There’s never been a more exciting time to be part of a political dirt unit. Yesterday Jeremy Hearn and Peter Killin, two Victorian Liberal candidates, withdrew over anti-Muslim and homophobic posts respectively. Labor’s Luke Creasey also landed in hot water over rape jokes he made on Facebook back in 2012.
Creasey apologised, but refused to step down. As appalling and tasteless as his posts were, his excuse — that they were made seven years ago and that his views have since developed — is, on face value, believable. But Creasey’s story is becoming increasingly common.
Social media is a goldmine for dirt units and for sections of the media more interested in scooping their rivals than asking serious questions on policy.
When should the dirt be aired out?
There’s no magic formula for determining what warrants a hit piece and what doesn’t. But context, and an understanding of how people use the internet, is key.
Some old posts are heinous and objectionable, and no length of time can erode their hurtfulness. The anti-Semitic conspiracy theories shared by Labor’s Wayne Kurnoth probably fall in that category. Others have a particular importance from more recent context. Think of Donald Trump’s now infamous Access Hollywood tape bragging about sexual assault; the outrage came in the context of his extremely long and well-documented history of misogyny.
Then there’s the issue of how old the posts are. When the comments are recent, like Heards’ Islamophobic screed from just last year, they can hardly be chalked down to old youthful silliness.
But the tactic of exposing any posts a 50-year-old editor might balk at risks making mountains out of online molehills. The posts by Victorian Greens members last year are a case in point. Nilson and McMillan’s posts — variously about shoplifting, drug use, pornography and religion — were perhaps tasteless and off-colour in a way that might shock pearl-clutching, suburban boomers. But to even moderately online young people, they would be easily recognisable for what they were: shitposting, or a kind of extremely silly, irony-laden and often provocative online post.
Also, some of them were pretty funny. Nangs (canisters of nitrous oxide which are inhaled to achieve a 30-second high), which Nilson joked about, are perfectly common shitposting fodder no matter what the Herald Sun might think.
Nothing is safe
Here’s the thing. Even if you don’t find nangs particularly funny, it’s undeniable that people in their twenties have grown up with the internet. We were dumb teenagers on the internet, and our growth from dumb teenagers to equally dumb adults is documented online in excruciating detail. As Nilson wrote after her posts became national news for some reason, screwing up online is “what normal people do”.
But now the Pandora’s Box has been opened, and any post that might offend some people could be the target of a front-page hit-piece. Why then, would any young person ever run for a political office? Everyone who has come of age in the era of social media, no matter how careful they might be with deleting posts, has a few skeletons in their online closet. It could be the problematic Facebook post you wrote a decade ago, a drunk Instagram story, or the group chat banter that went just a little too far. Nobody was thinking about their future political career when they shared that unwoke meme at 15.
Such pieces are clearly more likely to harm young candidates. Often, they are targeted at an audience with little understanding or sympathy towards online mishaps, and framed so as to maximise outrage. And the harm, particularly when the politician is early in the career, can be huge. McMillan spent the week following the Herald Sun’s piece on suicide watch. Any sensible politically engaged young person, would look at this and not bother.
It’s a shame potential blowback might deter young Australians from ever setting foot in the political arena because, now more than ever, our politics is desperately crying out for fresh voices. This election has put on full display the utter contempt with which much of Australia’s political establishment holds young people. Just yesterday, Deputy Prime Minister Michael McCormack called the record young enrolment “one of the biggest problems we’ve got in this election”. Presumably because they are worried about the prospect of a climate apocalypse, a stagnant jobs market and the prospect of never owning their own home; concerns the Coalition do not seem to share
But the current crop of dinosaurs will soon be too old to plod around the halls or Parliament, and the shitpost generation will have to step up and replace them. This next batch of politicians will inevitably all come with a chequered social media history. The dirt units and the tabloids would do well not to punish candidates for the crime of being born in the 1980s or 1990s. And any prospective politician should err on the side of caution: delete your bad posts.
Well, that’s something to be happy about the tabloids and broadsheets going behind paywalls, then, taking their diminishing readership with them. We’ll all just have to lean on open-publishers like the ABC not to amplify those sorts of stories by repeating them where normal people can see them.
Eventually the days when anyone had not posted something they regret in a public forum will be gone, and having done so just won’t be a story.
Bit rocky until then though.
The following was published in Tasmanian Times in 2015 regarding the Liberal Party Dirt Unit in Canberra.
NATION, STATE: Mantach … Who is the Power behind the Throne?
By John Hawkins
Posted on August 31, 2015
A good Chief of Staff is the last person a Minister speaks to at night and the first person he/she speaks to in the morning.
Phillip Coorey, writing in the Sydney Morning Herald, says …
“Early on the morning of June 12 [2009] the Liberal Senator Eric Abetz and his Chief of Staff, Brad Stansfield boarded a plane from Hobart to Sydney. Of several Abetz meetings in Sydney that day one would go down in political infamy.
Already it has severely wounded Malcom Turnbull’s leadership, although the extent of the injury is still to unravel.
After lunch that Friday, Abetz and Stansfield joined Turnbull at the Potts Point office of Turnbull’s wife Lucy. Lucy was not there. Godwin Grech was ….”
When the resulting political disaster made the going a little too hot for Stansfield in Canberra, I suggest that Abetz flicked him as Chief of Staff to the newly-elected Premier of Tasmania, Will Hodgman.
Matthew Denholm writing in The Australian in Feb 2010 drew attention to Hodgman’s recently-installed Chief of Staff – one Brad Stansfield – and noted his power over the Premier:
“It is clear by the way his minder, Brad Stansfield, former staff member to right wing powerbroker senator Eric Abetz interrupts at key junctures of our interview that the party is unwilling to remove the training wheels.”
In an article written in the Mercury in 2014 by David Beniuk:
“Much of the credit for the Liberals’ disciplined effort is given to Premier Hodgman’s chief of staff and party powerbroker, Brad Stansfield.
The protege and former media adviser of Senator Eric Abetz, who earns a salary of between $220 and $260,000, has raised concerns among grassroots party members who believe he wields too much power.
Those who have worked with the former King Island journalist say he is a bare-knuckle fighter who has instituted the hard right approach of his former boss Senator Abetz.”
Stansfield reports on all matters political in Tasmania directly to Abetz.
Like Abetz he appears to be Anti-Gay, Anti-Gay Marriage.
The homophobic view of the world was described in this Mercury opinion piece by Greg Barns in 2013, entitled; “ Evil Prejudice denies gay rights” ( here ), which included this line:
“…..Last Thursday, Brad Stansfield, Mr Hodgman’s chief of staff, tweeted darkly about the possibility of a High Court challenge to a same sex marriage law in Tasmania.”
Hodgman, a talking head muttering the same old platitudes and looking rather like a stunned rabbit caught in the headlights, appears to me to be the puppet of Stansfield, who in turn reports to Abetz.
Abetz, as Special Minister of State in the Howard Government between 2001 and 2006, would have known Mantach as the file keeper in the controversial Government Members Secretariat (GMS) which contained a special dirt unit, then operated in secret by the Howard Government.
Mark Latham labelled it:
“A shadowy unit digging up personal dirt on political opponents”.
A legitimate question to ask, in my view is: Was Abetz responsible for moving Mantach from this unit in Canberra to Hobart in October 2005?
Former Liberal staffer Greg Barns, when interviewed on the ABC, stated:
“One would hope that the GMS’s rather shadowy role in political propaganda is not something Mr Mantach brings to Tasmania…..”
I suggest that in fact Mantach. with his protector Abetz, brought to Tasmanian politics the Exclusive Brethren, a GMS contact from his previous life and position in Canberra.
I suggest Abetz next brought into Tasmania his former Chief of Staff, Brad Stansfield, to control the disaster that was unfolding after Mantach had lied about the Exclusive Brethren and their financial connections to the Liberal Party. When the lie was discovered Mantach told Matthew Denholm of the Australian in Jan 2007:
“I know it doesn’t look fantastic”.
By March 2008 the missing money had been discovered and possibly recovered (but more likely in part written off). This matter, I believe, was raised with Canberra by the honest Liberals in Tasmania but someone with enough power and skin in the game arranged for the subject to be buried and Mantach moved to a new constituency in Victoria where he allegedly offended yet again.
Why was the Mantach affair in Tasmania not reported to the police?
Why was Mantach then placed in the same situation in Victoria where he was sacked with no charges and the matter hidden … which begs the question, who was protecting him and why?
Kroger, a customer of mine, is now after Mantach; this is one of the few positives in this sorry saga, for Kroger is a dangerous enemy for Abetz and his coterie of apparatchiks.
Is it possible that in some way Mantach is connected through Stansfield to Godwin Grech and a dirt file that went horribly wrong, resulting in the requisite for oversight of all the players linked to Grech by one Senator Erich Abetz?
Or was it by chance that Abetz brought down Turnbull, also a customer of mine, and installed the Religious Right under Abbott into the Liberal driving seat?
These questions over Mantach, the GMS, the Exclusive Brethren, a protection racket over stolen money and political lies need answers … for democracy is at risk.
I suggest that Abetz is the strongest link in this convoluted chain and that he can provide us with those answers – the quicker the better.
• Senate. Hansard. Thursday, 20 August 2015
Page: 109
Senator STERLE (Western Australia) (18:38): I rise to address reports that a sum of money totalling $1.5 million has been stolen from the Victorian Division of the Liberal Party of Victoria. This story was broken by Melbourne’s Herald Sun last night. According to the Herald Sun, forensic accounting firm PPB Advisory was called into Liberal Party headquarters some months ago. It is reported that a number of unauthorised financial transactions took place between 2010 and 2014. According to reports, a forensic examination of a number of computers has revealed that invoices may have been made out to a company which did not exist.
Mr Damien Mantach left the position of Director of the Liberal Party of Victoria on 13 March this year following the state election loss. He joined the Victorian secretariat in 2008 as deputy director, having previously been director of the Tasmanian branch of the Liberal Party from 2005 to 2008, and before then, a staffer for the Liberal Party in this building. At one stage he was a member of the Government Members’ Secretariat—the dirt unit operated by the Howard government.
Today it has been reported that Mr Mantach was forced to repay money to the Tasmanian division while he held the office of state director. This has not been a matter of public knowledge until today. What was a matter of public knowledge was his behind-closed-doors dealings with the Exclusive Brethren and associated breaches of electoral laws. It is understood the Tasmanian division is now conducting an investigation into matters related to Mr Mantach’s tenure. According to reports, senior Liberal figures were aware of the incident prior to Mr Mantach’s appointment to Victoria as deputy director and his subsequent promotion to state director in 2011. Perhaps Liberal senator, Tasmanian powerbroker and now Leader of the Government, Senator Abetz, could shed some light on the party official he worked so closely with during this period.
Reports suggest that senior figures with knowledge of alleged questionable conduct by Mr Mantach in Tasmania include Liberal Party federal director Mr Brian Loughnane. It is understood Mr Loughnane was part of the selection panel that appointed Mr Mantach to the position of Director of the Liberal Party of Victoria. The other panellists were Mr Tony Nutt, the former chief of staff to Prime Minister Howard, current NSW party director, and mooted replacement for Ms Credlin, as well as then Premier Ted Baillieu and his then chief of staff Michael Kapel. In March 2013, Mr Mantach was caught in the middle of the Victorian police command crisis and there were calls for his removal. At a press conference on 8 March 2015, Mr Abbott said this of Mr Mantach:
“I know Damien well. He is a person of integrity. Let’s see where this investigation goes but he has my confidence.”
More recently, the member for Corangamite, the member for La Trobe and the member for Deakin have praised Mr Mantach for his role in getting them elected. The member for Wannon—current chair of the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security—has also praised Mr Mantach’s professionalism. Earlier this year, Mr Loughnane, a man closely connected to Mr Abbott’s office, clashed with the Liberal Party’s federal treasurer about disclosure and accountability on financial issues. The party’s now former federal treasurer Phil Higginson threatened to resign his position over transparency issues and alleged conflicts of interest charges he laid at the feet of Mr Loughnane and Ms Credlin.
There are questions for Mr Loughnane to answer: first, his role in Mr Mantach’s appointment; second, his knowledge of his conduct in Tasmania prior to his appointment in Victoria; and third, his knowledge of Mr Mantach’s conduct during his Victorian appointment, including where the money went. Did any of it serve the Liberal Party’s interests, state or federal? There are also questions for the Prime Minister to answer: first, his knowledge of Mr Mantach’s conduct in Tasmania and Victoria; second, the Prime Minister needs to explain the reason he considers him ‘a person of integrity’; third, the connection between his office and Mr Mantach; and fourth, the relationship between Mr Mantach and Mr Loughnane. The Prime Minister, Senator Abetz and Mr Loughnane have shown themselves to be poor judges of character, backing a man who stands accused of stealing no less than $1.5 million from the Liberal Party.
Senate. Hansard. Tuesday, 23 February 2010
Page: 902
Hawke v Howard, the ultimate juxtaposition. And sadly, there can never be another Hawke.
I doubt that everyone, even in the under 35 cohort, has posted usable dirt on line though of course the majority have.
As to who will replace the political dinosaurs of the undead parties, T1, T2 & the gNats, it will be the same group of apparatchiks from Central Castings as for the last 30yrs.
The sort of simulacra who claim never to have “done drugs” – they are either lying or the type of men-without-navels who should never been allowed near the levers of power.