From the shadows, ‘loathsome’ Labor Lunchalot fronts ICAC
The NSW Independent Commission Against Corruption is determined to nail former ex-MP Ian Macdonald on his ministerial dealings. But his patience was wearing thin today on the stand.
It’s been a stressful morning at the New South Wales Independent Commission Against Corruption for former Labor minister Ian Michael Macdonald. When he slipped into the witness box at 3pm yesterday he looked full of confidence, but today’s relentless interrogation is taking its toll.
Yesterday counsel assisting, Geoffrey Watson SC, told the former mining minister he would take him through 40 times and events. “At the end of it I’m going to show to you that you did this deliberately, you created this [mining] tenement with it in mind, to profit your friends the Obeids,” he said.
ICAC is investigating allegations Macdonald made improper decisions about mining leases which could enrich the family of his friend and political ally Eddie Obeid by somewhere between $75-175 million. It’s been alleged Macdonald stood to receive $4 million in return.
We are now up to point number 14, and it does feel as though the former leading light of the NSW Left faction is slowly sinking into quicksand.
Yesterday he said he had decided that Mt Penny, on the Obeid land, would be the site of a new mining tenement because he had simply found it in the atlas. Today he is denying he instructed the relevant government department to create this new tenement, against expert advice that more investigation was necessary. Two public servants have already given evidence that Macdonald instructed them to “create a Mt Penny tenement”.
The former politician is also denying he had told cabinet, the Parliament or his colleagues about the decision, claiming he hadn’t known the Mt Penny tenement was on the Obeid’s property. “The first time I heard about it was in the paper [The Sydney Morning Herald],” he said.
Heavy-set, bald, with a neck like a rhino, the 63-year-old radiates aggression and disdain in equal quantities, with the occasional flash of nerves. His constant bluster and obfuscation is testing the patience of the commissioner, David Ipp QC, who has described his evidence as “tiresome and time wasting”.
There has been quite a bit of argy-bargy at the bar table — “just answer the question!”; “will Mr Watson stop shouting!” — until Watson asked a question about a previous witness, whom he described as an “honest man of great integrity”.
“And so am I,” Macdonald snapped, bringing the hearing room to a stunned silence. “I won’t comment on that,” Watson replied.
Macdonald is the biggest star of this inquiry. Last year ICAC investigated his receipt of services from Asian s-x worker “Tiffanie”, paid for by property developer and murder suspect Ron Medich. It’s alleged Macdonald received s-xual favours in return for introducing businessmen to the heads of government departments. No findings have been made in that matter.
In a way, both Macdonald and Obeid are reminiscent of many of the politicians in Papua New Guinea: their only reason for entering parliament is to gather money to enrich their tribes. In PNG, this behaviour is cultural. But Macdonald does not even pretend to have an ideology, changing allegiances on crucial Labor policy like electricity privatisation simply in order to gain influence. In Parliament for 22 years, he finally left following a public outcry over travel rorts and excessive entertainment expenses, which had earned him the nickname “Sir Lunchalot”.
It’s a long way from the Housing Commission flat in rural Victoria Macdonald grew up in with his four siblings after their father deserted them. His mother eked out a living as a housekeeper in Catholic presbyteries, impressing on young Ian the importance of education.
He worked hard at school and went to La Trobe University, where he studied history and threw himself into campus politics, joining the ALP. After graduation, Macdonald worked as a research officer in the Senate before moving to NSW to spend a decade working for then-attorney-general Frank Walker, organising to shore up Walker’s position with the Left faction. By 1988 he was appointed to the upper house of the NSW Parliament, giving a rather prescient maiden speech in which he expressed misgivings about plans for an independent commission to investigate corruption.
He has his detractors on both sides of the fence. A few years ago, Nationals leader Andrew Stoner described Macdonald as a “repeat offender when it comes to feathering his own nest at the expense of taxpayers and looking after his mates”.
But the best description of him comes from an unnamed member of his own party, quoted in 2009. “Macdonald,” they said, “was one of the most loathsome people in Australian public life, an orthodox right-winger masquerading under the ‘hard Left’ banner, a man who operates from the shadows.”










I don’t like these witchhunts and Margot should not buy into this sort of tabloid crap.
Claims made and statements made without substantial evidence are not facts yet.
If there was really a criminal case why go to the stupidity of this? I remember all the media hyperventilating over the corruption committed by Brian Burke claimed in WA but so far he has been cleared of any wrong doing at all.
Saville and Crikey need to remember three little letters - AWB.
Then ask who got charged for what the entire world knows is a terrible crime that cost tens of thousands of lives and enriched our spiv. farmers in the process.
Didn’t John Atkinson, and John McGuigan and Travers stand to make the most money out of this whole deal?
Don’t get me wrong MacDonald and Obied appear to deserve what may be coming to them, but the old lawyers and miners seem to have a lot more to gain.
In a drug investigation they would primarily go for the Mr Big not the dealer, or corrupt cop. Will this be the same?
Sometimes I wonder if it wouldn’t be better to hypnotise these “witlesses”, that way they’d remember a lot more?
“Cargo cult” has no repect for party boundary.
Klewso, no truer words have been spoken. With the pro “CSG or bust” government now in NSW, I shudder to be around in 10 years when the full effect of this environmental vandalism remains long after the perpetrators have taken the money and run, for the poor residents and tax payers paying the $bill.
Of course Ian Michael Macdonald did all of this purely out of the goodness of his heart towards Edie Obeid. In no way did he hope to profit by the latter’s good fortune. No not at all, at all.
Macdonalds handling of the equine flu in 2007. Overcompensation and “special circumstances” catagories for the vested interests that introduced the virus. Now a class action being mounted that will presumeably do the same more compensation the rich, very rich.
Venise, statements of claim are not facts of wrong doing, If there was a crime they should have charged them straight out without this bullshit.
shepherdmarilyn suggests this ICAC inquiry is a witchhunt. Whilst I despair of ICAC’s lack of real teeth, I am somewhat bewildered by the use of the term ‘witchhunt’, which suggests that this particular inquiry is being undertaken to persecute MacDonald and the Obeids with little regard to their actual guilt or innocence. Is sherherdmarilyn really suggesting these public officials are poor misunderstood innocents who should not be compelled to explain decisions which, whether fraudulent or merely improper, saw millions of dollars flow into the trust accounts of Australia’s luckiest ‘farmers’? And I suspect almost all crikey readers are capable of discerning the difference between an allegation and a proven fact, and the difference between the rules of evidence at an ICAC inquiry and a criminal trial. The media, whilst certainly taking great daily delight in focussing on the more loathsome accusations, has repeatedly highlighted that the rules of evidence at ICAC are quite different to those in a criminal trial. If shepherdmarilyn is right and no charges are laid at the end of this inquiry, I will join the many who will no doubt demand that ICAC be disbanded as a waste of time and money. In the meantime I’m thoroughly enjoying the progress of this inquiry and the media coverage, and choose to live in hope that charges will be laid.
No wonder Vic gov doesn’t want politicians included in their corruption commission.
Remember that these obscenities, on either side of politics, are delivered by major party “Safe seats” won not at election but by cynical branch-stacking.
To which the four decades old international Greens principle of grass-roots participatory democracy has long offered an ignored remedy.
What??? “Don’t think twice, it’s alright”.
Go back to sleep.
SHEPHERDMARILYN: Where abouts’ did I say they were facts of wrong doing?
Now here is where I will say something you can quote. Macdonald moves with the pent up aggression of a nightclub bouncer. He resorts to a rictus smile to conceal the content of his eyes. He looks like a thug, therefore one can only assume he’s had years of practice.
If you have had anything to do with litigation you will know it takes years for the legal practice to kick into gear.
Cheer up. The crooks always win.
PS: Penultimate line to read…’it takes years for the legal process to kick into gear.’
I like to buy in to the information relied on by the peoples court of public opinion. A political venue, where the truth is taken as that perceived by the voters who will in time make their verdict know by exercising their own votes at ballot boxes across this Great Nation. Dan de lyons you of all people. Must understand voters must use the court of public opinion as a venue where we may identify which political weeds we need to pull from our garden bed of democracy. Hamis Hill When we read of branch stacking it is usually happening in one or the other of the “two parties not much preferred”. We the people are readying ourselves for the federal ballot box. We have I think enough to guide us toward a good ruling in the peoples court of public opinion! all of us should be putting Labor last on any ballot paper because it is clear Labor Party members nationally have demonstrated their intention to change. It is entirely up to Australians to exercise their own votes, by numbering boxes below the line. Directing their own preferences and putting Labor dead wood last. Edward James
It’s a bit of a reach for someone to suggest this is a witchhunt.
Just one paragraph,the one on Mt Penny: Macdonald claims he found the place “in an atlas” and denied creating the tenement,against advice. Two PSs contradict him in testimony.
If that is not disturbing,what is? If that does not demand examination,what does?