JAILER GREG: Greens Victorian leader wants staff jailed for not respecting Parliament's authority but may be in contempt of Parliament himself

jailergreg Feared party numbers-man, tram user and de facto Greens party leader Greg Barber looks like adding a new dimension to his menace.

In parliamentary debate this morning in Victoria’s Red Morgue Legislative Council, Barber proposed that hard grafting state government ministerial staff directed by their employers not to attend politician’s committee meetings would be imprisoned.

Barber and Labor’s hard-man in the upper house Matt Viney slugged it out with Barber and all but identified him as leaking a parliamentary committee draft report to the Age newspaper. The Age reported that the committee was going to damn Attorney-General Hulls and various other government notables. It didn’t.

State Press Gallery sources suggest that The Age’s Paul Austin is none-too-happy about being duped by Barber with a ‘draft’ report that bore little resemblance to the final one.

This act of leaking a confidential report could make the Greens party Victorian de facto leader Greg Barber guilty of the same offence of which he complains in relation to the hired help: contempt of parliament.

While bully-boy Barber wants poor old Peta Duke incarcerated for an indefinite period for merely doing her job, not even VEXNEWS proposes that Barber be imprisoned for leaking, even if it is to Paul Austin.

Some MPs and the Legislative Council staff though are believed to be intent on a formal inquiry into the leaking scandal, perhaps even contemplating a reference to the Victorian Ombudsman which could lead to all sorts of trouble for the Greens MP, including possible interaction with infamously troubled Ombudsman staffer Lachlan McCullough. In theory, the Parliament could jail or fine Barber for his contempt of Parliament.

littlestephenmayne A greater and more appropriate punishment for the power-tsar Green would probably be a long sentence of continued service in the Legislative Council. Indeed, environmental movement sources say the Greens party has done a sleazy and secret preference deal with no-hoper ex-Liberal staffer, unloved local politician and intending Northern Metropolitan candidate Stephen Mayne to help the perpetual loser sit on the cross-benches in the upper house where he’d be sitting next to Barber and his comrades.

That should be punishment enough.



Filed under Uncategorized

24 responses to “JAILER GREG: Greens Victorian leader wants staff jailed for not respecting Parliament's authority but may be in contempt of Parliament himself

  1. Pingback: Tweets that mention VEXNEWS 2010© | JAILER GREG: Greens Victorian leader wants staff jailed for not respecting Parliament’s authority but may be in contempt of Parliament himself -- Topsy.com

  2. Madam Lash

    As if the Upper House isn’t already a big enough joke. Greg Barber has got the personality of 10 day old bread…can’t wait for the Greens to implode they add nothing to the political debate and are full of themselves to boot…bend over for 12 of the best Greggie…and I wouldn’t waste the lash on Mayne…another legend in his own lunchtime..

  3. Madam Lash

    and I don’t know where Greg gets off trying to intimidate staffers…get a brain…the Parliament is not a court of law…it makes the law…

  4. Barbar the terrible

    Barbar and his followers think being green means giving lip service to the environment and joining in liberal political witch hunts and political bashing of staffers.

    No Greg being green does not being ballieu’s handbag.

    Bob brown is more sensible than this twistered upperhouse Twitterer. Brown understands the greens cannot become hatchetmen for the libs or the public will deal with them like it dealt with the democrats.

    Barbar having gone for blood over Windsor issue cannot then asked to be excused for his own sloppiness.

    This double standard is sadly becoming the norm for Vic greens who see themselves above the law.

    When you are a hippy protest party with uncosted policies then you can get away with transgressions but when you start hunting with the liberal party pack – then you need to expect to be help accountable like the grown ups.

  5. Who will investigate the Ombudsman?

    Not even near as disgraceful as the ombudsman annual report. He came out all guns blazing in defending his disgraced and bully staffer Lachlan McCullough

  6. Rampant

    What was Bruce “Lurch” Esplin doing chatting with his old boss, Andre “Kraut” Haermeyer at SX this morning?

  7. Another upper house snorer

    Greg who?

  8. Anonymous

    Perhaps the Parliament should use its time to keep in jail mass murderer Julian Knight rather than put political opponents in the clink.

  9. barber behind bars?

    Will an imprisoned barber still bore us with his shallow ‘twitters’?

  10. barber behind bars?

    Perhaps he could start an organic community garden…

  11. Les 20something

    Barber behind bars – no, GB won’t bore us at all.

    He’ll give us really good info on the merits of serving lentils in prison.

    He’ll also report on the merits of being a ‘prison bitch’ which I’m sure will be his chosen role.

  12. Vomitus

    Contempt of parliament. Hmnn. That’s a non-sequitur. Pollies make me puke.

  13. dirty dog

    Gee do you reckon that aged reporter paul austin will pick up on this? Na like baiilieus overseas tax havens it will be swept under the carpet. Can’t wait for the aged to die got to be soon!
    Like it’s suburban papers it’s headed for heaven.

  14. Rampant

    I just came back from hearing Greg Barber blurt to the media and rent-a-crowd greenies at parliament talk about the VicForest Supreme Court decision.

    Moments earlier, I walked past Barber’s mate, Gavin Jennings, down Little Collins laughing in a high pitched voice in his phone to someone. If you didn’t see who it was, you would have thought it was a teenage girl.

  15. Andrew – your google ads seem to be promoting Greens propaganda. What gives? Are you a closet green?


    We have banned the Church of Scientology from advertising here, should we also ban the Greens party cult?

  17. Greens target staff

    The wanabee lib barber can’t take on labor mps so takes aim at staffers….big man I am sure….

  18. Michael

    Until Howard ruled (to get out of the consequences of his filthy children overboard lie) that members could prevent staffers from appearing before parliamentary committees, this practice had never occured before. Victorian labor claims that they are legally correct in taking this action, and in doing so they rely on the new ‘convention’ instituted by Howard. However, it has not been legally tested and expert opion suggests they are acting illegally in attempting to prevent staffers from appearing. The labor party once again undermining democracy, whilst openly using the most dubious opinions and actions of the revolting John Howard as justification.

    Rob Hulls on the 7.30 Report: “This is not new in Victoria. It’s not new around Australia. In fact, I think it was John Howard who invoked that principle for the children overboard inquiry where he made it quite clear that staff wouldn’t appear because it’s ministers that are responsible. And so we don’t, in Victoria, intend to move from away from that process, from that convention.”

    Nice one Hulls and labor. Nice. Or should I say laboral or libor, since John Howard is apparently your mentor on legal and moral issues. Your true colours are so close to the surface.

  19. Daniel

    Andrew, do you honestly mean, when you say ‘poor old Peta Duke’, that concocting a scheme for the planning minister to act completely illegally in relation to a planning decision, deceiving the public and trampling fundamental democratic processes is what is entailed in ‘doing her job’ as an advisor? You really are sick. The labor party must be the only people not thanking you for your dribble – through your blatant lies, slander, populist (and next to illiterate) rants, and gross displays of your gutter values, you shine a very clear light on just how much the labor party has lost its way. Thank you. The people need to know.

  20. Andrew Landeryou - editor VEXNEWS

    oh puh-lease.

    I don’t know Peta Duke and I’m not exactly in lerv with the Brumby Govt Media Unit but let’s keep it real.

    Planning decisions are political decisions. Pretending otherwise is stupid.

    We are very, very pro-development around here.

    And even with that attitude, I am worried about the Windsor Hotel development over-shadowing perhaps Melbourne’s most important building and buggering up an historically important one. (Parl Hse & Windsor respectively)

    That the government wanted to stop the building after listening to public objections is no scandal, nor even a surprise.

    The public should have a say in what gets built and what doesn’t get built.

    The confected, concocted and bizarro coverage of the Windsor Hotel issue is one of the greatest political frauds since Stephen Mayne’s ‘People Power’.

    Madden did not act illegally, nor did she. I’m not suggesting that what she did was politically smart but it was a reasonably approach in the circumstances of wanting to stop a building that could be a monstrosity and a blight on Melbourne for years to come.

    I think, Daniel, you are either being a bit confused about all the issues here or are winding me up for a bit of fun. If the latter, fair play to you. If the former, I really urge you to read more on the issue. The AgeBC beatup of the issue has been hysterical and mad, the end result of which is that they basically helped the developer get through a highly contentious project, of a nature the AgeBC would normally vigorously oppose. It really was an odd situation where a cheap-ass attempt at Watergate gotcha journalism blew up in the inner-city left’s face. I just hope that many people’s genuine fears about that building are proven wrong, the damage to that important historical precinct could be severe and will be permanent.

  21. Daniel

    Yes Andrew, it was it a ‘reasonably (sic) approach in the circumstances of wanting to stop a building’.

    Peta Duke drafted a document which outlined their plans to deceive the public with a false consultation process about the Windsor Hotel development. This fact is established, and has been acknowleged by the Brumby labor government as the truth. Andrew, THERE WAS NO CONSULTATION.

    The issue running parallel to this is that the labor govt has made major and before unseen inroads into planning legislation to minimise public scrutiny and comment, and to bypass environmental checks so that they can charge on with a plethora of foul and massive projects, without things like endangered species and increased carbon emissions getting in their way. During the lead up to the Windsor Hotel scandal, large sectors of the public had become extremely tired of and angry about being treated like this – of being bullied and locked out of debate that rightly and legally belonged with them.

    These people complained very loudly to the govt of:

    1. the legislative dismantling of democratic processes re planning
    2. the huge number of inappropriate planning decisions being made – ie a developers/development free for all no matter the social or environmental cost.

    In this political climate they needed to shut people up – they needed people to think they were being consulted, and they needed the public to see them saying no to a development – ie apparently making a sensible, balanced planning decision, because neither of these things had happened in far too long, and they knew it was beginning to damage them.

    The leaked memo from Peta Duke revealed labor’s rather typical response to this situation. Rather than acknowledging they had routinely acted outside established process and lifting their game (ie adhering to the principles of responsible government), and rather than responding to legitimate community concerns by actually consulting, and actually making sensible and balanced planning decisions in accordance with the law (which appears impossible for them particularly for the second-rate footballer minister), they used the proposed Windor Hotel development as a tool for shutting the people up without changing either of the practices complained about. The deception is two-fold, and the corruption is palpable.

    This act was cynical beyond belief, and your faulty recording of it is truly sickening.

    And Andrew, don’t think for a second they actually care about the Windsor Hotel, though I don’t imagine you do either. If they wanted this development or if it was of worth to them, it would have gone ahead and another dummy case would have been used for that purpose.

  22. Crirkey Struth

    They should lock Barber and Mayne up in a cell toghether. Just don’t bend over in the Shower and keep your back to the wall when Mayne is around.

  23. alial

    Is that the kind of high quality journalism your readership requires to be persuaded by your stories Andrew? ‘AgeBC’? Are you a child? Have you no sense of dignity? I take it any publication/network that occasionally publishes something remotely resembling facts is offensive to you.

    You base this entire ridiculous story on your meaningless summation that ‘Matt Viney … all but identified [Greg Barber] as leaking a parliamentary committee draft report to the Age newspaper’. Oooh. So a person didn’t say something about something that isn’t remotely true. Wow. Where do you get your red hot material? Nice sidestepping of the actual story that the minister for planning is a corrupt politician in contempt of Parliament though. Good one.

    Nobody cares who you are ‘in lerv with’, but you are right about one thing. The Windsor Hotel planning decision was certainly a political decision and certainly nothing to do with ‘that important historical precinct’. As a not so famous person once said ‘pretending otherwise is stupid’.

  24. dal-sat

    @dirty dog, no Paul Austin won’t pick up on this because unlike vexnews, if you write for a real publication, you can’t make up stories and slander people – there are actual consequences for this stuff in the real world. You can’t say ‘a Victorian labor parliamentarian during some unspecified debate didn’t say that GB did something. Therefore GB is guilty’, which is Drew’s entire point in this case. You would get the sack and never work again if you tried to do this in the real world where real people are reading. Even tabloids wouldn’t stoop this low.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s