Well, our collective pre-Victorian election idle speculation on what had been offered to Paul Mullett’s police union has now been answered fully. AM got the scoop, and the full document and extensive analysis are at The Age.
Tim Dunlop notes an obvious problem with the deal: the public was kept in the dark, while The Oz observes that the practice of Police Ministers doing deals directly with police unions and cutting Police Commissioners out was condemned in the Fitzgerald Enquiry.
It’s obvious that deals like this aren’t great. An equally interesting question for me, however, is why Bracks feels such a need to keep Paul Mullett on side. Law and order may have receded as a political issue a little, but it seems state governments are like rabbits in the headlights when it comes to the threat of opposition from police unions.
And it’s really dangerous that they are. It’s obviously the main reason in Victoria why there’s never been an independent inquiry into corruption, and in Qld why the CMC has lost most of its teeth when it comes to investigating/supervising police. 90% of complaints to the CMC are referred straight back to the cops. A lot of the legislative obligations of the CMC – for instance, monitoring videos of interviews, are outsourced back to the cops. Standing commissions are not panaceas. The police are a necessary evil, and I think that every state police force should get a Fitzgerald like broom swept through it once a decade. Fitzgerald also only scratched the surface in many ways – political links and corruption involving prostitution and gambling were explored, but drugs largely left alone.
Both sides of politics are shitscared of Paul Mullett and will do whatever he says in an effort to keep him happy.
This is probably due to two things: memory of Mullett’s role in bringing down Kennett and out-and-out fear of Mullett himself, who is a bona-fide thug.
This also explains why (as is pointed out in comments over at Dunlop’s) the opposition is not all over this like a rash.
This type of corrupt secret dealing should be a gift for any opposition, yet they’re extremely reluctant to kick up much of a stink about it.
Police unions are unique by virtue of the power that their members wield over the public, and their capacity to undermine very basic civil rights in their day to day work. Police deserve very good pay and conditions and the highest level of of workplace safety standards, but in no circumstances should their demands and their claims be dealt with in secret. The issue in NSW of the police allegedly being able to run businesses or work second jobs needs some proper scrutiny.
It is is inappropriate for people who work in stressful jobs involving the capacity for lethal force to be applied in that work, to be holding down two jobs. There are good reasons for limiting the length of the working day, and one of them is the capacity for tired people to make mistakes.
In the case of police, a mistake may have potentially lethal consequences. Much as their members may like to think otherwise, their role in the community means that their actions and their demands must involve much wider discussion than the same matters agitated by employees who do not wield potentially lethal force (legitimate though that may be) over their fellow citizens.
Mark re your comment:
Are they referred back to the police for investigation OR are they referred back to the relevant Departments for investigation? I admit I don’t know, but I do know a lot of complaints are both trivial and anonymous and should be dealt with at the departmental level. The results of those departmental investigations go back to the CMC.
As for the police unions; they give unionism a bad name.
Is Mullett the ideal name for a guy heading up a Police Association, or what?
This is just typical of the ALP/Unionist dishonesty and graft style of government. That we should have to pay for the defence of a bunch of drug dealing swine just so Steve Brack can park his fat, useless caboose in front of the public trough for a few years beggars belief.
Andrew, it doesn’t seem to be confined to Labor. While there are of course no state or territory Liberal governments anywhere to be seen at the moment, police unions tend to be equal-opportunity bullies.
Like I said, cozy deals between the union and the government were apparently standard operating procedure during the Joh era in Queensland.
wpd, referred to the cops. Talking about complaints about the cops, not complaints to the CMC generally.
A lot of the complaints might be minor or frivolous, but the history of the “Police Complaints Commission” under Joh suggests that it’s a bad practice to be encouraging.
Rob, not just under Joh. The Coalition gov’t which held office from 96 to 98 in Qld did a secret deal (the “memorandum of understanding”) with the Police Union just before the Mundingburra by-election which tipped Goss out of office.
Doing some digging, apparently Mullett’s efforts were “influential” in Bracks’ unexpected 1999 election win. Does anybody have more details?
Damn straight.
I spent last week sitting in the WA version, observing proceedings.
It was one of the most appalling spectacles I’ve seen in a long time. I’ve got a soft spot for the inquisitorial system of justice, but the public hearings at the CCC are an appalling travesty.
Robert -
There is no comparison. Joh worked closely with the police to ensure that Qld. remained a decent and safe place free of pornography, radical unionism and sexual perversion.
There’s nothing wrong with that.
What Steve Hacks has done has spent public money making life easier for drug dealing swine and that is a Labor thing.
Add to that the majority of The Police Association’s members who are afraid of their Association.
When is the last time you heard of the Association defending a police whistleblower? – as apposed to those they spend million$ defending – the forces usual lineup of suspected murderers, drug manufacturers and wholesalers, consorts of convicted organised crime Mr Big Enoughs and those just plain on the take.
“Is Mullett the ideal name for a guy heading up a Police Association, or what?”
It brings a smile to my face and Monkfish to mind: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YnNrwmk2RIk&mode=related&search=
Unions doing what unions do best and LPers wring their hands in mock horror. If they aren’t busy colluding with big biz to screw the consumer they’re busy colluding with big govt to screw them as taxpayers. It’s what they do dudes, which is why we should abolish their collusion and anti-competitive practices, like we do with the ACCC. Still you can’t expect those who believe in one great big union/biz/govt monopoly enterprise to ever get it. Weird dudes I suppose.