Are voters as gullible as the government thinks? "The dog ate my ministerial responsibility".

[Play by Numbers]

It seems to be the go to excuse for government officials, the new the dog ate my homework.

George Brandis overlooked sending a letter to the Sydney siege inquiry, as it was missed being on the second tab of a spreadsheet.

Bishop signed documents without looking at them.

The immigration department didn't seem to read any reports on contractor behavior before first attacking SHY and later defending conduct in the senate, despite a paper trail to abuse allegations and testimony staff had spied on SHY.

Greg Hunt missed an auditor generals report on the great barrier reef despite being supplied with it before going to the UN to lobby for a no change in listing.

Abetz and Tasmanian libs claiming they knew nothing about Mantachs impropriety despite being told directly. Can a dog eat a conversation?

Neither Hockey nor Abbott knew anything about their own modelling of costs of emission reduction, despite it having been confirmed both had received the report before they cited outdated modelling used in the telle and then repeated again.

How many times has Turnbull claimed ignorance re the NBN.

Now neither Dutton nor Abbot know anything about the actions of the ABF, despite the cancelled operation being part of a PR push for the ABFs launch and Dutton receiving a press release twice.

Now I know plausible deniability is part of the political game of avoiding heat, but this is outrageous.

How many times can impropriety or gross wrong doing be blamed on having not see the modeling we requested/paper I was signing/documents to be forwarded/press release and on it goes.

The amount of things that are direct ministerial responsibility, that are being placed in front of said people but somehow not being seen is truly extraordinary, either they have such low opinion of the public that the same lie being told every other week passes muster, so the dog ate my ministerial responsibility, or the level of incompetence rife in the government is reaching society threatening levels.

 

[Howard Littlejohn]

The way I see it taxpayer funded departmental (but really politcial staffers) are paid big money to ensure Ministers do not see anything which does not fit with the narrative of the day. If that filter fails, taxpayer funded staff within the Minister's office work as a second line of defence.
Filtering this sort of thing probably costs the taxpayer $1m a year per Minister, so Ministers don't have to lie. They lie often enough, but its easier to deny without lying when that is possible.

 

[Maggie5]

Yes Minister, great show. Now in Australia.

 

[Play by Numbers]

The way I see it taxpayer funded departmental (but really politcial staffers) are paid big money to ensure Ministers do not see anything which does not fit with the narrative of the day. If that filter fails, taxpayer funded staff within the Minister's office work as a second line of defence.
Filtering this sort of thing probably costs the taxpayer $1m a year per Minister, so Ministers don't have to lie. They lie often enough, but its easier to deny without lying when that is possible.

Yep, it's an inbuilt mechanism to prevent dirt sticking to ministers, a hyper expensive teflon coating.

But in the case of Bishop, Dutton, Brandis and Abetz, the old din see nuffin argument cannot hold muster. Bishop signed documents, Dutton had the press release placed on his desk twice, Brandis was meant to have forwarded evidence directly and Abetz was supposedly told, whilst being deeply embedded in the states politics.

Even in the other cases, it's implausible to believe they were somehow screened from reading the very things they have commented on and argued about. You can't run a portfolio in a constant state of post hoc reality ignorance. As the talking points memo leak showed, they are briefed thoroughly on the issues, how to counter and strategies of attack, but clearly pleading ignorance has become the easiest strategy.

And if they are being shielded ala Hunt and the auditor general, how the hell can the government function properly?

 

[Howard Littlejohn]

And if they are being shielded ala Hunt and the auditor general, how the hell can the government function properly?

It doesn't. I thought that was obvious. Hasn't done since at least Keating.

 

[Play by Numbers]

It doesn't. I thought that was obvious. Hasn't done since at least Keating.

It was a rhetorical question.

I agree it can't and hasn't, however I think it is harder in a country like Australia for ministers to plead ignorance and with such frequency. Smaller population, less layers of accountability and responsibility and narrower focus.

The public service here is pretty trim and efficient compared to say the UK, likewise, one of the problems with executive interference and overreach, ala Hunt and the reef is that they make it hard to plead ignorance. You can't have your office request an audit, very publicly campaign a certain way on the issue, have your office publicly acknowledge receipt of the report, then head to the UN and try and argue a case opposed to findings.

It just strains credulity.

They keep requesting independant advice, then pretending it doesn't exist. Likewise stepping on the toes of the senate, or other departments, or the courts with self assured rightness, yet plead ignorant of every contrary event or opinion. I mean, take the borderforce. This was the jackboot show stopper, based on laws and portfolio adjustment deemed largely undemocratic and stepping on the toes of other ministers. A blackshirt head kicking tour de force. Then when they go and do, exactly what they had planned and the public spit chips, you can't step back and say, oh that was never our intent, it was an accident, rando official blah blah blah. It's Duttons baby but suddenly he has no idea what it is and where its gone?

It's not ideal to cite comedy, but see the show The Thick of It. Pleading ignorance works when you don't get on the front foot, don't take a stand and don't overreach. The layers of staff and beurocracy shield you. That however has not been observed by this government, hence why the lies appear so glaring.

 

[Howard Littlejohn]

I was thinking more of Sir Humphrey and the "need to know". Today's Ministers need to know enough to attend a photo op and look all tough with paramilitary units and copious flags - and a few talking points handed out from the PM's media office, or Peta Credlin. Detail is kept from Ministers, so they can say they never saw it.
The press release arrived at his Dutton's office twice. That is far from arriving at his desk.

 

[madmug]

I was thinking more of Sir Humphrey and the "need to know". Today's Ministers need to know enough to attend a photo op and look all tough with paramilitary units and copious flags - and a few talking points handed out from the PM's media office, or Peta Credlin. Detail is kept from Ministers, so they can say they never saw it.
The press release arrived at his Dutton's office twice. That is far from arriving at his desk.

This has been going on for many years but really went to another level under John Howard. Plausible deniability.

 

[Play by Numbers]

I was thinking more of Sir Humphrey and the "need to know". Today's Ministers need to know enough to attend a photo op and look all tough with paramilitary units and copious flags - and a few talking points handed out from the PM's media office, or Peta Credlin. Detail is kept from Ministers, so they can say they never saw it.
The press release arrived at his Dutton's office twice. That is far from arriving at his desk.

Fair enough, however I am not sure your characterisation applies. This is a government of self proclaimed "experts". They derive moral authority from knowing.

It's a pattern that is well worn by now. Declare independant review or request departmental advice, champion findings saying they confirm what we knew all along whilst delaying or preventing release. Be forced to back pedal or claim ignorance when findings are released.

Also, from having read the opinions of a few with experience in the public policy arena, was received by his office most definitely meant was placed on his desk. A press release that important 100% gets the ministerial sign off.

 

[Ratts of Tobruk]

The ABF themselves blamed junior administrators, despite the Regional Commander being quoted at length.

Dyson Heydon blamed his PA.

Personal responsibility doesn't extend to the 'management class', obviously. Even though entitlements do.

 

[Play by Numbers]

The ABF themselves blamed junior administrators, despite the Regional Commander being quoted at length.

Dyson Heydon blamed his PA.

Personal responsibility doesn't extend to the 'management class', obviously. Even though entitlements do.

Heydon like Bishop or Brandis can't sidestep blame.

These aren't vague policy issues but situations where direct oversight should be involved.

 

[Ratts of Tobruk]

Also, from having read the opinions of a few with experience in the public policy arena, was received by his office most definitely meant was placed on his desk. A press release that important 100% gets the ministerial sign off.

I'm 90% on board with that (can't be 100% since I wasn't there!), because I think the Border Force Farce is best explained in this context:

1. Government requests an "announcable" each week from departments that fit what the LNP thinks are their strong points
   
2. Border Force decides to dress up a regular duty with Vic Police as something bigger so it can be announced
3. Like a politician, the ABF milks as much as it can from the duties it is going to do (which was probably just helping out Taxi officials, but maybe some random checks on Public Transport properties where they can request ID) to make it sound more impressive
   
4. Release gets approval from ABF at least at Regional level, but probably higher given the Govt's request for announcables
5. Release goes to the Immigration Minister, so he is happy and can pass onto others that they have an announcable
6. PR Release is released.
7. Public confused. Some angry. Many point out overreach.
8. All senior officials and pollies declare (publicly) that they had no idea

 

[Long Live HFC]

no doubt politicians of all persuasions are economical with the truth, but i think you're giving them way too much credit (or expecting too much) re being on top of everything in their portfolio. doesn't surprise me at all to see examples of them simply having no ******* idea. sure, sometimes that's deliberate as per your 'plausible deniability' but sometimes it's just them being clueless or rubber-stamping atop the bureaucratic chain of command.

eg i find it completely plausible that bishop signed her expenses without really looking at them. she would have signed dozens if not hundreds of similar documents during her time in parliament.

 

[Maggie5]

eg i find it completely plausible that bishop signed her expenses without really looking at them. she would have signed dozens if not hundreds of similar documents during her time in parliament.

Arrogance is not an excuse.
I know when I had to travel for work, expenses were carefully put together, I also added more details than was necessary. Completed them very carefully and honestly.

 

[Long Live HFC]

Arrogance is not an excuse.
I know when I had to travel for work, expenses were carefully put together, I also added more details than was necessary. Completed them very carefully and honestly.

I never said it was an excuse, she is totally responsible. I just said I found it plausible that she really didn't/doesn't pay that much attention to everything she signs.

 

[SonOfurX]

It seems to be the go to excuse for government officials, the new the dog ate my homework.

George Brandis overlooked sending a letter to the Sydney siege inquiry, as it was missed being on the second tab of a spreadsheet.

Bishop signed documents without looking at them.

The immigration department didn't seem to read any reports on contractor behavior before first attacking SHY and later defending conduct in the senate, despite a paper trail to abuse allegations and testimony staff had spied on SHY.

Greg Hunt missed an auditor generals report on the great barrier reef despite being supplied with it before going to the UN to lobby for a no change in listing.

Abetz and Tasmanian libs claiming they knew nothing about Mantachs impropriety despite being told directly. Can a dog eat a conversation?

Neither Hockey nor Abbott knew anything about their own modelling of costs of emission reduction, despite it having been confirmed both had received the report before they cited outdated modelling used in the telle and then repeated again.

How many times has Turnbull claimed ignorance re the NBN.

Now neither Dutton nor Abbot know anything about the actions of the ABF, despite the cancelled operation being part of a PR push for the ABFs launch and Dutton receiving a press release twice.

Now I know plausible deniability is part of the political game of avoiding heat, but this is outrageous.

How many times can impropriety or gross wrong doing be blamed on having not see the modeling we requested/paper I was signing/documents to be forwarded/press release and on it goes.

The amount of things that are direct ministerial responsibility, that are being placed in front of said people but somehow not being seen is truly extraordinary, either they have such low opinion of the public that the same lie being told every other week passes muster, so the dog ate my ministerial responsibility, or the level of incompetence rife in the government is reaching society threatening levels.

I don't know why anyone is surprised, they broke every promise they said they wouldn't break (prior to getting elected).

 

[madmug]

I don't know why anyone is surprised, they broke every promise they said they wouldn't break (prior to getting elected).

Yes, if this is the adults in charge, Gawd help us all!

 

[NSWCROW]

OMG BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA

Heydon's decision has the cowards petulance written all over it.
Nose to spite the face and all that jazz
year 10 s**t , bottom lip out and all.



Joke
Rabble
Disgrace


Call the election you *en coward.


And then get this 100% truth , the blob Hockey on 2GB 20 mins ago addressing the speculation that the cowards gonna sack him -

" What we're seeing here is a hangover from the Rudd-Gillard-Rudd years in office....................................."


I was like....

 

[Gough]

You shouldn't listen to the wireless Crow, I fear for your blood pressure.

 

[NSWCROW]

You shouldn't listen to the wireless Crow, I fear for your blood pressure.

BP is ALWAYS fine at my tri-weekly appointments.
Goin tomorrow , got a good feeling i've dipped under 110 kegs too

 

[NSWCROW]

 

[sherb]

Absolutely I think the public is gullible.

We will see if they are completely off the rocker though when the next federal election comes around.

If they vote this lot of nutters back in, heaven help Australia.

 

[Lebbo73]

OMG BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA

Heydon's decision has the cowards petulance written all over it.
Nose to spite the face and all that jazz
year 10 s**t , bottom lip out and all.



Joke
Rabble
Disgrace


Call the election you ****en coward.


And then get this 100% truth , the blob Hockey on 2GB 20 mins ago addressing the speculation that the cowards gonna sack him -

" What we're seeing here is a hangover from the Rudd-Gillard-Rudd years in office....................................."


I was like....

Have you ever heard the saying "Mountain out of a molehill" 2 teeth?

 

[Lebbo73]

Absolutely I think the public is gullible.

We will see if they are completely off the rocker though when the next federal election comes around.

If they vote this lot of nutters back in, heaven help Australia.

I would give my left testie to see the reaction on BF!

 

[NSWCROW]

Have you ever heard the saying "Mountain out of a molehill" 2 teeth?