« June 2007 »
1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28 29 30
Entries by Topic
All topics  «
about editor
aust govt
big media
contact us
donations to SAM
election nsw 2007
election Oz 2007
free SAM content
human rights
independent media
local news
nsw govt
nuke threats
publish a story
zero waste
Blog Tools
Edit your Blog
Build a Blog
RSS Feed
View Profile
official indymedia
ecology action Australia
ecology action
Advertise on SAM
details for advertisers
You are not logged in. Log in

sydney alternative media - non-profit community independent trustworthy
Thursday, 28 June 2007
The dirty bear pit of NSW Government
Mood:  down
Topic: nsw govt

The news coverage today reinforces the dirty nature of NSW politics in this "good government".

The Greens are railing against this alleged pay off here:

28 June 2007

Is Fred Nile waiting in the wings to be new Asst Deputy Upper House

Greens MP Lee Rhiannon says the NSW government*s plan today to create
a new position of Assistant Deputy President in the Upper House is

*The Labor government has given no justification for creating a new
position of Assistant Deputy President. This move seems to be designed
to assist Labor politically rather than improve the running of the NSW
Upper House,* Ms Rhiannon said.

*The NSW Upper House is already well served with a President, a
Deputy President, and seven Chairs of Committees who assist the
President on a daily basis.

*This new position will be filled tomorrow and at this stage it
appears Reverend Fred Nile is the only nominee.

*The new position is most likely to attract extra pay and perks. The
NSW Parliamentary Remuneration Tribunal in the past has ruled that way.

*If Rev Fred Nile does take this position Premier Iemma should be
embarrassed as quite recently Rev Nile advocated a moratorium on Islamic
immigration and for decades has bred hostility against the gay and
lesbian community and manoeuvred to dismantle a woman*s right to an

*Apart from the *moral* issues that the Christian Democrats back
Reverend Nile has consistently supported the government of the day in
promoting a conservative agenda.

*He voted with the government when they weakened workers*
compensation laws; watered down community consultation in the planning
process; dismantled public ownership of Sydney*s water supply;
restricted the availability of public housing; and made it harder to
stop land clearing.

*As Labor does not have the numbers in the Upper House Rev Nile*s
vote has been crucial on many government bills.

A motion to appoint an Assistant Deputy President was put to the NSW
Upper House today. Tomorrow the Upper House will vote on who fills the

For more information:  Lee Rhiannon - 9230 3551 or 0427 861 568




 The Bower for recycling, reuse and repair 142 Addison Rd Marrickville, see our website here 


Today we corresponded briefly with a radio jock curious at my oblique sleding in these terms about the dirty water in Warragamba as follows:

Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2007 9:44 AM
Subject: Re: a friendly reminder

Well without getting too deep just a spontaneous response I suppose based on
1. I just had coffee and was a little fiesty
2. ....I find the whole Warragamba plume story a 
false diversion from Nathan Rees culpability for Breaking the Silence 
failure by him and Orkopoulous, that Stoner was thrown out of the parliament
for yesterday. Notice Koperberg says - there is no problem. It's classic PR
And the crypto trauma etc of 1998 is why they won't go water recycling now,
but its so cocky to jam the Aboriginal child abuse problem with a Warragamba
non threat. I mean get real. It's been raining for 2 weeks and they only now
have a worry about turbidity?
Polluted dam may see shift to reservoir ]

Rees is the real fear. He worked for Iemma. Almost certainly breifed against 
Bryce Gaudry - deselected.
My thesis is Iemma knew all about Orkopoulos scandal well before his press
conference in 2006 getting in front of the curve ball. That's the point.
3. Minister for 'Callan Park' Verity Firth - ...- when she is a demonstrated sleaze on broken election promises
a. dry boat store in Rozelle Bay
b. M5 East
c. Anvill Hill opposition.
As MP for Balmain she should be slam dunked for selling off mental health 
services for a university campus ...... let me guess which one.

Yours truly, Tom

Today we also have this story of inquiry into dirty election donations for the duopoly gerrymander up there in the dirt pit:

Coalition wins vote for donations inquiry THE Coalition has won a battle to establish an upper house committee to examine the issue of political donations, as the ALP advertises "business dialogue" packages costing $102,000 for business people to meet State Government ministers.

Here are the Greens again:

MEDIA RELEASE - 27 June 2007

Upper House backs Greens call for inquiry into donations

Greens MP and donations spokesperson Lee Rhiannon today welcomed the decision of the NSW Upper House to establish an inquiry into donations to political parties and candidates.

"This Inquiry is long overdue. There is growing public disquiet about the millions of dollars political parties receive to run their election campaigns", Ms Rhiannon said.

"I will ask that the Inquiry request that key political figures including Paul Keating, Carmen Lawrence and Bob Carr who have spoken publicly about the political party donation process give evidence to this Inquiry.

"The Greens campaigned for this Inquiry in the recent state election campaign so we are very pleased that we won the support of all MPs to undertake this important work.

"The Inquiry will be undertaken by a select committee of six Upper House MPs", said Ms Rhiannon.

The terms of reference for the Inquiry requires that the committee investigate -
·all matters associated with electoral funding and disclosure,
·the advantages and disadvantages of banning all donations from corporations, unions and organizations to parties and candidates,
·the advantages and disadvantages of introducing limits upon expenditure in election campaigns,
·the impact of political donations on the democratic process, and any related matters.

Contact:  Lee Rhiannon  0427 861 568


Yesterday ICAC wrote back to us in these terms about the dirty way a litigant who could have really damaged, but didn't, the Iemma govt in the lead up to the State election magically obtained a favourable affidavit from Treasurer Costa, police minister at the relevant times, and reportedly a six figure payout. Get it? Evidence volunteered, not put to the proof via subpoena, or via cross examination. How convenient. As a former litigation lawyer for a big firm here in Sydney I would have loved to have affidavits from the opponents like that.  ICAC wash their hands, as I imagine the Auditor General would too if flicked there. They should know it's not just 1 in ten burglaries that are being solved: One burglary in 10 is solved, reveals auditor

"MORE than 90 per cent of all household burglaries in NSW are left unsolved, making it the second worst-performing state in Australia, according to a report by the state's Auditor-General."

I would say its one in ten corrupt govt activities as well. Just look at the regular "investigations" with no convictions for wanton land clearing in regional areas, all too hard or what? Corruption by inaction is our accusation.


"[27th June 2007]

Thank you for the information you provided to the ICAC on 21 May and 14 June 2007 regarding the NSW Government.


The ICAC understands your concerns to be that:

  • Government Minister Michael Costa provided evidence by way of affidavit, and not by subpoena, in support of Mr Tim Priest’s court action against the NSW Government.  You state that Minister Costa should have withheld any such affidavit until he was compelled by legal process.  This would have avoided any conflict of interest and the Minister’s duty to protect the public revenue.
  • Minister Costa may have offered an inducement to Mr Priest to self censor any role in the NSW election period in order to obtain a favourable affidavit of evidence enabling a substantial payout to satisfy the $2.5M claim by Mr Priest.  Minister Costa has wasted substantial public revenue for failing to adequately support the legal defence to Mr Priest’s legal claim.


The ICAC Act 1988 sets out the ICAC’s functions, which include investigating and educating the NSW public sector and the community about corrupt conduct and how to combat it. 


The ICAC can only deal with corrupt conduct as it is defined in the ICAC Act. In simple terms, conduct is corrupt when it:


·        Results or could result in a public official or agency exercising their functions or authority in a partial or dishonest way, breaching the public trust or misusing information or resources, OR

·        Adversely affects or could adversely affect the way a public official's duties are exercised and which could involve any of the matters set out in s.8(2) of the ICAC Act, AND

·        Is serious enough to constitute a criminal or disciplinary offence, or reasonable grounds for dismissing the services of a NSW public official. 


The ICAC does not investigate all matters received and, even if a matter involves corrupt conduct, the ICAC Act requires the ICAC to focus its attention on serious and systemic corrupt conduct.


Your matter has been carefully considered by the ICAC's Assessment Panel. The Assessment Panel is a committee made up of senior ICAC officers, and is responsible for determining what action the ICAC should take on each matter received. The Assessment Panel has determined that the matter should not be made the subject of a formal ICAC investigation.   


In making its decision, the Assessment Panel took into account a number of issues, including that the information that would be provided by way of affidavit compared to by subpoena is likely to be similar.  It would be difficult to prove that the motive for Minister Costa’s affidavit was for reciprocal assurances from Mr Priest to “self censor” during the lead up to the State election.  There do not appear to be any lines of enquiry to support the allegation that the Minister acted corruptly in providing the affidavit.  There is also no information to indicate that Minister Costa unduly influenced the decision by the Police Commissioner and the Police Minister for a financial settlement with Mr Priest.  The allegations do not indicate the occurrence of systemic corrupt conduct by Minister Costa or any other NSW Government official.


Thank you for bringing this matter to our attention. Although we are unable to investigate every matter we receive, your information is important to us as it can help us improve our understanding of corruption risks and trends in the NSW public sector. While the information you have provided may not on its own be sufficient for us to commence an investigation at this time, it will be retained and may well assist in future matters. The information you have provided may also be used to inform our corruption prevention and education work.


For more information about the ICAC’s decision?uro;‘making processes, please read the enclosed Information Sheet or visit our website at www.icac.nsw.gov.au.


In any further correspondence to the ICAC please quote the reference number provided."



The bear pit is a dirty dangerous place based on any of the above.It reminds us tangentially of a particularly revolting tv advert prominent at the moment. It's for a financial company in a corporate workshop scene where a coloured guy is dressed as a bear and gets an arrow in his head and dies. All on prime time tv. Laugh? It's revolting.

What kind of a sad rotten society is this exactly as violence is condemned in Aboriginal communities, and this advert runs on prime time under the cover of satire. Meanwhile NSW governance actually is, no satire, such a demonstrably dirty game run by meglomaniacs like Treasurer Michael Costa?

You can complain about that tv advert  too at www.advertisingstandardsbureau.com.au but I wouldn't expect any change there just like NSW politics. Apparently it's all voluntary standards of behaviour. Do you think children would wash everyday to avoid sickness if it was voluntary, or wallow in dirt and ignorance? Just asking.

Posted by editor at 1:15 PM NZT
Updated: Friday, 29 June 2007 11:04 AM NZT

View Latest Entries