Soula Papadopoulos writes: Re. “Incurious George finds the Day detail a bit taxing” (yesterday). I think Bernard is being too harsh. The Attorney General did provide us with vital information.

He was twice able to inform Leigh Sales of the provision of the constitution that might give rise to the disqualification of Senator Day.

I am sure that there were heaps of people at home earlier last night worried that our government was falling apart, with senators dropping like flies.

I am equally sure that they all soon felt much calmer, thinking “Well, it is OK that our Attorney-General does not know anything at all about any aspect of the long history of this matter, because he does know which provision of the Constitution is in dispute, so everything is under control”.

It is not like me to quibble, but he referred to the provision as “section 44, subparagraph (v)”.

If he had bothered to read the second sentence in what was literally the only two sentences on which he was briefed before going on national television to discuss this issue, our Attorney-General would know that the provision is correctly described as “section 44, subsection (v)”.

So our First Law Officer knows exactly one thing about a matter that will soon be the subject of a ground breaking High Court case.

And he only has it half right.

Peter Fray

Get your first 12 weeks of Crikey for $12.

Without subscribers, Crikey can’t do what it does. Fortunately, our support base is growing.

Every day, Crikey aims to bring new and challenging insights into politics, business, national affairs, media and society. We lift up the rocks that other news media largely ignore. Without your support, more of those rocks – and the secrets beneath them — will remain lodged in the dirt.

Join today and get your first 12 weeks of Crikey for just $12.

 

Peter Fray
Editor-in-chief of Crikey

JOIN NOW