third of the electorate not voting at all out of disgust with the political machinations?'

Answer: they wouldn't give a toss. If two thirds didn't vote they might start worrying a little about the bad image...

As for independents having probity, that applies even more to The Greens. They don't take developer donations and they have a bottom-up democratic process within the party so the elected representatives and 'heavies' don't have as much leeway to act corruptly compared to the more hierachical major parties. For instance the state organisation cannot override local groups in choosing candidates or preferences.

In my electorate I would say the sitting independent member is far less voter-responsive than the Greens candidate, and also got elected partly on developer money. Plus The Greens have Council and upper house electees as well so they are potentially more effective than independents.
Posted by Michael G., Monday, 12 March 2007 2:38:56 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
It is perhaps odd that whilst state members are cited, except for the AWB, the Federal escapes censure. Yet books such as 'Silencing Dissent', Hamilton & Maddison and a number similar, point to the secrecy of this government and the ways in which the Democratic will has been, well thwarted, if people knew.
Elizabeth de la Vega, a retired US federal prosecutor for over twenty years has devised a fictional account of the indictment of Bush and others for fraud. That is a grand jury indictment for taking the US to war in Iraq fraudulently, violating Title 18, US Code section 371. This because the US is not party to the ICC, this court thus having no jurisdiction in the matter. The method is to use fiction but the elements in the indictment are not. 'US V. Bush seven storeis press available in Australia.
Australia you may remember, so much trivia having passed since, on September 14 2001, five days after 9/11 committed under the ANZUS to support America.
The Australian populace received the material fed to the Americans, aided here as there by a supine or subject media. This is the subject of the fictional indictment.
My copy of the Constitution is missing but the American law cited has to do with people in public office swearing not to defraud the State and maybe our document says similarly. But we do not need to do that the Statute of Rome establishing the International Criminal Court requested Sates ratifying the treaty to incorporate much in their criminal law and use this for prosecuting war Crimes approaching the ICC when necessary. We have done so, largely unused, and it has yet to be rescinded, which as America did with the ICC is possible. Iraq is not a signatory either, the implications escape me.
A number of prosecution are being attempted, here in the UK and America. It is not possible to indict serving politicians and in Australia it is the serving Attorney General who brings the case.
The implications are obvious.
Posted by untutored mind, Monday, 12 March 2007 4:02:34 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Lachlan, Agree big time. Well said, someone else who sees the facts about our two major greedy and corrupt parties.

Michael G., Agree also. They really couldn't care who votes as they know the majority of barrackers will just tick for one or the other of the big two. If it's 10 votes to 5 or 20,000 to 10,000 they wouldn't care in the slightest. Author way of track here.

What is Kang talking about? Hasn't read the article obviously, just has water on the brain. Fell for all the panic and fear roromoted by government and the media did we?

Howard sack a Minister? For what? Corruption? Don't be silly, that would be an admission of something and we all know Howard will never do that, admit anything. He only "accepts" resignations over unfounded gossip which is, after all, the most highly rated criteria in our society. NOT. Courruption is fine even when it's Saddam we are caught giving money too. No worries at all. The stench is rank.
Posted by Betty, Monday, 12 March 2007 4:35:03 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
"Surveys show that many respondents have long believed that governments favour the big interests over ordinary people, and rate politicians low on questions of ethics and honesty. But these seemed to me to be harsh judgments made out of ignorance of their job."

Oh really? Just who is being ignorant of their jobs? What world are you in to raise that people consider their every-day swindlings, deprivations and murderous war crimes merely as "harsh judgements"? My considerations and sensitivity go towards the victims they have systematically ground down in poverty. It has been far harsher on pensioners who have had to suffer despicable destitution and deficiency in their elderly years. Surely, we would have to consider over the last hundred years, thousands of pensioners, driven to an early death because they could not afford medicine or proper health care. In contrast, Bob Hawke for example, received one and a quarter million dollars retirement payout plus a large pension for life and concessions. How many workers will the politicians send to an early grave due to the big dollar plans they envision for the hospital/ Medicare privatisation process. Then there have been those who have perished due to the long waiting lists that have been deliberately contrived from closure of hospitals, wards and specialised medical staff dismissed. In this way the medical system can be commercialised, a shortage, a market created, whereby patients sufferering pain, limbs, or life threating injuries will have to pay extortionate amounts. What sort of horrors including poverty and extreme exploitation do you think the intended workplace relations laws will create?
Posted by johncee1945, Monday, 12 March 2007 5:01:53 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Intended workplace relation laws? long in place the biggest pain I fear daily is part of the Australian culture.
I am all right mate! its not affecting me yet so why worry?
Have you seen a 60 year old man doing the only job he can get for less than $10 an hour?
Not in Australia you say? yes in Australia pushing super market trolleys back into the store for contractors who even make some wait for three weeks before paying them.
And who avoid tax and find far more protection under workchoices than those who work for them.
Australia, once fair go mate! meant for every one.
Question the truth of this? take the blinkers of friends its very sad and very true
Its my daily nightmare
John Howard Sir go now go with grace and let us restore dignity to our country's IR laws.
Posted by Belly, Monday, 12 March 2007 11:22:04 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Betty, yes I read the article. It was about corruption and our political culture. I am concerned about an issue which reeks of corruption - the trashing of our Sydney drinking water catchments by mining operations approved by the NSW Labor Government. Therefore I took this opportunity to offer it as an example of the culture of corruption Warhurst is discussing. The Gordon Nuttall case is no doubt the tip of an iceberg (The Qld minister who accepted a $300,000 "loan" from a mining company).
Do try to join the dots, Betty, as I did. And do try to understand that water is quite important to you as well as to me and that it would be of benefit to you and to everyone else to protect rivers in our catchments.
Posted by kang, Tuesday, 13 March 2007 10:30:54 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I don’t think we hear about most of the corruption in politics. There is a sad history in Australia. I remember Rex Jackson as minister for Corrective Services in an earlier Labor Government going to jail for arranging early release for Calabrian Mafia figures. Eddie Obeid and Tripodi have some stains on their reputation but they are still there.
Morris Iemma and John Howard fortunately seem to be straight and stain free. Richardson or Richo as he is known looks a sort of Brian Burke figure embroiled in tax evasion and probably insurance fraud.
Posted by SILLE, Tuesday, 13 March 2007 3:27:29 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
One way of gaining political power in a democracy is to alter electoral outcomes by fraud.

Getting away with fraud for a prolonged period, say around a century, will have a distorting effect upon not only the structure and policy of the political entity that is the initial vehicle for corruption, but upon the policy and composition of opposing political organisations, and indeed the whole of society. Perhaps the most confusing fraud imaginable would be one of altering genuine electoral outcomes without allowing any of the participants, electors, parties, or candidates for election, to know of its existence.

Candidates in good faith of all parties in such circumstances become demoralised and disillusioned without knowing the real reasons for their frustration. Such may explain the climate of resigned acceptance of pervasive corruption within Australian political culture. Better insight into the disease affecting Australian politics may be gained by audit of the historical electoral process, rather than focussing upon the individual partipants, their parties, or proposed changes to electoral law.

John Warhurst is Professor of Political Science in the Faculty of Arts at the Australian National University. Based in the Research School of Social Sciences at the Australian National University and supported by the Australian Research Council, is the Democratic Audit of Australia. If this body could be induced to focus more upon auditing the administration of past electoral events , despair about the health of the Australian political system may be less obligatory. It should have looked for departures, no matter how seemingly minor, from the letter of the electoral law by those charged over the past century with its administration. It should have looked for the slightest departures from manner and form: such are almost always signposts to more serious impropriety. Believe me, such departures have been found to have taken place. It was as to their possible meaning for the future that there seems to have been so little consideration given in academe.

Can you get the Audit to ask around about past electoral impropriety instead of riding hobbyhorses of proposed change to our system of governance, John?
Posted by Forrest Gumpp, Wednesday, 14 March 2007 2:13:21 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
At the risk of sounding trite, people get the governments they deserve. They also get the oppositions they deserve. How many people, in their short-sightedness, will vote for the ALP later this year simply to get rid of the Coalition? Then, after two or three terms of the ALP, people will be falling over themselves to vote the Coalition back in. Doesn't anyone ever get a sense of deja vu in all of this? Where's the sense of irony in people whining about the system/parties/corruption/whatever yet participating so eagerly in that process?

I figure either vote for a minor party or an independent, or opt out of the system as much as possible, or shut up about the whole thing and embrace the BS the mainstream politicians go on with.
Posted by shorbe, Wednesday, 14 March 2007 2:26:58 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy