<< back to archive index Date: 1st February A Theory of the Carr Government The Carr government has been in office too long. It is obsessed with the enjoyment of power, and has become increasingly intolerant of any public discussion, or modification of its power and direction. The inner group of the Carr government wants to control the ministers, the lower house, the upper house, local government, the public service, the courts, the media, the information flow, and even then tweak the electoral system or ignore referendums to get its own way. It is trying to achieve vertically integrated power, much like Queensland - effectively engineering a one party state. If you think this is far-fetched, here are some points to consider: It has control of the State government, and this is becoming tighter.Decisions are made by the cabinet in Governor Macquarie Tower. Ex-Cabinet department staff are in almost all ministerial offices, and Ministerial budgets are tightly controlled, so Ministers have to take their budget cuts and make it all look like good news, like sophisticated puppets. The caucus, which is the Labor members of the NSW Parliament, do not dare to challenge this or they will lose their advancement prospects. The government has a majority in the lower house, so it always wins there. The government tries very hard to get control of the upper house. Its chief method has been to change the voting system in the upper house, so that preferences do not flow. This allows the government to get a higher percentage of the seats, than it got of the votes. The object is to make both houses of parliament a rubber stamp for what is decided in the Cabinet Room - an expensive and undemocratic farce. It is trying to get control of local councils. This is being accomplished by changes to the local government electoral system, and the forced amalgamation of Councils. Sydney and South Sydney councils were unceremoniously abolished on 6 February, and this will also be the fate of other councils who don't toe the Labor Party line. Changes to Local government elections will mean that groups wanting to stand at local elections have to get a lot of members and candidates to get an 'above the line' box on the ballot paper. This situation favours the major parties. Once they've made it on to council, the Labor councillors are considered to be in good training positions to move up the Labor hierarchy, obeying the party or State government in any conflict between the interests of the Labor party and the interests of their constituents. The government did not want to have referendums because (and this was said quite openly) it would make amalgamation hard. The Upper House forced an amendment onto the Government that they could not amalgamate councils without a referendum, so they held one in Concord and Drummoyne. 79% of Concord residents and 73% of Drummoyne residents who replied voted no. Not content with this, a postal ballot (between elections) was held and only 43% and 36% of Concord and Drummoyne respectively, turned in a vote. The government simply added all the people who did not vote as 'Yes' votes and amalgamated anyway, calling the new Council City of Canada Bay. This shows complete contempt for the democratic process. The control of the Courts is being effected by changing the law when decisions are made, or about to be made. When developers at Walsh Bay wanted to demolish part of the historic wharves, the National Trust challenged in the Land and Environment Court saying that the 5 wharves were a single unique historic building. The hearing was due at 10am, but at 3am the same morning, the government with Opposition support changed the law to stop the challenge and let the developers have the wharf. When the Land and Environment Court, after hearings that lasted for months with many options considered, stopped a waste transfer station in Granville, the government put through a special bill to allow it. This is not best practise law-making, which demands that a general rule be established and the Courts required to interpret them in individual cases. This government makes laws using the interest of shock-jocks as its moral yardstick. It has control of the media by extensive media management. Journalists are rewarded by being given stories as 'exclusives' if they give favourable coverage - if they do not, they just do not get the stories. Good journalists are recruited to be government media advisers on big salaries, and when they return to the press gallery, they are talking to journalists who were previously their junior colleagues. It has control of the information flow, as it makes the Ministerial announcements that are 'news'. One major announcement a day, and one as a distraction if there is some bad news to hide. It uses taxpayer's money to monitor the media, so it knows exactly how much coverage every issue is getting - an advantage that anyone outside Cabinet doesn't have. Freedom of information requests are obstructed and delayed. Significant requests go to the Minister, and if the information is released at all, it is released after the Minister announces that he or she has found a problem, and developed a solution. When the information is released, it has become yesterday's news- it is a 'problem' that is now irrelevant because the clever minister fixed it yesterday. The Carr government has increasingly taken control of the public service, which was once secure enough to be 'apolitical'. The upper echelons are now in the Senior Executive Service on fixed term contracts, so they can be sacked if the minister doesn't like what they have to say. Everyone's career is dependent on not rocking the boat, and the result of this is an increasing gap between rhetoric and reality. Because managers did not come up through the ranks, they often lack grounding in the field, but are certainly aware of the political ramifications. DoCS and Health are recent examples of this syndrome, as has been shown in the DoCS Inquiry and the Campbelltown Hospital revelations. Mind you, this is merely my theory of the Carr government. It explains how this government works for me, but I recommend testing it against your reality and see if it makes sense to you.

home | about | ace at work | issues & projects | media | links | sitemap

updated: May 6, 2004