The bulk of the Australian media have failed to cover the fact that the Rudd government is trying to censor what the opposition can say about them and are even trying to stop people from being able to read Hansard according to The Daily Telegraph’s Piers Akerman.
UNDER the Rudd Labor Government’s new rules, it is OK for MPs to congratulate the Government but illegal to criticise it.
How did everyone miss that?
Thankfully the Tele’s Steve Lewis, more well known for his coverage of Godwin Grech’s email inbox, managed to bring it to Piers and our attention. Unfortunately, neither Piers nor Steve actually name the piece of legislation that makes criticism of the government supposedly illegal, but let’s try to work with what we’ve got.
What we do know is that the changes are part of the crackdown on the parliamentary entitlements scheme, in this case specifically the printing allowance. There have always been rules regarding how the printing allowance could or could not be spent, for example party political literature was not supposed to be produced with these funds.
The change that obviously upsets Piers, Steve and some coaliton MP’s is
establishing a rigorous vetting and checking system within the Department of Finance to ensure the material Members and Senators print is within entitlement;
So it’s not illegal to criticise the governement? They’re just making sure that MPs and Senators aren’t using taxpayer funds for party political purposes? And this is their definition of censorship?
According to former Senator Andrew Bartlett
The government’s decision to formally define “electioneering” for the first time, and tightly restrict the use of printing entitlements for this purpose is a major step forward.
However Piers sees it very differently
This is an extraordinary attack on the principle of free speech, one of the mainstays of a liberal democracy.
So let’s recap, criticising the government hasn’t been made illegal. Sending voters information that is critical of the government hasn’t been made illegal either. What has changed is that there is finally some serious vetting of how politicians use their entitlements, which should surely be something that every taxpayer should welcome.
And as for access to Hansard? Well thankfully all of us can access it right here, just like we could before the new changes to entitlements.
As a final word from Piers,
This might sound like a claim from a conspiracy theorist…
Yes Piers, it does.
10 Comments
I think the legislation (actually, regulations) referred to are here (and it seems some amounts were amended here).
It’s a great beat-up from Piers, with an assist from Lewis. But of course the appeal to a free speech argument is ridiculous. Opposition MPs are still free to say what they would like to their electorate – but if what they want to say is electioneering, they can’t use their parliamentary entitlements to cover the cost of saying it.
Isn’t it arguable that the cut in allowances and the restriction on electioneering helps the opposition more than it harms it? Having the majority of the incumbents means that, under a less restrictive system, the government has the advantage in terms of being able to use parliamentary entitlements to help campaign for the next election. While current opposition MPs might be seeing the downside for them, it seems to me that a whole bunch of opposition challengers are now on a more level playing field.
I sent Piers a message. It read ” This silly beat-up of a story is debunked here{link to PP}”. I wonder if censorship will allow it to be published?
A quick google shows the murdoch papers were right behind this reform – and now it’s the same lot who’re trying to make out it’s a nefarious plot. Someone raised the story on a bolt thread after reading it in the courier mail – even after I explained what it was really about, that lot were still trying to argue that it was somehow a scheme to give the government an advantage – why? Because since the government can rort the system to pay for its advertising, oppo MPs should be allowed to rort the system to pay for theirs as well – anything else would be unfair. It doesn’t seem to occur to anybody that by having the most MPs, the government also gets the biggest slice of the printing allowance.
Are all the News Ltd columnists trying to get a job on Fox news?
Just to illustrate what a complete backflip this is …
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/national/mps-rorting-millions-in-taxpayer-funded-entitlements/story-e6frf7l6-1225760418861
http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/money/mp-rorts-scandal-revealed/story-e6frezc0-1225760410841
http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,26042510-952,00.html
This is the very reform that newsies have been touting – while making sure to pin misdeeds on the new government while in opposition. Now their guys are in opposition, so it’s a completely new problem.
Wow…having just read through the comments on Piers’ site…I thought the posters on Bolta’s site were rabid. I don’t think I’ve ever seen a bigger collection of paranoia, hate and bile in one location. Especially “JJ”, who all but accuses Rudd of being a mass murderer…
I’m waiting for the day Piers gets a gig on South Park?
Step aside Officer Barbrady.
The best thing about piers blog pieces is he responds directly to those who challenge his claims. Invariably what happens is he ends up further sinking himself. For eg on the 1st page:
and this from page 2:
and this on page 3:
Can Piers explain how MPs are being prevented from sending stuff to their constituents? Or being censored? No.
The fact-free zone Akerman strikes again.
Actually it sounds like just the current day’s instalment of the daily anti-Labor bile the Telegraph publishes by that Coalition apologist.
They’re still smarting (maybe not the best word) because Mr Rudd deposed their sainted rodent.