No match for the bagman and the bogeyman
Posted
Never mind the historic deals on the Murray Darling and Tasmania’s forests: it was asylum seekers v the AWU in a tussle for the media’s attention this week, writes Barrie Cassidy.
The Federal Government has done some nice work on the environment and conservation in recent days, but none of it was a match for the bagman and the bogeyman.
It started with the extension of the marine reserves around Australia to cover an area of ocean equal to a third of the country’s land mass.
Then, as the week progressed, the Government reached an agreement on the Murray-Darling Basin plan, designed to safeguard irrigation towns while ensuring the stressed river gets all the water it needs.
And by the end of the week, a 30-year battle over the protection of Tasmania’s forests was finally over, with conservation and industry groups bringing to an end often acrimonious negotiations.
Not a bad result really.
In all cases, individuals on either side of the arguments will continue to agitate for a better deal, but the major players have nevertheless signed up to compromises. These are all historic, long-term outcomes, among the biggest ever struck in this country.
But as we have seen for years now, it takes a truly super-human political initiative to knock any new development in the asylum seekers issue off the front pages.
The Government continues to be its own worst enemy, of course, tacking one way then the other, and all the time getting nearer to the policy introduced by former prime minister John Howard.
The fact that the policy is attacked with equal venom, but for very different reasons, by the Coalition and human rights advocates does, however, confuse the politics.
And the politics vary greatly anyway depending on where you live.
Thursday’s Daily Telegraph in Sydney included the headline “Asylum Open Door Policy”, and declared the Government had waved the white flag and decided to “pay (asylum seekers) to live in the community while their claims are processed”.
The front page of the Hobart Mercury, on the other hand, reported on the news that a detention centre had been reopened north of Hobart, saying that the decision “was roundly applauded by local residents as well as political and business leaders”. Premier Lara Giddings said the decision was “a positive move for the rights of asylum seekers and for jobs and the local economy”.
The reality of harsh conditions on Nauru and Manus Island – and the prospect of living, poverty stricken, on a bridging visa and denied the right to work – might scare off some potential asylum seekers.
Both prospects – the harsh conditions offshore and the poverty here at home – might even appeal to some voters in key marginal seats. That, it seems, is precisely the way they think it should be.
So it then follows that media reporting along those lines might help the Government and aid its objectives.
But on the other hand, every time the Government changes direction, it loses credibility, and the more it appears not to have a handle on the issue. The electorate sees consistency in one party alone, with the Coalition never budging from the policy that they say was so successful during the Howard years.
The opposition struggles to justify its ‘turn back the boats’ policy, and indeed Tony Abbott hasn’t yet plucked up the courage to raise it directly with the Indonesian president. But flawed or not, it has been part of a package of measures that has never varied.
While asylum seekers stole the front pages, the Australian Workers Union slush fund scandal was prominent inside the papers and on much of the broadcast media. What was the latest incentive to stoke the issue along? The bagman arrived!
A former AWU official, Ralph Blewitt, flew in from Malaysia claiming he had a deal with the Victorian fraud squad to tell all he knows about the slush fund scandal in return for immunity.
He said the prime minister, Julia Gillard, had questions to answer, though he didn’t say what they were. His memory was vague; he was trying to trigger recollections by reading documents. Most importantly, he wanted to ensure that freedom of speech and the press was not shut down.
What else do we know about this man, other than the fact that he admits to being a part of the fraud, and that he has taken 17 years to speak to authorities about it?
There was quite an insight into his character on Radio 6PR in Perth with Paul Murray back in August.
Murray was interviewing the deputy leader of the opposition, Julie Bishop, who was going through her now familiar lines on the issue. “It goes to her character, Paul – her ethics, her judgment, whether people can have trust and confidence in her. I think people are entitled to answers from her so that they can make a judgment about whether she is fit to be prime minister of the country.”
Then Murray took a call from Penny.
Murray: “What can you tell us about this?”
Penny: “… Ralph Blewitt is my brother, he is my older brother. He is as crooked as they come. It wasn’t Julia Gillard that stole the money. She might have set up the fund, and Wilson and Blewitt, Ralph Blewitt, were the crooks, not Julia Gillard. Ralph is out to make whatever he can make out of this for himself.”
Murray: “… he appeared on the front page of The Australian newspaper saying ‘I’ll tell my whole story as long as I don’t get prosecuted’.”
Penny: “Yeah, well, he is crooked as they bloody come. Sorry, but he is my older brother and I am telling you now he is rotten to the core.”
Jon Faine, the host of the morning show on ABC 774 in Melbourne, read out the transcript on Thursday and asked: “Why hasn’t that appeared on the front page of The Age or The Australian? Why hasn’t that appeared so that we can factor that in, and judge his reliability as a whistleblower?”
Meanwhile, Minister for Agriculture Tony Burke fronted the National Press Club to talk about the three big environment initiatives, and in particular, the Murray Darling agreement.
Two questions on water, one on ICAC, another on fishing, then: “Minister can I ask you a question on another topic?”
Burke: “We’ve been waiting 100 years and no one will ask!”
The question was on the slush fund.
Barrie Cassidy is presenter of the ABC programs Insiders and Outsiders. View his full profile here.
Topics:unions, fraud-and-corporate-crime
Email
Comments (544)