Grilling A Minister Many Years Ago Opened My Eyes. Grill Yours.

At a public meeting many years ago I asked a then MP, a member of cabinet no less
“On what issue would you cross the floor in the best interests of your election &/or the state of WA?”

I also recall 3 people sharply turning around & looking at me with a bit of shock.
I assume they understood the can of worms that I was opening.

The question was met not with a clear answer but a tactical political reply.
I'm naming the Minister & I'm paraphrasing to get as close as I can to what was said (not a an actual quote)

‘ I fight hard in cabinet, I think it’s better to stay in cabinet and voice the opinions that want to be heard & keep trying, never giving up '

What I never told people since was my follow up...
“So with a battle ground type assessment of everyone’s potential, if the Premier knows he has the numbers, lets you have a token say, knows you'll never resign so he can ignore you. All is locked up in cabinet papers for 30 years marked confidential ”

He then told me it’s far more nuanced and complicated, the number of interworking parts at play as well as the longer strategic game being played is immense, too much to explain tonight. Add to that that he'd potentially violate cabinet regulations...yada yada

I think there's good grounds for reducing the 30 year rule on Cabinet Papers & when they are released they should be 100% NON-REDACTED in any way. Be full & complete.

I often think Cabinet's hide behind the bogus force field of "commercial in confidence"
I think if you use this sheild from scrutiny then it should go before 3 senior judges for a judgement. If its legitimately "Commercial in Confidence" it will be kept so by the judge's ruling...fair bump play on. Currently MPs, Ministers, Premiers & of course senior bureaucrats have deep layers of bullet teflon in the shadows that they can rely on as a safe harbour.
If we're to trust our ruling class, then they are to be tested to ensure they look to have the highest integrity & actually are proven to have the highest integrity.

Some of this harks back to having proper systems of provable integrity within the ruling classes & some of it harks back to an MP not knowing to whom they owe a fiduciary duty & relying upon you not asking them. The answering (accurate, plain & honest or a tactical political reply) will tell you a lot they maybe don't want you know.

How many masters can you serve and which first or which solely whilst you pretend to the others??

1. Their own personal ambitions, prestige positions & earnings
   
   
2. Their electorate as best as a reasonable person might
   
   
3. Their party & actually represent their party in the electorate instead of representing the electorate's best interests in the Parliament and/ or Cabinet?
   
   
4. Their faction within the party & just "play the game" to their electorate, other factions?
   
   

Recently looked at our own new Labor MP & in the last 4 weeks we've searched the local newspapers & her FaceBook feed. It's all about appearances. Delivering biscuit hampers to local school staff rooms on "International Teachers Day". Selling red poppies outside the bank for charity. Going to charity & fund raiser events. And yes, reaching out to community groups to push the profile higher. The local monthly car event was contacted to see if the MP could hold a regular Sausage Sizzle with money raised going to charity, a different charity each month. The regular thing was her, Labor volunteers and Labor colours. She was told the event was meant to be apolitical. She was apparently asked to consult with the nearby coffee shop because they had held fund raisers there for charities & they might end up cutting their grass which isn't a good look. The next event (only a week later) they didn't come & went to an Alziemer's Event instead.
Now we get it. They have to do local fluff n puff stuff. That's fine.

The dud part is that new MP, with less than 6 months in the job in the last 6 weeks not posted anything online or in local newspapers about legislation passed or policy being pushed. NONE.

Nothing on the electoral reform bill which was "not on the agenda" before the election but straight after was & it will reduce regional representation. Had the rules proposed been in at the last election Labor would have picked up several seats, Nationals & indpendants would have lost some & the Liberals no change. Its a near on 100 year old ideological gerrymander.

At present there's several that don't represent us in Parliament & they don't even represent their party in the electorate because she only wants to be photographed at fund raisers or "International Day of..." celebrations. Pretty sure her party want her visible but as silent as possible.

This highlights that Public Servants in the actual Public Service must serve the public's best interests & they should be on contracts with serious performance reviews.
MPs should have serious performance reviews & perhaps they & the senior bureacrats should have "The Big Five" personality tests before entering politics and in each seat the party must have 3 candidates running. If one is elected and falls well below standard, refer them to a higher court & if deemed substandard at the halfway point of their term, replace them with number 2 on the ticket. Or release the findings so they all have a score at the next election.

Let me guess...every MP in unison will sing together like a choir that "It’s far more nuanced and complicated, the number of interworking parts at play as well as the longer strategic game being played is immense, too much to explain"