Yes, its a whinging entry but I wouldn't be complaining if there wasn't a problem.
Yes, I complain about some things that don't matter a lot but if a thing is wrong, that's worthy of any & all complaining.
No Name, No Pack Drill but how on earth do these people...
a) Get into a party & not be squeezed out?
b) How do they get pre-selected?
c) How do they keep getting support from a party they're not really serving properly?
Defies logic and when you apply logic, there's no real answer except there's possible an institutionalised culture of intellectual corruption as well as real manipulation that shows elements of what researchers call the Dark Triad. The are namely Machivelleanism, Narcisissim & Psycopathy.
The polarising leaders really only seem to start to polarise once a critical amount of people see or end up subjected to their ill treatment, manipulation, attacks of some sort.
Try this.
I know one MP in the WA Parliament who...
Sexual Harassment in Agriculture - Spoke in press, social media & at public events of sexual harassment in Agriculture. This MP not only attended the RRRW Network event some years ago on the matter, this MP took 5 or 6 other people from their party. The MC was very left leaning Tracy Spicer. The main speaker was a young professor from a Sydney University. The claim from the Professor's paper was that 93% of women in Australian Agriculture had suffered sexual harassment. This MP quote that figure for quite some time.
Trouble was buried in that Professor's PhD Research Paper on the matter was yes a claim 93% of women in Australian Agriculture had suffered sexual harassment.
Now we should point out the next bit the MP didn't know & clearly didn't ask. The research paper was actually the speakers "PhD Thesis" that was reviewed by her co-worker in the University's gender studies department.
Buried on page 58 of the 355+ page thesis was the table of women surveyed. The sample size that underpinned the entire thesis. To be fair it also warned about using these survey results, which the author seemed to madly abandoned when arriving at the RRRW Network event.
Only a total of 101 women were surveyed. 88 across 8 sectors & 13 from "Other"
The "Other" was never specified but with only 13 she could have said the exact occupation of each "other"
From Agriculture...only 14 women surveyed to give a 93% rate of sexual harassment in the Ag Sector. At the time the ABS figures showed an estimated 44-50,000 women working in Agriculture.
This was all pointed out to the MP & the MPs staffers & yet they continue to cite the corrupted figures from that event, from that thesis. The complaints about 93% & applauding the professor still remain on Social Media to this day. What small amount of academic value is long gone & dead news now, but its now a politicized marker that still pops up. At the time, there was no movement, no backing away & no crictial comments of the research that falsely slurred the Agriculture Industry.
Clive Palmer - Next one in no particular order, same MP supported the rushed legislation to block Clive Palmer's right under Australian Law to take the Western Australian Government to court to get settle a disputed commercial ageement. I am not a Palmer supporter but in effect this and other MPs voted to remove an Australian Citizens right to have their day in court. Now if you think $30 Billion would have bankrupted the state, no. It would have set it back but not broken nor bankrupted it. Firstly you don't sue someone & hand the judge an invoice for the amount you think you deserve. The courts decides a verdict, then decides if damages are required and then what amount. Then there's appeals afterwards.
This legislation was prepared over many months with the Attorney General, the Premier & a legal team. Cabinet was not told, the opposition was not told. The morning the bill was tabled as an emergency bill, the Liberal & National Leaders were summoned (no they weren't even in the chamber) and the Premier briefed them outside the chamber, fear was ramped, opposition MPs said they placed "trust" in the government & it was rushed through. The WA Labor government was "trusted" yet clearly the WALabor Party leaders didn't trust the opposition giving them no part nor any briefing in the months prior. In fact they were ambushed & failed to even pull the reins & refer it to committee.
Lawyer friends I know, that I asked said they were totally stunned.
This MP did not even know how the legal process worked, just followed like a lamb.
Roe Vs Wade - Same MP made a big splash about the Roe Vs Wade decision in the USA. About women's rights for bodily autonomy. Same MP would not say when life actually begins nor any other aspect but just referred back to left wing pro abortion argument. No matter that the decision was not actually about preventing any abortion in the USA. It was correctly putting their Constitution forward & showing that if a matter is not specifically covered within the Consitution it is not a federal law, it is a state law. The reversal was about finally doing the consitutionally correct thing and preventing FEDERAL GOVERNMENT OVER REACH. You can still have an abortion. If the majority of your state's electors want to have or prevent abortions state parties put forward a policy, state votes...the people of the state have the power to make laws not falling under the constitution. Can you imagine the Federal Government taking over car rego? Same deal. That we had an MP so far out to lunch that they didn't know what Roe & Wade was...kind of scary but I suspect it was a virtue signal & nothing more. Sure was based on understanding or logical premise.
That's the short list & yes its a supposedly Conservative MP. The main conservation this MP is concerned with is conserving energy knowing the topic, doing the research or listening to the WA Public.
Clive Palmer - Next one in no particular order, same MP supported the rushed legislation to block Clive Palmer's right under Australian Law to take the Western Australian Government to court to get settle a disputed commercial ageement. I am not a Palmer supporter but in effect this and other MPs voted to remove an Australian Citizens right to have their day in court. Now if you think $30 Billion would have bankrupted the state, no. It would have set it back but not broken nor bankrupted it. Firstly you don't sue someone & hand the judge an invoice for the amount you think you deserve. The courts decides a verdict, then decides if damages are required and then what amount. Then there's appeals afterwards.
This legislation was prepared over many months with the Attorney General, the Premier & a legal team. Cabinet was not told, the opposition was not told. The morning the bill was tabled as an emergency bill, the Liberal & National Leaders were summoned (no they weren't even in the chamber) and the Premier briefed them outside the chamber, fear was ramped, opposition MPs said they placed "trust" in the government & it was rushed through. The WA Labor government was "trusted" yet clearly the WALabor Party leaders didn't trust the opposition giving them no part nor any briefing in the months prior. In fact they were ambushed & failed to even pull the reins & refer it to committee.
Lawyer friends I know, that I asked said they were totally stunned.
This MP did not even know how the legal process worked, just followed like a lamb.
Roe Vs Wade - Same MP made a big splash about the Roe Vs Wade decision in the USA. About women's rights for bodily autonomy. Same MP would not say when life actually begins nor any other aspect but just referred back to left wing pro abortion argument. No matter that the decision was not actually about preventing any abortion in the USA. It was correctly putting their Constitution forward & showing that if a matter is not specifically covered within the Consitution it is not a federal law, it is a state law. The reversal was about finally doing the consitutionally correct thing and preventing FEDERAL GOVERNMENT OVER REACH. You can still have an abortion. If the majority of your state's electors want to have or prevent abortions state parties put forward a policy, state votes...the people of the state have the power to make laws not falling under the constitution. Can you imagine the Federal Government taking over car rego? Same deal. That we had an MP so far out to lunch that they didn't know what Roe & Wade was...kind of scary but I suspect it was a virtue signal & nothing more. Sure was based on understanding or logical premise.
That's the short list & yes its a supposedly Conservative MP. The main conservation this MP is concerned with is conserving energy knowing the topic, doing the research or listening to the WA Public.
Uluru Statement/The Voice to Parliament - Same MP has since 2018 supported both & yet there's still no detail on what is a horribly race based ideal. It's a multi billion dollar a year tax payer funded lobby group with exclusive elite level open door access to the parliament AND all senior department bureaucrats to influence on bills to be considered & how services and money is to be administered long after its passed.
No detail since it popped up. This MP has dug in but can't explain the scope, powers or what the model looks like...worse still on of the pivotal reports was a 242 page document...and this MP supported it before the committee even met to discuss ideas that would years later resulted in that report.
Tier 3 Rail - As this particular MP held a senior, very senior role & arguably a manifestly wrongful position of over reach, over control over policy & what to pursue I spoke to them re Tier 3 rail and the need for it to not just be repair, better for it to be fully rebuilt. I knew this was going to ignore longer term I tried appeal to them by pointing out a election value in doing it as well.
The response I got was was textbook gas lighting with condescending overtones. "Look Pete, you can't possible think that, it's not really that simple, its quite a complicated thing thats gone now"
Now I probably didn't even know what the phrase gaslighting meant but I knew I was being fobbed off.
I pointed out one of the wheat & sheep properties we owned for 3 generations bordered the Quairading to York Tier 3 rail.
I was then met with "Yes its difficult practically, there's a lot nuance in it, its very complicated"
I replied that not for me, that I sat in meetings over it at the time, one with Murray Criddle, Alannah McTiernan, PGA reps, Unions members and a number of others (I named the town where the meeting was, it was the town where this MPs Electoral office was. They did not attend)
I pointed out the growing number of Quairading people, many members of this MPs political party branch & they want Tier 3 rebuilt.
The MP should never play poker. The eyes widened with surprise, then the eyes & brow furrowed as arms were folded and I knew within 30 seconds that MP would excsue themselves and be gone. Unbeknown to the MP, I'd pressed the stop watch on my wrist watch, yup you bet I knew this was going to happen BEFORE I spoke to this MP & had the stop watch ready.
I got a curt volley, then the pivot to warm smile, kind words then tocu on the shoulder with a smile, tilt of the head, the glance away micro seconds before the turn and walk away. 18.6 seconds.
Years later this MPs party after years of battling got a motion passed to rebuild Tier 3 rail. It was policy. It was passed. The MP was interviewed on radio and it was widely known this MP was either keen to shelve it or not keen to worry about it or pursue it. The interviewer asked when the MP had a change of heart & why to which the reply was they'd always supported the rebuilding of Tier 3 and glad it'd been able to progress to this point after so much hard work. There's however had been to stifle it.
That was several years ago. Its never been mentioned in Parliament, there's been no working group within the party to form a strategic plan to promote it as an issue. Nothing. Passed means locked in the ether, never to be seen again.
By the way the part most sensible was to build Tier 3 over a few decades, but on new surveyed rail lines that could easily handle the now much bigger wagons that were quite literally falling off the rail if they went over walking pace as so much of the weight burden of the wagon was hanging out over the rail curve. One slight bump or too much speed the wagons literally fell over. The rail bridge at York needed to be demolished & rebuilt. It used to sway so much train drivers could see the last wagon, then they couldn't, then they could. Bridge sway.
Quairading & York 2 big Strategic Bins for CBH. All of Quairadings grain (which will continue to increase in tonnages) goes to Perth by truck. If CBH were to open Greenhills & Mawson again for one single grain or grade they'd go close to highest possible tonnage recieved as the bins would be able to be filled to full capacity. That would all go to Perth via truck. One the less than optimum country roads with school buses and families. Meanwhile MetroNet that this MP complained about...billions in budget over runs, like 5-6 Billion at this stage and not one single passenger has been on it. If it had been built for zero dollars it's ongoing use & maintainance costs would be such that fares will be subsidised for ever more. I'm at odds with this MP, I'm openly ok with MetroNet because Infrastructure projects are what governments should do. Firstly they stimulate the economy but deliver a better, safer service for citizens. What I'm against is project losses, hopeless mismanagement at gargantuan proportions and hopeless MPs that won't get ore grain on rail because "its complicated"
There is the nutshell complexity & nuance
I listed many more, so far, 23 other absurd positions MPs possessed & won't list them all because I'm worried that number will blow out.
And this is why the current political class will not conduct Politics in the Pub, or hold an annual let alone quarterly public meeting to discuss their attendance in Parliament, how many committees they're on, which way they voted & why or what Bill they wish to push for. Hell you can't get them to give specific party values or a list of matters they won't change lanes on, y'know the hill they're prepared to die on.
One Party has passed motions on policies, but you won't find them, they're parked. And the policies they do have are on the very very minor matters & have ZERO timelines, when they hope to have it dealt with in the Parliament. Heck, with one party you cannot even find the list of passed motions that are supposed to end up in Parliament. They do reactionary questions in Parliament & to be fair I'd expect that to be the majority by some unguessable percentage...but not so close to 100% its first number is 9 & the second number can only be 7, 8 or 9.
When its motions within its organisation all read "That the *Insert Party Name * pressure the WA Government to..." whatever it is, wait 12 or 18 months & enquire what the MPs did with that motion. Of 12 we asked about, none had arrived in the parliament nor resulted in even a letter to the Premier or the respective minister.
All appear to have been passed to make lay members feel great...then off they go, gone off to gather dust & eventually die.
Why campaign prior to an election on a matter without a timeline, why pass it as a party policy & then do absolutely zero & worst of all...have no ability for voters or even lay members to ask "Where you at on that policy?"
And when they do the response instruction is
a) Sound completely on their side
b) Cite 3 other things hurting or a fault of the opposing political party that are (actually) being worked on
c) Emphasise the efforts being pushed by the MPs on that issue as they're a serious priority just in front of issue the elector brings up
d) Stress their concerns aren't just noted, things will happen as soon as possible
e) Change the subject and/or quickly more away to another person
f) Work the room. One on one means less multi number or crowd knowledge of answers. One on one you can diffuse without any promises. Avoid questions from a crowd (see this with EVERY PARTY)
If you think there are no hollow headed, quick talking theatre props employing smiles, hugs, compliments, catchy buzz words & mother hood statements to fob you off, think again.
Its standard operating practice.
Political prose that is deeply ineffective & is just to appeal to whoever is in front of them, to side line attempts at drilling down into the politicians performance. To use a bland, broad but popular sounding concept & then say something angry about political opponents...
Its par for course. As a very well known journo said parliament is largely, apart from a handful, a "humidcrib of mediocrity"
And you pay, know that. Look after your wallet, keep them fully to account, know how they're actually trained to work you over, round you up and send you off as one person happy or one person angry...not a group with numbers that will grow. Its actually part of their deliberate training once they're actually elected.
Know it. Expect it. Look for it. Oppose it.
Late Edit - this has been online for just over 24 hours. It's getting read. I will point out people are trying to guess who that MP is. I am answering them but saying straight up Sorry No Name, No Pack Drill.
Please don't send messages asking. I'm not saying no matter how right you are. FWIW, people are either 100% correct or very close. None are wildly wrong. I'll leave it at that. Those guesses that aren't the actual MP but are nearby to the MP described...those MPs are good guesses because they're using the same methods of profoundly vague values, one on one dealings to make people feel engaged but not in any position to hold the MP to account because there is no crowd engagement involved. One on one is easily well stage managed. The disappointment for me is these methods which are almost toxic poison to the traits of actual statesmanship are so wide spread but slowly people are noticing, some maybe without fully under standing what it is they think is wrong but just feel they've been rounded up and side stepped.
Only upside is soon more will see the theatrics and tricks & call it out, push for metrics for MPs & assess performance. Thats very hard to do when your local MP spruiks very bland, vague but feel good motherhood statements not specific plans & timelines.
Political prose that is deeply ineffective & is just to appeal to whoever is in front of them, to side line attempts at drilling down into the politicians performance. To use a bland, broad but popular sounding concept & then say something angry about political opponents...
Its par for course. As a very well known journo said parliament is largely, apart from a handful, a "humidcrib of mediocrity"
And you pay, know that. Look after your wallet, keep them fully to account, know how they're actually trained to work you over, round you up and send you off as one person happy or one person angry...not a group with numbers that will grow. Its actually part of their deliberate training once they're actually elected.
Know it. Expect it. Look for it. Oppose it.
Late Edit - this has been online for just over 24 hours. It's getting read. I will point out people are trying to guess who that MP is. I am answering them but saying straight up Sorry No Name, No Pack Drill.
Please don't send messages asking. I'm not saying no matter how right you are. FWIW, people are either 100% correct or very close. None are wildly wrong. I'll leave it at that. Those guesses that aren't the actual MP but are nearby to the MP described...those MPs are good guesses because they're using the same methods of profoundly vague values, one on one dealings to make people feel engaged but not in any position to hold the MP to account because there is no crowd engagement involved. One on one is easily well stage managed. The disappointment for me is these methods which are almost toxic poison to the traits of actual statesmanship are so wide spread but slowly people are noticing, some maybe without fully under standing what it is they think is wrong but just feel they've been rounded up and side stepped.
Only upside is soon more will see the theatrics and tricks & call it out, push for metrics for MPs & assess performance. Thats very hard to do when your local MP spruiks very bland, vague but feel good motherhood statements not specific plans & timelines.
