Stan Heuston, from Oxley Vale, writes to comment on two recent letters to the editor.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
The pork barrel brigade was out in such force on May 18 (letters: “New England’s member is being loose with the truth” and “The electorate has so much to gain”) that it is necessary to comment.
I’d better say first, that if Mr Windsor is going to complain about looseness with the truth, it might be better if he didn’t accuse The Nationals of removing Mr Abbott as Prime Minister.
The Nationals didn’t get a vote in the Liberal party room, and Mr Joyce, then Deputy Nationals Leader, expressed opposition to the removal in this paper.
If people look at the record in relation to Mr Windsor’s claims, like $1.8 billion for hospital funding, they will find that those funds were voted by the government of the day, not Mr Windsor or any other independent.
The fact that Mr Windsor seeks to deny credit where it is due to whichever major party formed that government, is only the first problem with his claims.
He writes in apparently bizarre terms of “bids” for hospital services as if funding for them is auctioned, instead of allocated according to a scheduled order which ensures that every community waits the same time for upgrades, and otherwise proper assessment of needs.
Since this is the case with roads, I hope it is the case with hospitals, rather than people’s health being a political bargaining chip.
And without being too harsh, we know how those who are so enthusiastic about politically corrupt pork barreling when it benefits New England would react if their scheduled turn for improvements was queue-jumped by another electorate through a political deal – they’d squeal like stuck pigs (and actually, fair enough).
Third, these ill-gotten gains are illusory.
Do people really think that if Mr Windsor has politically blackmailed Labor when he holds the balance of power, that that will be forgiven and forgotten when Labor has power in its own right?
I respectfully suggest you have no idea of the people you are dealing with.
Most important, the federal member for New England is elected to contribute to the government of the whole nation.
Fortunately, most New England voters realise that it is what they can contribute to that, as a sounding board for their local member, that is most important.
Their surrender of that role would be entirely self-defeating.
If national – and state – systems are ineffective, health being a prime example, your new hospital buildings and other barrel bities won’t be worth a sow’s ear.
