Morrison gaslights integrity commission

More Morrison corruption today:

Prime Minister Scott Morrison has opened a new front in the debate over a national integrity commission, declaring Australia could become an unrecognisable “public autocracy” if such a body is given too much influence over government decision-making.

With Labor, the Greens and the “teal” independents campaigning hard on the need for a new integrity body, Morrison emphasised the risks of handing sweeping powers to unelected officials in an interview with the Herald and The Age.

NSW Premier Dominic Perrottet hit back at Morrison’s repeated attacks on the state’s anti-corruption commission on Tuesday, warning debate should not damage public trust in the agency.

The twisted logic is a complete waste of everybody’s time:

  • A popularly elected body installs checks and balances on itself.
  • This prevents such activity as corruption and pork-barreling, neither of which is in the national interest.
  • In Morrison’s illogic, this results in a “public autocracy” ruling mercilessly over the popularly elected government that installed it.

The circularity is absurd. The self-interest is brazen. The corruption hiding in plain sight.

This is the same gaslighting behind which Morrison has hidden sexual assaults in parliament, repeated pandemic failure, foreign policy disaster, climate change inertia, and private rorting on a scale never before seen in Australian history and that is saying something.

Arch conservative Concetta Fierravanti-Wells had it right. Morrison is unfit to be PM:


Houses and Holes
Latest posts by Houses and Holes (see all)


  1. The BystanderMEMBER

    My favourite argument so far against a federal ICAC is the ‘suffering’ that people have experienced at its hands. I’m sure Gladys is traumatised for life after the ICAC revealed that she was covering up her boyfriend’s corrupt conduct. I mean, look at her now in her cushy Optus job – look how the ICAC crushed her hopes and dreams, leaving her a destitute pariah…

    • kierans777MEMBER

      It’s more about that Morrison only wants the perks of public life, but not the scrutiny. Public hearings help keep faith with the public.

      As the Liberals are fond of saying, if you’ve got nothing to hide you should worry about the government invading your privacy 😉😉

    • Christopher Pyne wrote a long winded piece of drivel (no, I won’t link newscorp) not long ago about a federal ICAC being a really bad idea because it would have to justify its existence by finding corruption.

      That really took the cake for me.

      Why do we fund the police then? They might go looking for crime!

      • Well, define corruption!
        Surely, the Motherfixer wouldn’t think that Lewd Nepotist Pigs fcuking in the Parliament Prayer Room are corrupt per se.

    • Autocracy or bustMEMBER

      From the govt that pursues whistle blowers who expose things like bugging East Timor for gas prices, and others until the end of time, and uses defamation cases as a weapon to quiet people, pork barrels to a whole new level, let alone introduces robodebt,
      where is the “autocracy” coming from, when autocracy involves oppression of the plebs. Don’t want any respectable legal people poking around with torches in the funding and lobbying.

      • The govt wants no light on their reported doings with the public’s money.
        For the punters they have different rules –
        Actually the punters should have the right to privacy until you are reasonably suspected or reported of an illegal activity. Until then the govt should have no right to access your data without a warrant, unless they have autocratic tendencies, for example taking peoples phones at the airport without a warrant, or robodebt.

    • Stoics love that stuff until the spotlight is put on them…then there is all sorts of grab-bag reasons why the light shouldn’t be on them.

      The truth is, personalities like those in the LNP in particular love to move in the vagueries, as it allows them to duck-and-weave through the ‘rules’ whilst achieving their political and ideological objectives. Tight, transparent rules-based systems, contracts, etc, were made for people such as this… 🙁 It’s difficult to not come to conclusions about groups that resist such transparency and rules-based accountability…

    • drsmithyMEMBER

      There are significant gaps in the jurisdiction and investigative powers of the federal agencies responsible for scrutinising the public sector and government. No agency has the power to investigate corrupt conduct as defined by our state based commissions. No agency can investigate misconduct of MPs, ministers or the judiciary. The agencies that do have strong investigative powers, such as the federal police, can only use them when investigating criminal charges. No agency holds regular public hearings, meaning that corruption and misconduct is not properly exposed to the public.

  2. David WilsonMEMBER

    Since when do politicians not pork barrel … labor out promises at every election , increases our national debt and covers up for the union mates running a protection racket for them …the ABCC comes to mind and labor wants to close it down thus causing massive increases in union corruption and forcing up infrastructure costs by 30%
    Labor buys votes by promising all of its union mates pay rises that are uneconomic and wants more education waste whilst standards drop, labor means big government and more deficit spending … naaa nothing to see here!

Leave a reply

You must be logged in to post a comment. Log in now