Larvatus Prodeo

A lot of the argy bargy over Jonestown has been about the issue of Jones’ sexuality. This debate has diverted attention from the more important questions about Jones conduct, influence and accountability in relation to Federal and State politics. Margaret Simons writes in today’s Crikey:

But outing is not by a country mile the most important thing in the book. James Packer is wrong when he says the book lacks substance. David Flint is also wrong, or at least misleadingly selective, when he implies in today’s Australian that the book rests on anonymous sources and is entirely to do with s-xuality.

Masters’s work is clearly based on dozens of interviews with people directly involved in events, and almost every assertion is footnoted. (In a nice twist, one of the sources credited frequently is an earlier interview with Jones by Gerard Henderson – who has been one of Masters’s critics.) Most significant, Masters has had a huge “leakâ€? of Jones’s correspondence with politicians.

So what else is in the book? What should we be debating? Here are a few of the well supported, meticulously researched assertions.

Jones’s intervention was instrumental in getting the NSW Police Commissioner, Peter Ryan, sacked, and blighting the career of Assistant Commissioner Clive Small who was, Masters says, “better at catching crooks� than ingratiating himself with Jones. As a result, the program to tackle serious corruption in the NSW police force was largely derailed, and the mentally unstable Timothy Priest elevated to the status of martyr, hero and authority on policing matters.

Jones took on the role of publicist for the convicted murderer Andrew Kalajzich, forcing two public inquiries into his conviction, at a cost of about $5 million, when there was no evidentiary basis to doubt the conviction. At the time, Jones was using research paid for by Kalajzich, although he denied having discussions with the defence team.

Both political parties in New South Wales have regularly run policy past Jones before adopting it, and his influence has distorted policy and public life on numerous levels.

Jones has been paid, not only to advocate the interests of his commercial sponsors, but also to remain silent on development matters that might otherwise have been justifiably controversial.

Jones’ influence has blighted, and in some cases ended, the careers of many public servants whose advice went against the course he was urging on politicians

Continue reading ‘The Real Questions of Jonestown‘