Now how do we fix the Hospital Crisis?
I think its fair to say this won't happen due to personal ambitions of many differing MPs and the respective political strategies (of all parties) to win at all costs by smashing the opposing party or parties.
Solutions & good outcomes are extemely elusive when its adversial & many run eagerly to the incendiary issues with petrol & gunpowder.
Here is an example of the problem and the reluctance of the entire Parliament to avoid this, to fix this.
It seems unrelated to The Health Crisis & directly it is. But the essence of this is a clear example of the an underlying variable or perhaps widespread mindset within the Parliament that will prevent reasoned & rational debate in the Parliament & instead always revert to point scoring & slagging matches.
The Premier had the opportunity to show statesmanship. He chose not to.
The Premier had the opportunity to seek solutions with the opposition FOR the WA people. He chose not to
The Premier had the opportunity to show statesmanship & set out the rules of engagement as shared solutions. He chose not to.
Read from Hansard...
Peter Rundle MLA - "Does the Premier believe that it is appropriate for fundraising and campaign training to be delivered by the Labor secretariat to publicly funded electorate officers during their work hours?"
I think that (if it happened) would not pass the pub test anywhere in WA and the only way a person would approve of that misuse of State money is if they're deeply, immensely welded onto a political party and they claim is leveled at their party.
No, government funds should not be used to train Electorate Officers on recruiting members for a party, any party. They should not be involved in electioneering matters at all. They should not ever be involved in fundraising for their MP or their MP's party...EVER, let alone be trained in it during work hours, paid for by the tax payers. Never ever, ever.
The Premier mentions things in his reply that were not of the question at all.
That's called a deflection & distraction and to add weight the Premier pulled in other unrelated training that then provides the false bolster to the tactical reply.
The Premier then added a warning shot, hoping to diffuse Peter Rundle and avoid a supplementary question...or perhaps baiting him to a supplementary question because he had prepared a verbal baseball bat
Premier Mark McGowan - "I could outline some of the activities of the National Party in its electorate offices."
Indeed he could outline such things & wouldn't blame him were he to first properly & clearly answer the question & then outline the activities of the National Party. In any case it was a prime opportunity for the Speaker to ask the Premier to answer the question, not offer a diversion reply with a possible threat. The Speaker did not, why? On that a bit later.
For now, just know that after the Premier's reply Peter Rindle MLA asked a Supplementary Question which are designed to dig deeper or to hopefully get an actual answer instead of the tactical reply. You can't ask the same question again.
Again read the question 2 or 3 times & ponder on it before reading the answer.
Read it twice, maybe three times then look at the answer
Peter Rundle MLA - "Can the Premier confirm that his Labor Party secretariat is delivering fundraising and campaigning training to electorate officers during work hours..."
There was no "yes" or "no" with an explanation. Instead you got a politically based tactical reply instead of an actual straight answer.
Peter Rundle MLA - "...and that the Premier sees no issue with this?"
Peter Rundle MLA - "Can the Premier confirm that his Labor Party secretariat is delivering fundraising and campaigning training to electorate officers during work hours..."
There was no "yes" or "no" with an explanation. Instead you got a politically based tactical reply instead of an actual straight answer.
Peter Rundle MLA - "...and that the Premier sees no issue with this?"
Again there was no "yes" or "no" with an explanation. Instead you got a politically based tactical reply instead of an actual straight answer.
Premier Mark McGowan - "As I said to the member, staff are trained in how to use technology and those sorts of things by all political parties, but I am aware of the National Party’s state conference in 2021. What did it do? It used the electorate office of the Leader of the Opposition for Young Nationals events—for the Young Nationals annual general meeting. There it is. Not only did the National Party do it, but it published that it was holding those sorts of things there. The Leader of the Opposition’s staff were up there campaigning in the by-election for North West Central. Not only that, the Leader of the Opposition actually thanked them."
This part of the Premier's tactical reply with political shot across the chamber has several levels.
1) Trained in technology was not the question, misuse of Electorate Officers for membership, campaigning & fundraising was the issue.
2) When he did cover misuse of Electorate Office & Electorate Officers it was in regards to the Young Nats having their AGM in the Electorate Office & possibly other party based functions positions. This is either wrong and so to is it wrong that WA Labor is training Electorate Staff during work hours on recruiting members, raising funds and improving their skills in campaigning. They're with BOTH bad or 'yeah it's not good but you did it too so there's nothing to see'
Then then president of the Young Nats works for Mia Davies in some capacity. The fact they held the AGM in the Electorate Office was wrong, stunningly wrong. This isn't just a rookie mistake, it's something very obvious. Shouldn't have happened. Heads should roll. Same for the matters the Crime & Corruption Commission is investigating with the WALabor Party
3) I don't doubt the Mia Davies Electoral Staff were up at the North West Central by-election campaigning. I think most of them are also Young Nationals. Now I don't know if it was in Electoral Office hours or if it was they took leave or if it was outside office hours. We'd need that clarified. I note that was the by-election that the Premier & Cabinet decided not to run a candidate in despite them only losing that see by around 300 votes. Apparently the North West Central electorate is not worthy of representation in Parliament nor the Labor Government via a WA Labor MP. They don't need North West Central so they can go hang.
It would seem that someone was watching closely to see if lines were crossed by Nationals & the Liberals and notes were taken for firing shots back.
4) I don't know if the Leader of the Opposition Mia Davies MLA thanked them or not, but if she did, if she approved of it then stunned & disappointed. Not only is it misuse, it might be deliberate misuse if it isn't a rookie mistake. She is not a rookie. However she should not be used as an excuse to let the WALabor Party off. Both need to apoligise to the Electorate & to WA voters generally.
Either both are wrong or right misuing Electorate Offices/Officers or "Nah, nah, you did it too, so there..."
Its wrong. Period, full stop,
But this is the probably with the very adversarial political landscape, do whatever you like...as long as you win. If the other side does wrong, keep that powder dry until you get picked on & use that stored fault to your advantage. Not to take you both to the principal's office for an ass whooping but use it as a "Awww well they did it too"
That renders the Parliament into a landscape where winning is the prime & sole target and you have to be careful of firing shots at the other side doing dodgy in case it comes back to haunt you.
No. Do what's right, not what's popular & hold yourself and your political opponents to the same high standard that we voters not only want, we expect.
Now the Speaker. Again, the Speaker could have intervened on the Premier and his answer but didn't.
Well why would you...politically you wouldn't. If you were keen on proper, clear, succinct, rational, well reasoned actual answers to the actual question you would have intervened.
Peter Rundle MLA has strict requirements & cannot re-ask a question but the Premier doesn't have to actually answer the question, he only has to reply.
Often you hear the Speaker (and the President in the Legislative Council) of their stand in say that the government MP "has answered the question" when they clearly have not. They have replied & there is no chance in hell of Question Time being actual answers to actual questions and those let down with tactical replies aren't likely to make much noise about it...if they end up in Government they're going to want to be evasive as well.
Its time for political reform.
Its time the Speaker & the President were not elected members of Parliament. Its time each were a board of 5 members taking turns with a contract that runs the equivilent of 2 terms of parliament but they only change hald way thru a Parliamentary term so they are not affected by a change of government & perhaps selected & appointed by the WA Governor and ratified by the Parlianment at 90% approval.
We're not going to get a decent parliament until we get a de-politicised Speaker/President.
Now its the cherished appointment prior to their retirement.
That's where we're at. A highly politicised adversarial parliament, a less than non political President/Speaker with no courage for proper answers or unbiased control of the unruly and a "oh yeah its wrong but they did it too" landscape.
See it, know it...its there & how it is.
Watch the political will to change it from MPs. Yeah that will rides on the back of a unicorn farting glitter and dragging magical packets of Tim Tams that keep refilling each time one is taken
Either both are wrong or right misuing Electorate Offices/Officers or "Nah, nah, you did it too, so there..."
Its wrong. Period, full stop,
But this is the probably with the very adversarial political landscape, do whatever you like...as long as you win. If the other side does wrong, keep that powder dry until you get picked on & use that stored fault to your advantage. Not to take you both to the principal's office for an ass whooping but use it as a "Awww well they did it too"
That renders the Parliament into a landscape where winning is the prime & sole target and you have to be careful of firing shots at the other side doing dodgy in case it comes back to haunt you.
No. Do what's right, not what's popular & hold yourself and your political opponents to the same high standard that we voters not only want, we expect.
Now the Speaker. Again, the Speaker could have intervened on the Premier and his answer but didn't.
Well why would you...politically you wouldn't. If you were keen on proper, clear, succinct, rational, well reasoned actual answers to the actual question you would have intervened.
Peter Rundle MLA has strict requirements & cannot re-ask a question but the Premier doesn't have to actually answer the question, he only has to reply.
Often you hear the Speaker (and the President in the Legislative Council) of their stand in say that the government MP "has answered the question" when they clearly have not. They have replied & there is no chance in hell of Question Time being actual answers to actual questions and those let down with tactical replies aren't likely to make much noise about it...if they end up in Government they're going to want to be evasive as well.
Its time for political reform.
Its time the Speaker & the President were not elected members of Parliament. Its time each were a board of 5 members taking turns with a contract that runs the equivilent of 2 terms of parliament but they only change hald way thru a Parliamentary term so they are not affected by a change of government & perhaps selected & appointed by the WA Governor and ratified by the Parlianment at 90% approval.
We're not going to get a decent parliament until we get a de-politicised Speaker/President.
Now its the cherished appointment prior to their retirement.
That's where we're at. A highly politicised adversarial parliament, a less than non political President/Speaker with no courage for proper answers or unbiased control of the unruly and a "oh yeah its wrong but they did it too" landscape.
See it, know it...its there & how it is.
Watch the political will to change it from MPs. Yeah that will rides on the back of a unicorn farting glitter and dragging magical packets of Tim Tams that keep refilling each time one is taken
No comments:
Post a Comment