Scott tells us he is rather important and considering he is Prime Minister of Australia, he is probably correct to a large extent. Scott wants everyone to like him and when the election happens sometime in the next few months, Scott wants us all to dutifully go to the Polling Place and support the local Coalition candidate, because he leads the Coalition Government and has the best interests of Australia at heart. In Scott’s world view ‘Everything is awesome
The problem is that those few who aspire to a life of public service in Parliament (it was, and it could again be a noble profession) may observe that Scott is the at the pinnacle of that particular career path. When choosing a career, people are frequently told to observe those already at the higher echelons of the particular calling and emulate them. Emulating Scott is probably not a particularly good plan.
Scott became Prime Minister in 2018 when Peter Dutton challenged then current Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull for the job. How Scott ended up in the Prime Minister’s Office is still somewhat of a mystery, with Scott telling anyone who asked the question that he didn’t challenge for the job despite winning the second time Dutton challenged Turnbull. While Dutton may have lost the challenge, does Scott really expect us to believe that a group of his colleagues just decided on a whim that he would make a good boss? Short of there being pixies with a political mindset being resident in Parliament House to spread ‘good vibes’, Scott must have put his hand up and ‘done the numbers’ at some point to charge past Turnbull and Dutton to claim the ‘prize’.
Scott voted over 20 times against a Royal Commission into the Banking and Finance sector which was set up when he was Treasurer. Then when he relented, he vetted a draft of the letter from the major banks the Government used as justification for an enquiry
and potentially colluded with the major banks’ senior management on the terms of the enquiry. Scott’s Coalition Government has agreed to accept all the recommendations; notice there is nothing about implementation? As Jack Waterford wrote in The Canberra Times
he tries to accentuate the positive and the ultimate outcomes. He insists that even if he let the cock crow 22 times, he deserves the credit for ultimately giving in to demands for an inquiry. Sure, it was a bit late, but it was ultimately held and made recommendations the government pretends it has accepted, he and the government can be trusted to see them through.
Scott’s Coalition Government recently lost a legislative vote in the Federal Parliament allowing for slightly more humane treatment of refugees held in New Guinea and Nauru at the behest of the Australian Government. Rather than advise the Governor-General that his government has lost the confidence of the Parliament and an election should be called, like the last two Prime Ministers who suffered the same fate (in 1941 and 1929 — so it doesn’t happen often), Scott doubled down on a campaign suggesting that the ‘security risks’ inherent in bringing refugees to Australia for medical care will unleash the hounds, hordes of locusts, murderers, rapists and destruction unknown to mankind on our fair land (maybe a bit of exaggeration there, but you get the drift . . .). The reality is that the legislation Scott lost the vote on only affects those already in New Guinea or Nauru, who have been in Australian detention for a number of years. Scott’s government hasn’t done much to address the ‘security risks’ inherent in the 64,000 who the Immigration Department know have overstayed their visas, some for over 20 years
while demonising a small group that didn’t use a 747 to ‘illegally’ enter the country. Overstaying your visa is illegal, unlike asking for asylum.
Toby Wright, writing for Nine media
recently made a comparison between Mick Young, a Minister in the Hawke Government of the 1980’s and Scott’s Government. Young, who neglected to declare a stuffed Paddington Bear at Customs in 1984, was confronted with his crime and promptly stood down from the Ministry until investigations were concluded. Scott’s Government include Ministers that seem to be connected with a mindboggling litany of unethical actions; the current list includes Ministers Cash
and former Minister and current Ambassador Hockey
. While some of the current scandals surrounding the government commenced before Scott became the Prime Minister, he is not blameless as resignations or ‘career breaks’ could have been requested or enforced while the facts were determined. Scott in contrast continues with his ‘Everything is Awesome
Assuming for a second there are people that really
do want to enter Parliament to represent their electorate rather than become one of the pigs in the trough, a piece of advice — Scott is not someone you should attempt to emulate; don’t be like Scott.
What do you think?