A politician was caught out misleading parliament again. Some seem to think this is not much ado about anything. Others seem to think that it is something when a major piece of legislation is rushed through parliament and it that the public was somehow misinformed.
Costello’s argument is that:
“A report was carried in The Australian on November 5, 2005, which said that there had been specially commissioned advice from the Treasury and … not me, but Treasury put out a statement saying that there hadn’t been specially commissioned advice from the Treasury in relation to that.
This is not the first time a department has taken the fall for the failings of a minister. Nor the first time a minister seems blissfully unaware of what is going on in his own department on important matters.
Christian Kerr in Crikey points out the obvious:
McKinnon and Lewis have another story:
According to the documents obtained, a Treasury executive minute on the workplace relations policy was sent to Mr Costello on October 6. It argued the “economic case for reform”, including expectations of higher employment growth, while claiming that productivity would initially be “suppressed.”
Treasury pointedly argued that wages growth would be slower under the new industrial relations system.
So… Does this mean Costello misled the House or isn’t doing his paperwork properly?
Either way it is pretty damning. If he misled the House on such an important issue he should resign. One aspect of the debate over the IR reform has been the distinct lack of economic evidence presented by the pro-side. The best argument seemed to be “Trust us. We know what we are doing.� Evidently any trust was misplaced. The IR reforms represent significant changes for the workplace and should have been debated with openness and honesty and not through deception or gagging debate.
On the other hand, if Costello’s paperwork or lack of knowledge regarding what his department it up is at fault then that is no excuse. I would very dubious of a Treasurer who, in the course of formulating major economic policy, fails to consult his department. If that is the case then the Treasury seems to have no purpose for the Treasurer in terms of advice.
Finally Costello (ignoring his department again)
….. questioned the accuracy of the Treasury documents, which show the workplace changes passed by Parliament in early December will deliver smaller wage rises for low income earners and cut productivity in the short term.
I wonder what economic papers the Costello did or did not read to arrive at such a conclusion? And would he tell us anyway?
Cross posted at The 52nd State
Recent comments
marty, marty, marty, marty, Tyro Rex, Tyro Rex [...]
Mark, skepticlawyer, Mark, Brett, Lefty E, Bernice [...]
Mark, MichaelH, Mark, GregM, patrickm, Michael [...]
Marlon, patrickm, yeti, Michael, Blogreader, Chris [...]
Katz, feral sparrowhawk, Helen, Mark, The Amazing Kim, Adrien [...]
Adrien, Fine, Adrien, Mark, Labor Outsider
zorronsky, Darin, Adrian of Nowra, Marlon, Adrien, Nickws [...]
Sacha, Pliny the Younger, Penthe, j_p_z, Liam, j_p_z [...]
RobWindt, wizofaus, Tyro Rex, UNRR, carbonsink, David Irving (no relation) [...]
dave, Dr S, GB, Dr S, GB, Liam [...]
Liam, Mark
Adrien, Adrien, MikeM, Desipis, Katz, Kingsley [...]