As the famous saying goes, “Never set up an inquiry unless you know in advance what its findings will be.” If, by some slip, the inquiry finds something you didn’t want, then bury it for as long as possible.
Consequently, the Albanese Labor government’s commissioned review into public appointments was buried for two years. Now, they’ve tried to sneak it out under the radar, and, guess what folks? Water is wet!
Recent governments have too often rewarded friends for past loyalty with plum jobs or picked candidates to promote political priorities, a long-awaited review into political appointments has found.
These government appointments have all too often “looked like forms of patronage and nepotism that should have no place in the modern Australian society”, the scathing report said, warning that the current system had eroded trust with the public.
“Looked like” nepotism? Well, in the same way that a feathered aquatic avian that quacks looks like a duck.
The review by Lynelle Briggs – dubbed an investigation into “jobs for mates” – was tasked with probing government appointments to public boards after Labor’s 2022 election win, with the report due to be released in late 2023.
But until its belated release on Tuesday, Labor said the report remained under cabinet consideration, despite fervent calls from the coalition and the crossbench for it to be made public.
Public Service Minister Katy Gallagher defended the delay as she unveiled an overhaul of the appointments framework, which included a list of strengthened principles focused on merit and diversity.
“Merit and diversity”? That’s a literal oxymoron. You can have merit-based appointments or you can have DEI. You can’t have both.
Three guesses which Labor female politicians prefer. I mean, who on earth would give Gallagher or her former Mean Girl sister Kristina Keneally a job on ‘merit’?
Ms Briggs, a former public service commissioner, found the current arrangements were not fit for purpose and “do not always provide the best person for the job”.
“They have let down the Australian people, undermined the integrity and effectiveness of the public sector and exposed ministers to unnecessary risk,” the report reads.
It also concluded that standing in the rain gets you wet.
Gallagher is also coming under yet more fire for her role in the Scandal That Keeps on Giving. Going for the ‘la-la-la-la-I-can’t-hear-you’ defence isn’t making her position look any better.
Finance Minister Katy Gallagher has vowed she will “not be answering any further questions” on her fictitious claims of a Liberal cover-up of Brittany Higgins’s [alleged] rape and the findings of two judges who ruled her and Foreign Minister Penny Wong’s allegations were baseless […]
On Sunday, Senator Gallagher was asked again about her role in claiming the Morrison government had engaged in a cover-up of Ms Higgins’s rape, and the fact two judges had found there was no evidence of this.
“I’m not answering any further questions on this,” she said.
This is not going to end well for her. I well remember Jeff Kennett trying the same gambit on live radio, during the last days of the 1999 state election campaign. Faced with difficult questions, Kennett simply refused to answer, saying, “I’ll just sit here and drink my tea.” About 30 awkward seconds of dead air ensued before the station cut to another audio. Kennett went on to cop a surprise belting at the election – losing government in a shock landslide. The disastrous interview is widely credited as pivotal to the outcome.
Gallagher’s last standing fellow Mean Girl isn’t coming out of the affair smelling of roses, either.
In a terse exchange, Foreign Affairs Minister Penny Wong has refused to accept that accusations she made against former Liberal minister Linda Reynolds and her chief of staff Fiona Brown of a political cover-up in the rape of Brittany Higgins were unfounded.
This puts Wong at odds with not just two judges, but a great many Australians.
Senator Wong repeatedly dodged questions during budget estimates on Monday about findings by two senior judges that neither woman had been party to a cover-up, nor had they treated Ms Higgins poorly in the wake of the rape allegations.
The government has been unable to shake off questions about its role in the scandal despite Anthony Albanese’s attempt two weeks ago to sideline the issue by claiming he did not agree with the “characterisation” of the case.
Hiring $25,000-a-day silks, in likely violation of parliamentary rules, to try and shut Reynolds up isn’t making the government look any less like it’s trying to hide guilty secrets.
On Monday, the government came under further fire for refusing to reveal what it was paying the top silks hired to fight compensation claims by Ms Reynolds and Ms Brown, with department officials unwilling or unable to state categorically that Attorney-General Michelle Rowland had acted as “model litigant” in the cases, as required by her own rules […]
[Liberal senator Anne Ruston] accused a department official of refusing to answer to the Senate after she dodged questions about whether the Attorney-General had signed off on paying top silks more than the threshold rate of $5000 a day to fight legal actions brought against the commonwealth by Ms Reynolds and Ms Brown.
Meanwhile Brown, who was wrongfully hounded out of her job and hasn’t been able to work since, has to rely on pro bono legal representation. So much for Labor standing up for women.
The Higgins scandal has a long, long way to go, yet. The wheels of justice are grinding slowly, but exceedingly fine.
