Can anybody identify the music? Plane Crash

Stanhope attacks Smyth in question time, but where are the reporters?

March 6th, 2007 at 08:28pm

Would anybody care to explain to me why ACT Chief Turnip Jon Stanhope’s verbal attack on former opposition leader Brendan Smyth in question time today has received so little media coverage?

The lead story on 2CC news for most of the afternoon was Jon Stanhope calling Brendan Smyth a slime ball who enjoys being in the gutter and subsequently being reprimanded by the speaker of the assembly Wayne Berry MLA. 2CC reported that Brendan Smyth was disgusted by the outburst.

This was question time, and all of the news outlets had reporters at the assembly today, so why has there been no mention of this outburst on the television news bulletins? I’m not sure about ABC Local Radio but as there is so far nothing on their news website about it I don’t think they’ve covered the story, and I’m almost certain that RiotACT would have covered it if the story had appeared on ABC Local Radio’s news bulletins…so what’s going on? Why has such an unusual (for the Legislative Assembly at least) and newsworthy event gone unnoticed by so much of the local media?

Here is a copy of the transcript from proof hansard, the PDF will be replaced with the final version of weekly hansard at the end of the week.

Bill Stefaniak MLAMR STEFANIAK: My question is to the Chief Minister. Chief Minister, where were you on the night of 17 January 2003 when the head of the Emergency Services Bureau was trying to get in touch with you, and what were you doing?

Jon Stanhope MLAMR STANHOPE: I have to say that I was interested in the contribution that the member for Tuggeranong, Mr Smyth, made to the no-confidence motion last week, in which he dwelt very much on this subject, comfortable as Mr Smyth is with the selling of innuendo, of scuttlebutt and of slime.

Bill Stefaniak MLAMR STEFANIAK: Answer the question.

Jon Stanhope MLAMR STANHOPE: Well, it is not that simple, actually. It is a question in relation to which one really should provide some context around the degree of comfort that Mr Smyth has in getting into the gutter, the slime— Mr Slime Ball from Tuggeranong. He loves it down there in the gutter.

Wayne Berry MLAMR SPEAKER: Order! Refer to the member by his name, please. Withdraw that and refer to the member by his name.

Jon Stanhope MLAMR STANHOPE: I refer to Mr Smyth as Mr Smyth and—

Vicki Dunne MLAMRS DUNNE: Mr Speaker, he still hasn’t withdrawn.

Wayne Berry MLAMR SPEAKER: Withdraw it.

Jon Stanhope MLAMR STANHOPE: I withdraw it; I was withdrawing it. But it of course does not change my opinion of the member at all, and he knows it.

Vicki Dunne MLAMRS DUNNE: Mr Speaker, this is entirely disorderly. When a member is asked to withdraw, they have to withdraw, and that’s it— simpliciter, without embellishment.

Wayne Berry MLAMR SPEAKER: He has withdrawn.

Jon Stanhope MLAMR STANHOPE: Mr Smyth is comfortable down there in the gutter. He likes it there, down with the cigarette butts and the dog turds and the wasted life. That is where he is comfortable, and of course it is one of the reasons that his colleagues tipped him out a few months ago— because he really does not have the maturity or the standing or the quality that befits a leader.

Wayne Berry MLAMR SPEAKER: Come to the subject of the question, Chief Minister.

Jon Stanhope MLAMR STANHOPE: I spent that evening with my wife, Robyn, in company with two other people, the reputations of whom or the professions of whom some of course might have a particular issue with. I think it was to these particular points that Mr Smyth was going, of course— the quality, the calibre and the nature of the people and who it was that I might have spent that particular evening with. I spent it with my wife and with a magistrate of the ACT Magistrates Court, and his wife, and— forgive me my sins— with a Catholic priest, the parish priest of St Matthew’s, Page. Mr Smyth, of course, was not looking for an answer that bowled me as actually spending an evening with a magistrate of the Magistrates Court of the ACT or with the parish priest of St Matthew’s, Page. Mr Smyth had other ideas. Mr Smyth has been out there spreading innuendo and slime and slurs and outrageous suggestions— as he did when he put in an FOI request for all of my wife’s travel documents on the one and only occasion when my wife has accompanied me on a spouse-accompanied trip. This is the man who thinks it is appropriate behaviour for a Leader of the Opposition to requisition all of my wife’s travel documents. This is the man that the other Liberals are comfortable with on their back bench.

Bill Stefaniak MLAMR STEFANIAK: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker, under standing order 118A.

Jon Stanhope MLAMR STANHOPE: Who among you thinks that is appropriate behaviour—

Bill Stefaniak MLAMR STEFANIAK: Pull him in, would you?

Wayne Berry MLAMR SPEAKER: Come back to the subject matter of the question.

Jon Stanhope MLAMR STANHOPE: of a member of your particular party? This is the scuttlebutt. This is the innuendo. This is the slime—

Wayne Berry MLAMR SPEAKER: Come back to the subject matter, Chief Minister.

Jon Stanhope MLAMR STANHOPE: that your colleagues engage in. Which one of you has suffered your spouse or partner having all of their private documents FOIed in relation to any travel involving you in your official capacity— who of you? It is the most shameful behaviour by a despicable little man!

Bill Stefaniak MLAMR STEFANIAK: Mr Speaker, I have a supplementary question. Chief Minister, thank you for that explanation— in the 30 seconds that you gave it; I will disregard the rest. Why until now have you been so reluctant to advise the people of Canberra what you were doing when you should have been following the fires closely? Why did you not advise us before now?

Jon Stanhope MLAMR STANHOPE: Because it was none of your business.

Bill Stefaniak MLAMR STEFANIAK: It has taken you four years.

Jon Stanhope MLAMR STANHOPE: Because it was none of your business, and it is still none of your business. I only answer today because of the slime that is being perpetrated and spread around Canberra by this colleague of yours— the innuendoes, the doublespeak, the slime, the attacks on my wife and the requisitioning of her travel documents: freedom of information requests in relation to every document associated with her private life and her behaviour. This is what the Liberal Party in this place has reduced itself to. He kept it up last week in the no-confidence motion. You all sat around, all relaxed: “Funny; chuff, chuff; let’s be part of this innuendo”— this slur, this campaign against my wife and my marriage, this suggestion that there was something untoward about my behaviour, which you have gone on and on with.

Brendan Smyth MLAMR SMYTH: You refused to answer the question.

Wayne Berry MLAMR SPEAKER: Order! Mr Smyth!

Jon Stanhope MLAMR STANHOPE: Because I have a private life that is absolutely none of your business. You have run a four-year campaign about my private life. The questions that you have pursued in relation to my whereabouts on that particular night, on that evening, and the persons in whose company I spent the evening have had a single purpose. It is absolutely and utterly despicable— utterly despicable. Of course, then it was followed up by Mr Smyth and his freedom of information requests— that he has requisitioned: his demand for tabled documents— in relation to my wife’s private life and business.

Bill Stefaniak MLAMR STEFANIAK: Mr Speaker, I raise a point of order, again under standing order 118A.

Wayne Berry MLAMR SPEAKER: I think the question was “why haven’t you told us up until now?” I think the Chief Minister is trying to tell you.

Jon Stanhope MLAMR STANHOPE: To the point where I have to say this. I am loath to involve my wife in this; she will be appalled, and perhaps disappointed, that I have breached her privacy in relation to this. But since Mr Smyth conducted his campaign against my wife and her travel, my wife refuses to travel with me. She is not prepared to have her private life and her private affairs submitted to the political point scoring and nastiness of Brendan Smyth. My wife will no longer travel with me because of Mr Smyth’s requisitioning of her personal travel documents, her personal affairs and
her expenditures when she travels on official business with me. That is what Mr Smyth has done. I apologise to my wife for breaching her privacy in this way. It is appalling. I am absolutely appalled that this paragon of virtue— this citizen of Tuggeranong, this pillar of society— thinks that that is appropriate behaviour. It is not. On the night before the fire, I was with my wife, with a magistrate of the ACT Magistrates Court and with a Catholic priest.

Bill Stefaniak MLAMR STEFANIAK: Why didn’t you tell us before now?

Jon Stanhope MLAMR STANHOPE: Because it is none of your business— because it is none of your business. It is none of your business what I was doing.

Bill Stefaniak MLAMR STEFANIAK: No-one is going to blame you for being with your wife, for goodness sake.

Jon Stanhope MLAMR STANHOPE: I explained at the time. I said, “I was in my electorate at dinner.”

Jacqui Burke MLAMRS BURKE: You did not.

Jon Stanhope MLAMR STANHOPE: Yes, I did.

Katy Gallagher MLAMS GALLAGHER: Yes, on the north side of Canberra.

Jon Stanhope MLAMR STANHOPE: My colleagues remember. I was in my electorate on the north side of Canberra at dinner. But that was not sufficient! That was not sufficient! It just excited the dirty mind of Mr Smyth. That just excited the dirty mind, because I would not say I was at dinner with my wife— because it was none of your business. It was not relevant that I involve my wife in this place. Oh, no— a four-year campaign of innuendo, scuttlebutt, doublespeak and plain gossip. Of course it all gets repeated back to me. It is a small town. It is a small place, this. It all gets reported back to me— everything that Mr Smyth says as he goes around town: the destruction of my reputation and that of my marriage and my wife. It is all out there. He is out there talking about it. He is talking it up. I can go and get statutory declarations and affidavits from those to whom Mr Smyth has told this story. That is what we have come to. It was a matter of principle. It is none of your business. My wife is not part of this job.

Jacqui Burke MLAMRS BURKE: It’s the community’s business.

Jon Stanhope MLAMR STANHOPE: It is not. Mrs Burke, tell us more about the sexual harassment matter. Come on.

Bill Stefaniak MLAMR STEFANIAK: Oh, here we go. Let’s get grubby, Jon.

Jon Stanhope MLAMR STANHOPE: Let’s get grubby? Let’s get grubby!

Bill Stefaniak MLAMR STEFANIAK: You are accusing him of it and now you are doing it.

Wayne Berry MLAMR SPEAKER: Order!

Jon Stanhope MLAMR STANHOPE: I am respecting Mrs Burke’s privacy. Give us the lurid details, Mrs Burke. (Time expired.)

It even continued in to the next question…

Mick Gentleman MLAMR GENTLEMAN: My question is directed to the Minister for Territory and Municipal Services. I understand that recent criticism of ACTION is misguided, as patronage levels are through the roof. Can you inform the Assembly how many passengers have voted in favour of ACTION by using the new network?

Brendan Smyth MLAMR SMYTH interjecting—

John Hargreaves MLAMR HARGREAVES: Mr Smyth, I challenge you to tell in public what you told your Liberal Party branch about me. I challenge you in public because I would like you to give me a photocopy of your house because I will have it for you.

Wayne Berry MLAMR SPEAKER: Order! Mr Hargreaves, come back to the subject matter.

John Hargreaves MLAMR HARGREAVES: I certainly will. You just do it and I will take you on.

Considering that the “answer” provided by Jon Stanhope actually answers a question about his whereabouts prior to the 2003 Bushfire, one does have to wonder why at least that bit was of no interest to the local media, if the name calling of Brendan Smyth wasn’t of interest to them.

I am still perplexed as to why Jon Stanhope doesn’t think his whereabouts is the business of his constituents, and I can only assume that, had he been forthcoming with these details, Brendan Smyth would never have tried to work it out by using Freedom Of Information…in fact I’m sure that Mr. Smyth and the Liberal Party would have tried many other ways of working it out before FOIing travel documents of Mr. Stanhope’s wife.

More questions, why is it that Mr. Stanhope can find enough money to erect a statue of the late disgraced Whitlam government minister Al Grassby, but needs to make businesses in Civic pay a levy for the general upkeep of the area…a job which would normally be considered a government responsibility? And why is this kind of levy going to be charged at a varying rate depending on the “rateable” value of their property…surely if this must happen then it should be charged at a flat rate and not be an addition to land tax by another name?

What a peculiar place that Legislative Assembly is.

Samuel

Entry Filed under: Canberra Stories,General News,Samuel's Editorials

Print This Post Print This Post

12 Comments

  • 1. Jackie Birk MLC  |  March 7th, 2007 at 9:12 am

    Disgraceful conduct. Absolutely disgraceful !

  • 2. Samuel  |  March 7th, 2007 at 10:49 am

    Looks like RiotACT has finally caught up after noticing an article in The Canberra Times about the outburst. Still nothing from the ABC.

    It’s funny that just a couple weeks ago Johnboy suggested to me that I should listen to more of 666 ABC Canberra…perhaps the opposite is true, perhaps he should listen to more 2CC!

  • 3. Jackie Birk MLC  |  March 7th, 2007 at 12:00 pm

    Johnboy ? That self possessed over-inflated ego ?
    I wouldn’t take much notice of anything he said !

  • 4. Jey  |  March 8th, 2007 at 7:52 am

    nice use of piccies, pity the the piccies aren’t so nice!

  • 5. eebl  |  March 9th, 2007 at 10:14 am

    Samuel, I think that listening to a radio station that has editorial standards and is not likely to be influenced by advertisers is a much better way to get the news than listening to a commercial station that has commercial interests. That said, it is, of course, better to listen to more than one radio station to get a better perspective on the world around us.

    The Chief Minister defended himself pretty well, and although he should have told the people where he was, his intentions were to protect the privacy of his wife and those he was with. Clearly she is a woman who does not like to be in the public eye and that is completely understandable after Smythe’s previous antics.

    Some might say that this was disgraceful behavior, but it was a purely human reaction from a man trying to protect his family and his friends.

  • 6. Samuel  |  March 9th, 2007 at 10:38 am

    You think I only ever listen to one radio station…how cute.

    Did you buy Mr. Stanhope’s whole “breaking down in front of the cameras” act? I don’t deny that he is upset over the years of probing, but as the only person capable of issuing a state of emergency at the time, he should have answered the phone (and ESA or whatever they were called at the time should have rung his landline).

    Also, perhaps he should have asked the friends if they would mind being named as the people he was having dinner with…and if they said no, he should have publicly stated that the people wished to remain private.

    Back to the issue of taking pot shots at 2CC…I suppose I’ve taken a few at the ABC lately so I’ll cop that one, although I was tempted to write something about last night’s ABC TV News story about the New South Wales election in Newcastle, where the story revolved around which Labor or ex-Labor candidate will get the seat…apparently the people in Newcastle are unhappy with the poor funding from Morris Iemma’s government, but the possibility of a non-Labor person being elected never crossed the mind of the reporter?

    And for the record, I agree that multiple sources are the best way to get news…but don’t you find it interesting that both the ABC (television at least) and WIN have tried to make as little as possible out of the outburst transcribed above.

    As for Mr. Stanhope, last time I met Senator Gary Humphries I informed him that I am looking forward to next year’s ACT election, as I’m looking forward to voting for anyone who isn’t Jon Stanhope.

  • 7. Samuel  |  March 9th, 2007 at 10:39 am

    And just to clear up any party bias here, I don’t vote on party lines, I vote for who I think would be better…for example, right now federally I am slightly leaning towards Mr. Rudd, in new South Wales where I have no say I would prefer entirely new candidates, and locally I reluctantly prefer Bill Stefaniak.

  • 8. eebl  |  March 9th, 2007 at 12:28 pm

    Ok, so my implication that you only listen to one radio station was a low blow 😉

    Don’t get me wrong, Stanhope’s a narcissist for sure, but I do believe the ‘nothing to do with you bastards; stay out of my personal life’ (of course not a direct quote ;)) line was completely valid. He seems to have not given a rats about asking his friends; his stubbornness and ego told him that he shouldn’t have had to tell people where he was.

    As for your comment about the ABC’s report on Newcastle…

    (NB: I’m arguing for the sake of arguing here, I think you should shoot this one off to Media Watch if you haven’t already.)

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Division_of_Newcastle

    Newcastle is one of the biggest Labor strongholds in the country, and although that Wikipedia entry is about Fedral Labor, I think that a lot of people are voting for Iemma for the same reason they voted for Howard — They don’t want the other guy MORE than they don’t want Iemma.

    PS. So I’m a bleeding-heart little-l liberal who will always vote Labor… at least I’m not, y’know, a prick about it 😉 Hehehe.

  • 9. Samuel  |  March 9th, 2007 at 12:52 pm

    I was impressed to see Stanhope admit to being stubborn yesterday…I didn’t think he realised…he is more human than I thought.

    And the ABC did use the throw away media line of “Labor heartland” in their report, but I thought the report deserved at least a Liberal or greens candidate.

    Media Watch are appearing a bit more balanced and impartial this year, so I might just send them an email about the Newcastle report.

    They don’t want the other guy MORE than they don’t want Iemma.

    That’ll be Debnam’s undoing. I refer back to my previous quote a few weeks back about it being a race between the devil you know and the devil who couldn’t possibly do any worse.

  • 10. Samuel  |  March 9th, 2007 at 1:39 pm

    Thanks Jey, I think it helps to illustrate who is talking, and I did something similar previously with a Federal parliament question time article.

    Actually, you just gave me an idea for a standby fun poll for when I don’t have a subject specific weekly poll to run…at this rate it could be as soon as next week.

  • 11. Samuel  |  March 9th, 2007 at 1:41 pm

    Oh, and it took a little bit of time to resize all of those images. Unlike the Federal parliament, the legislative assembly only seems to take a photo when an MLA first joins the assembly…so some of the photos were very old and I gave preference to party supplied photos which tend to be more current, not to mention they are in JPEG format and not the colour restricted GIF format (Wayne Berry and Mick Gentleman).

  • 12. John_Barnes  |  March 13th, 2007 at 4:41 pm

    Mick Gentleman ? The gentleman & I have never met !


Calendar

March 2007
S M T W T F S
« Feb   Apr »
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
25262728293031

Most Recent Posts

Search Blog or Web

Login/Logout

Ads By Google


Blix Theme by Sebastian Schmieg and modified for Samuel's Blog by Samuel Gordon-Stewart.
Printing CSS with the help of Martin Pot's guide to Web Page Printability With CSS.
Icons by Kevin Potts.
Powered by WordPress.
Log in