Public service confidentiality
David Hardie writes: Re. “Speechwriter speaks: James Button and public service confidentiality” (Tuesday, item 1). I’m surprised that you have not been able to connect the dots regarding the public service, tenure and confidentiality.
Once upon a time there was a written and un-written compact between governments and the public service. In that in return for tenure, the government could expect a high degree of loyalty and confidentiality.
As has been demonstrated in Crikey‘s own daily emails over the past few weeks, if tenure becomes a variable, rather than a constant, so does confidentiality. This applies equally at all levels.
Bernardi and his beastly comments
Shirley Colless writes: Re. “Bernardi finally gives Abbott a reason to sack him” (yesterday, item 1). Senator Cory Bernadi might like to explain how he can work out when an animal consents to a s-xual relationship with a, well so-called, human being? Seems to me the act of besti-lity, like the act of r-pe, is one-sided — and while the human so attacked might be able to indicate refusal an animal cannot — unless of course Senator Bernadi has sat at the feet of Doctor Doolittle and learnt the language of animals?
But once again, Abbott has wimped it. Instead of sacking Bernadi, he allowed him to resign, if under pressure from his leader. Sacking him would have sent a much stronger message, not only to Abbott himself, but also to the rest of his loose-mouthed attack dogs.
Dave Sag writes: Bernardi’s comments recall the famous speech given by SA Liberal MP Peter Lewis, who claimed that people in Adelaide were attending org-es with animals and that in Macau one could pay “less than the cost of a cup of tea” to have someone “paint up a tree log that’s been hollowed out for you and fitted up with a duck” for your carnal pleasure.
Click here for a recording of the speech.
Anything but Pedant’s Corner
Don McKinnon writes: Just to let you know Pedants’ Corner (comments, yesterday) is actually a fairly long running section in British mag Private Eye. I’d love Crikey’s version to get going in the fashion Private Eye’s has, but I’m wondering whether it is safe to use the same name. Anyway, here is something to watch while thinking about it.
Shirley, if a male animal decided to fornicate with a human — god knows why they’d want to, but it’s in the Bible so it must be true — how would that animal not be ‘consenting’ to a sexual act? I’m not saying we ought to dwell on such matters, but use some imagination! (If you’d rather not, there’s always Walerian Borowczyk’s much-derided surrealist masterpiece ‘La Bete’, but I digress…)
*Disclaimer: this post in no way constitutes an attempt to stick up for Cory “thicker than Ron Boswell” Bernardi.
But what about the Dobermann’s superannuation?
@Don McKinnon, if there’s copyright on the name perhaps Crikey could call it Pedant’s Pedestal…or Pedant’s Posit.