Your Say gives readers a chance to tell Crikey what they think about the stories we’ve published. Today you let us know what you really think about Scott Morrison — not only his secret ministries but also his “Christianity” and his politics.
On getting to the bottom of robodebt
John Templeton writes: Bernard Keane is right on the money. This royal commission must be very, very thorough, very, very forensic, and determined to get to the truth. Its report will also have to be written in clear, simple English to explain how and why this cruel, vindictive policy was able to cause so much suffering, distress and in a number of cases death.
Keane also flagged another critical area: a proper reckoning for the unaccountable, shadowy ministerial staffers who were in the vanguard of this attack on the poorest and most vulnerable in the community. In particular, the links between ministers’ staff and the right-wing think tanks which for decades have led the push to stigmatise and depersonalise “dole bludgers”, “welfare scroungers” and “feckless young women having babies for profit”.
Judy McKay writes: I would encourage the royal commission to also investigate how software that was apparently deficit or defective was implemented. How much testing was done? What instructions and requirements were used as the basis for this software?
Ian Decker writes: What a joke. Who started robodebt? Labor. Who is paying for the royal commission? We are. What a waste of money. How about running the country not witch-hunting each other with our money.
On a royal commission into Scott Morrison’s secret ministries
Jo Vallentine writes: While I appreciated Leslie Cannold’s call for a royal commission into the Morrison ministry machinations, I suggest that any inquiry should probe much deeper: into the long-standing secrecy of the agreement between the Liberal Party and the National Party whenever they form government. The Australian public is in the dark when it comes to their deals/agreements.
We’ve had two achingly awful examples of the power of the Nationals in recent times: their holding the whole country (even the world?) to ransom over a climate policy. And anyone who saw the agonising interview with Barnaby Joyce on Insiders on August 28 would be left in no doubt that if he or any other National had let the public know what Morrison was up to, they’d lose a ministry and all the perks that go with it.
Wayne Levi writes: The very nature of a man who has continued to lie through his teeth most of his prime ministership should be questioned. The chances of Morrison being let off the hook after this power grab is nothing short of shocking. Any calls to hold him to account by implementing a royal commission seriously needs consideration.
On the ‘paranoid, delusional, deceitful’ Morrison
Patrick O’Hara writes: The Liberal Party is guilty by association. Federal Liberal MPs are obviously prepared to accept the unethical, immoral, incompetent behaviour of their fellow members and their leaders. Are Liberals born, or are they created by the Young Liberals and nurtured from a very early age?
Vanessa Trengove writes: Scott Morrison. What can I say. To start with I was deceived on the night of his election and charmed by his “I believe in miracles” declaration. It didn’t take long for the mask to come off, and for me to work out this is a two-faced leader, a wolf in sheep’s clothing.
As in every good restaurant, school, family or business what’s going on at the top flows down. Let’s see if you can get out of this one, Scott Morrison. You will reap what you sowed, and God will not be mocked. You’re a disgrace to democracy in Australia.
Barry Welch writes: Maybe Morrison is the result of what now passes for our democratic process. HL Mencken wrote in the 1920s: “As democracy is perfected, the office of the president represents, more and more closely, the inner soul of the people … On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their hearts desire at last and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron.” We can possibly understand why the US got Donald Trump, but how was the Australian soul so corrupted that we ended up with Morrison?
Bill Leigh writes: After a decade of misunderstandings and malfeasances, misogynies and manipulations, misrepresentations and malpractices, proselytising and presumptions, favouritisms and faux policies, the long-suffering, we now wait for the climactic revelations from the leadership group of the fraught shadow government, still on its training wheels. The once powerful so-called Coalition is playing in Australia’s second XI of power, demonstrating not one iota of care for good government, effective opposition, positive cooperation or plans for progress or vision.
We all know politics stinks, but if it walks, sounds and smells like a duck, it really is a duck — so we can be assured Morrison’s exit will be that of a very fat duck as he drags a bulging wallet of entitlements into his rest-of-lifetime, non-government activities.
On a former PM who was sent from God
John Russell writes: The Christian hypocrite Morrison still believes he was appointed to the position of PM by his god, and therefore had the divine authority to make any decision he thought appropriate. But when one compares the teachings of Jesus to Morrison’s attitude towards First Nations peoples who still live under white colonial Christian oppression after being ethnically cleansed by the delusionist thugs of this barbaric religion, or to refugees demonised by the Christians John Howard, Tony Abbott and Morrison and their governments, or to the Afghans who supported this country’s military in yet another illegal/immoral war, one finds that Morrison is spitting in the face of Jesus after the Romans nailed him to a fucking tree. If Jesus is actually the God he will regard white Australia as an ongoing war crime. Morrison was pathetic as a politician, pathetic as PM, and even more pathetic as a Christian.
On Morrison’s phantom ministries
Jules Pennell writes: What I don’t understand is how does one cease to be a minister of the crown? Do ministers have to be “sworn out” or decommissioned? For example, in a cabinet reshuffle minister A is moved from department B to department C and is sworn in as minister of department C. But what stops that minister’s relationship with department B? If it is simply when another minister is sworn in as minister of department B, doesn’t it follow that when Morrison was sworn in to five other ministries, the incumbent ministers ceased to be minister?
On what would Richard Nixon say …
John Gleeson writes: Richard Nixon excused his behaviour by relating how he could have done the easy thing (i.e. leave Vietnam) but did the hard thing (bombed Cambodia back to the Stone Age). Morrison’s incredible press conference was a rerun of this. Did he really expect anyone to believe his bullshit? My observations of this profoundly amoral huckster led me to seriously doubt that his religion is anything other than a convenient cover for his excesses — if his religious fervour became a hindrance, it would be just another stance to be discarded. A total charlatan.
On the governor-general’s do’s and don’ts
Christie Reid writes: The usually reliable Michael Bradley has it wrong on this occasion. The governor-general has not been compromised by acting on the advice of the prime minister in appointing the PM to extra ministries. It is not the role of the governor-general to refuse to act on the PM’s advice, absent something illegal; nor is it the role of the governor-general to check whether the government has published administrative arrangements orders.
After 1975 — and John Kerr in particular — the public and political expectation is that governors-general perform their roles and act on the advice of the prime minister, except perhaps in extreme circumstances such as where the prime minister asks the governor-general to do something illegal or improper. Such was not the case here. And it is factually wrong to say “the secrecy was indefensible”. There is no evidence that the governor-general was told that the appointments were secret and would not be made public in the usual way.
A Sandi Nielsen writes: Who else within the federal glass bowl is not required to maintain an accurate account of their daily activities? The indicators for a federal ICAC appear even more urgent.
On when will we stop talking about Morrison
Harry Collins writes: I think Morrison should stay in Parliament as a constant reminder of what you will get if you vote Liberal. The Liberals can’t do anything about him; if they vote to kick him out, they admit they got it wrong when they put him as leader of their party. And if they let him stay, they show that they think what he did was OK and have learnt nothing. Either way, Labor can’t believe its luck!
If something in Crikey has pleased, annoyed or inspired you, let us know by writing to letters@crikey.com.au. Please include your full name to be considered for publication. We reserve the right to edit for length and clarity.
