Wall St was down 94 overnight, its biggest fall in a month, while the local market is down 66.
Mick Keelty: master of blame dodging
|
In 1970, when Andrew Peacock’s then wife appeared in an advertisement for sheets, Peacock offered to resign. John Gorton, sensibly, told him to forget about it, despite crusty old timers claiming it was an outrage. That was probably the height of the doctrine of ministerial responsibility in Australia. We’ve come a long way since then. The doctrine took a battering under Paul Keating, when not only was Graham Richardson restored to public office after the Marshall Islands affair, but Bob Collins declined to take the fall for the pay TV licence auction debacle, blaming his department. John Howard promised to restore the idea that ministers were held to high standards of conduct, and watched with horror as he lost five frontbenchers in rapid succession. He more than made up for it afterward, with blatant misleading of Parliament, wilful ignorance, tolerance of corrupt conduct and blame-shifting to unaccountable ministerial staff becoming par for the course. To date, not a single person has been called to account for Australia’s biggest corruption scandal, AWB. This shift away from accountability has been paralleled in the language of management consultants in the last two decades. In seminars and three-day residential courses and executive love-ins across the public and private sectors, well-remunerated consultants have talked about how things go wrong not because people screw up but because of systemic faults, of cultures, of poor decision-making processes, of mistakes in resources management and allocation. Kevin Rudd has yet to be put to the test Howard faced because he has maintained an iron discipline amongst his ministers. Only Joel Fitzgibbon has come close to touching the void and then because his own bureaucracy dumped him in it. If he’d been in the Fraser Government — unlikely, since he would have been about 14 — that would have been the end of him. Rudd’s ministerial guidelines make it clear — as Howard’s did — that the issue of whether a minister stands aside or resigns because they have breached the guidelines is one for Rudd to decide. There are no clear-cut hanging offences in the guidelines. Even misleading of Parliament must merely be rectified as soon as practicable. But the lack of accountability appears to have descended yet further, as if pulled by gravity. No-one in the Defence Department or in uniform resigned over the SAS pay debacle, despite an apparently blatant contravention of a Ministerial directive and the subsequent humiliation of the Minister. And then there’s AFP Police Commissioner Mick Keelty. Keelty is remarkable in his capacity to blame others for the AFP’s mistakes. After the Haneef affair, Keelty blamed everyone else — the media (whom he proposed to prevent reporting such cases), Haneef’s lawyers, Haneef himself, Scotland Yard, the DPP — for the debacle when his own officers were the ones responsible for leaking material against Haneef, fabricating evidence and demanding he be charged without any basis. The AFP also later tried to avoid cooperating with the commission established to investigate what happened. Not that Haneef was the only beneficiary of the AFP’s particularly inept form of persecution. The false imprisonment and illegal interrogation of Izhar ul-Haque by ASIO agents — another breach of an individual’s most basic rights that has escaped appropriate redress — occurred with the concurrence and participation of the AFP. Now there’s the weekend’s events at Sydney Airport. Thankfully they were only bikies intent on attacking one of their own. Terrorists could have killed hundreds and been heading off in a Silver Service cab before Keelty’s Keystone cops arrived, the only threat being those sinister chauffeurs who try to foist rental cars on you when you walk through Departures. The CCTV system wasn’t even working properly. It is probably also worth remembering that Qantas apparently doesn’t mind you using your mobile phone while in flight if you’re a large, muscular male with a group of mates. Must remember that next time I’m told to turn my iPod off for safety reasons. Rather like the Chaser guys exposing APEC security as a sham, yet again we’ve seen that the national security state twaddle promoted by both the Howard and Rudd Governments is aimed at show and at inconveniencing ordinary people going about their business rather than offering any sort of genuine barrier to people determined to inflict harm. But Keelty clearly refuses to accept the idea that he is responsible for significant problems in the AFP. “I don’t want to get into the blame game,” he said yesterday, conveniently. “It’s about getting this better for next time round.” Law enforcement as a journey of self-improvement. Try that line if you’re ever charged by the AFP. But Keelty may figure that if it’s good enough for politicians to duck responsibility, then it’s good enough for chief executives. And he may be right in doing so. This is the consequence of the slow evaporation of responsibility in our political culture under both sides of politics. Keelty didn’t install the CCTV cameras. He didn’t prepare the security plan for Sydney Airport. Why should he resign, any more than Bob Debus or Robert McClelland should? But if so, who is in charge? Who is responsible? The system? Management culture? Structural issues? We’ve ended up with a system where responsibility is so diffused that there’s no accountability. And accountability isn’t just about finding out who caused something to go wrong, it’s about maintaining the pressure to prevent errors in the first place. Only one death. But only luck prevented there being more — of bystanders, of kids, of an airport employee reluctantly figuring it was their job to intervene in the absence of police. And no-one responsible. “It’s about getting this better for next time round.” |
|
|
21 Comments
Anyone who gives Mick Keelty the benefit of the doubt is a fool. His cowardly boasts, along with senior officers who fronted the media as they gleefully told of the Bali Nine bust demonstrated this fool is will not only avoid any responsibily but is a great danger to the safety of all Australians. He claims credit for crimes solved by overseas forces-his forces are infused with a untouchable infallibility, fosted by fawning politicians.
Let’s be clear-although terrorists could well attack any airport, our responses and even evidence gathering of such an horendous crime of a man being beaten to death in front og 100’s is woeful.
Yet the media have indulged in an orgy of self congratulation over the NSW police pursuit of a former judge avoiding a speeding ticket ?. Does anyone actually understand about prioritising ?
Where is the intelligence ? Where is the prevention ?. There isn’ ‘t any. How many Allan Kessings do we need ?. How many Haneefs ? How many AWB scandals ?. The AFP are a nasty bunch who with the ASIO mugs can get away with anything because Attorney Generals continue to allow them to prosper despite their failings. Robert McClelland has already implied his role is to protect the Commonwelath.-but not from the illegal actions of bent cops-just from compensation claims they may cause.
And While we are at it-when will the media begin to examine the dark connections between Child Wise and the AFP and how they exert so much influence over Keelty and Stephen Conroy whilst $millions are poured into their coffers that go no-where to actually aiding a real live child in danger ?
We have fanatics in control of certain institutions and the bikie killing shows we are all at risk because of it.
If anyone thinks there won;t be a serious terorist inciodent in Asutralia they are dreaming. If they think our authorities are prepared-your’e in the dream time.
Bernard, the media report I heard was that the CCTV was working but on some five different systems which don’t coordinate, which lead to problems in court yesterday. In any case, why is it Keelty’s fault that Qantas systems are useless? Keelty deserved to be sacked over the Haneef witch-hunt/defamation situation, no arguement. Also no arguement that a terrorist incident in an Australian airport could happen, just as it could happen at a shopping centre or sporting event and kill even more civilians. But I can’t see why Keelty should be sacked or resign over the brawl at Sydney airport. In any case, if no one had died, the whole situation would have blown over by now. It is only the fact that fatal injuries were inflicted (with a bollard, I believe) which has kept this in the news.
Dave, they could have had the cameras working properly for one thing…
And press reports suggest that weapons were brought into the departure lounge area. A source has told us the scanning staff handled themselves creditably during the brawl. But it’s a significant concern if weapons were brought through, given the whole purpose of that apparatus is to stop them.
Yes you can’t prevent a bunch of people gathering with the intent of engaging in violence without prior intel. But not at a place which has been the focus of tens of millions of dollars worth of security measures for several years.
I should have noted also that Qantas owns the terminal at which the events occurred. I’ve seen some comments suggesting Mac Airports does, but that’s not the case.
From Grapes of Wrath (movie version) -
An agent for the Shawnee Land and Cattle Company tells a Joad neighbor, Muley Graves, that they’re being evicted:
Muley’s son (Hollis Jewell): Who’s fault is it?
Agent: You know who owns the land. The Shawnee Land and Cattle Company.
Mulley: And who’s the Shawnee Land and Cattle Company?
Agent: It ain’t nobody. It’s a company.
Mulley’s son: They got a President, ain’t they. They got somebody who knows what a shotgun’s for, ain’t they?
Agent: Oh son, it ain’t his fault, because the bank tells him what to do.
Agent Tulsa: What’s the use of pickin’ on him? He ain’t nothin/ but the manager. And he’s half-crazy hisself tryin’ to keep up with his orders from the East.
Muley: Then who do we shoot?
Agent: Brother, I don’t know. If I did, I’d tell ya. I just don’t know who’s to blame.
Who is in charge? Who is responsible? Possibly airport management, and ultimately the Macquarie Bank.
It rarely seems to get mentioned that when governments flog public assets they are also washing their hands of responsibility for when things go wrong. Parking charges too high? Blame MacBank. Murder committed in full view of security guards? Blame MacBank. Never the government who flogged the airport in the first place.
I recently travelled through some major airports in Europe where armed police are constantly patrolling. Blind freddy could not have missed their presence. Being Australian I did find it confronting at first but it actually made me feel very safe.
Only a moronic idiot would try their chances with these guys. Maybe as Australians we need to get over our ‘she’ll be right mate’ attitude and consider the examples being practised overseas.
Keelty deserves to go for a lot of reasons (Haneef being the biggest), but this is far from the top of that list. The CCTV is unlikely to be a Federal Police responsibility, and although the Federal Police are part of the schmozzle that is overall airport security management again they didn’t ask for it to be this way. As a society, we can choose to protect ourselves from the unlikely possibility of “terrorism” by going complete police overkill (in every sense of that word) or we can choose to accept that having civil liberties means that we are at slightly increased risk of being caught up in something. I’ll choose the latter any day. Bernard is right that both the Howard and Rudd governments anti-terrorist efforts are more about show than substance, but again this is not Keelty’s fault. What would Bernard want changed?
Mick Keelty is the top police officer. If there are problems and it results in the kind of situation arising in Sydney he should resign as being incapable of fulfilling his role.
His attitude leaves a lot to be desired and he isn’t fit for the job. Why doesn’t he have police stationed at the Airport as happens in other vulnerable areas?
It makes me sick that as a result of this debacle there are calls to introduce new draconian laws when the police cannot even manage with the ones we have at the moment.
Time to take the fall Mick.
The most telling point is ” What if it had been a terrorist attack?”. Hundred dead and inadequate CCTV to consider matters as we bury the dead. The incompetence displayed by all parts of the security system is a national disgrace. Clearly, the AFP et al are working on the approach that intelligence will given them advance warning to bring staff back from lunch or filling out forms to address a possible attack. The British do not adopt such an approach at Heathrow.
Mick Keelty- master of the hospital handpass.
Remember Mick Young’s undeclared teddy bear import? And Liberal ministers Moore and Mackellar’s colour TVs in 1981? They were shot at dawn (the ministers, not the luggage…). Now we are protected by vision and mission statements, whistleblower legislation, FOI, etc., but these days the Koperbergs and Keeltys would have to mug Prince Phillip in a lift to get the boot. (Well, Princess Anne then…)
The culture of avoiding accountability goes right to the bottom, the vast murky depths of councils, provincial govt. departments and obscure “authorities”. In fact it’s much worse down here. Kafka rules, not least because the urban critics couldn’t give a stuff. We need to revise our crikerions of newsworthiness. Try to get even a brief letter to the ed. published in Melb. about, say, the cesspit of corruption known as Ballarat Council (pre-2008). I could go on, but you’re not interested….(sobs, fondles 12 bore crowd-pleaser…)
Keelty’s capacity to dodge even the most remote form of responsibility is well known. Bernard’s quite well-crafted article concerning the diminishing role of democracy’s “Westminster system” of responsibility paints a picture so often portayed in the past by a well known author…The author’s name? Franz Kafka, of course.
The reality is that if Al-quaeda or the bikies strike at our airports or anywhere else the damage inflicted will be done and dusted before any police or other emergency personnel reach the scene. The alarming aspect of this particular incident is the alleged offenders escape - via vast expanses of crowded public space, down escalators and out onto a one-way road chockas with people and traffic to flag a cab!! For Mick Keelty to offer salve to Australians on their safety is in expert hands is utter rubbish. It’s really time to quit the spin, scrub the security veneer and let us take our chances with travel as before.
As quoted below…’Personally, I’m not opposed to machine-gun carrying cops in airports, as is seen in many countries…….’
Mmmmm…let us think this over…machine guns in a confined, crowded public space…..methinks that the sort of people who make that sort of proposition have not seen what automatic weapons can do.
Frank, while I agree with every word you’ve written, what’s the remedy? The Federal cops were on scene within a few minutes, with a large number on the scene about 10 minutes after the first 000 calls were made. Hopefully they’d have been on-scene faster in the event of a terrorism incident than a brawl between a handful of blokes.
Personally, I’m not opposed to machine-gun carrying cops in airports, as is seen in many countries (how funny is the scene in the second Bazza McKenzie film where they shoot up his stash of Fosters?). Many Aussies would regard it as over-the-top, though.
Alright John Roberts, perhaps you can list a single example of an overseas airport with heavily armed police where their automatic weapons have accidently or deliberately discharged and resulted in the problems you describe?
I’m repeating myself but my point seems to stand: Keelty should have gone by now - Haneef and the Bali 9 are two good examples of when he should have gone - but the security mess at Sydney airport is the responsibility of government and private sector failures way beyond his control.
Throwing technology, such as CCTV and screening systems at the problem is not the answer. Neither is dreaming up a new list of things the long-suffering public cannot carry onto planes. It’s surprising what the ‘body’ screening system misses. It has never picked up a plate in my arm (titanium / stainless steel, I think (that I should get around to having removed)) or my watch (titanium case)
And removing laptops from cases. Why laptops? Phones, power supplies, external hard drives, sat nav systems, diabetic injection systems all seem to be ok. Bah.
Sydney Airport is well-known for the capacity of security to pick people up for the most ordinary of offences: staying too long parked at arrivals, a knitting needle in your carry-on, that sort of thing. It could be argued that the absence (until now) of real danger at the airport has caused the guards to focus too much on the petty, and lose sight of the big stuff. When something major happens, they’re too focussed on the banal to react appropriately. I’m not making excuses for Keelty, but maybe some basic “this is a real situation” training is what’s needed to shake them out of their stupor.
It’s quite clear what side of the political spectrum Peter O’Brien belongs to and moreover that his views are extreme. He has baldly stated that Keelty has acted in contravention to the law and his sworn duty.
What evidence have you got to that accusation Peter O’Brien? Because it is an accusation and a libellous one at that. What is not is an known fact nor even an accepted innuendo.
Keelty was appropriately heavily criticised with respect to the Haneef debacle and his comments in relation to the Sydney airport gang brutality were, like Peter O’Brien’s, at best naive, certainly stupid and possibly delinquent.
I agree entirely with BK’s point about the erosion of personal responsibility for systemic outcomes and accountability for failures. This trend is of course not confined to political, governmental and corporate arenas but has trickled down to the individual who, in all too many instances, is more than ready to blame others and expect compensation for their own stupid acts of commission or omission.
While Mick Keelty’s apparent insouciance is typical of the above, in fairness it is difficult to protect the public against the dreadful thuggery at Sydney Airport. The airport is simply a public place where many people congregate and no one could have anticipated what occurred, any more than they could have in a shopping mall, cinema complex, railway station, hotel or public street. The more pertinent question, as BK suggests, is are we exposed to a Mumbai-style terrorist attack? In the absence of good advance intelligence, one would have to think we are.
It is an interesting fact that the only person who suffered any form of detriment for the Haneef fiasco (apart from the victim, Dr Haneef) was a lawyer, Clive Porritt, the prosecutor, who faced some form of public service discipline.
The only other person who faced an individual accountability process was me. At Mr Keelty’s behest, I was investigated by the Queensland Legal Services Commissioner but the complaint was dismissed.
I may not be completely objective but “ironic” springs to mind.
Keelty allowed himself to be used by the Howard Government in the Haneef case…………he should have had the decency to resign after trying to, and failing to set up Haneef.