After eight years in government, Daniel Andrews and Victorian Labor have accumulated a long history of scandals — such as the red shirts, branch stacking, the systematic misuse of taxpayer funds, and the lack of responsibility for the decision to outsource quarantine security.
The Victorian Liberals have been unable, or unwilling, to hold Andrews properly to account. They’re more interested in their own branch stacking, peddling conspiracy theories, internal brawls and embracing extremism. However bad the Andrews government has been at times, the Liberals have been far, far worse.
That leaves the media as the primary mechanism for holding Andrews to account, however much Andrews fans on social media see any critical reporting of the premier, however strongly evidenced, as a right-wing plot.
Last week Nine newspapers’ Paul Sakkal unearthed another scandal, the subject of an investigation by the state’s anti-corruption watchdog, IBAC. It pertains to training grants to the Health Workers Union made over the objections of Health Department officials, possibly as a result of pressure from ministerial offices.
After contacting the premier’s office for comment, Sakkal then learnt the IBAC was seeking an injunction to block his reporting. Who tipped off IBAC?
When asked about that, Andrews ducked and weaved in an almost insultingly facile attempt to evade the question. Andrews also described Sakkal’s reporting as “smear, innuendo or media reporting based on anonymous sources”. He declined to back up those claims when asked to.
This is truly grubby stuff. The only smear was of Sakkal for doing his job. And the serious question remains: if Andrews’ office didn’t tip off IBAC, who did? If Andrews’ personal policy is to not comment on IBAC reports until they’re finalised, a simple “no comment” would have sufficed.
Problem is, while Sakkal was doing his job, News Corp, and specifically the Herald Sun, was failing to do its job. Instead of seeking to hold Andrews to account over legitimate issues, it was puffing up an absurd conspiracy theory about Andrews’ back injury that sidelined him in 2021.
The mockery and derision the Herald Sun received were entirely deserved, including that from Andrews himself at the weekend. And it allowed Andrews to portray him and his government as the victims of a media campaign. In the case of News Corp, that’s quite literally true. But it seems when Andrews employs language like “smear and innuendo” to describe perfectly valid media coverage from other outlets, he’d prefer Victorians to think all negative coverage of him is ill-founded and illegitimate.
As Andrews’ continued strong polling suggests, News Corp’s relentless campaign over the years has done little to dent his success. He heads into the election at the end of the month the strong favourite; the only question remains is whether independents and minor parties will take enough seats from both Liberals and Labor to threaten his outright majority.
All News Corp’s campaign has done has given credence to the idea that Andrews is a victim, instead of the most powerful man in the state, with a well-resourced media management apparatus at his disposal.
Doubtless stating such truths will infuriate Andrews fans and rusted-on Labor supporters, especially on social media. But they labour under the delusion that Andrews is a figure who needs protection and support, that he is their tribal leader.
He is none of those things: he is one of the most powerful people in the country, with vast taxpayer-funded resources at his beck and call, who should be held to account like any other person in such a privileged position. News Corp makes that job much harder.
Should Dan Andrews be allowed to keep playing the victim or should he be held to account? Let us know by writing to letters@crikey.com.au. Please include your full name to be considered for publication. We reserve the right to edit for length and clarity.
Should Dan Andrews be allowed to keep playing the victim or should he be held to account?
What? This sounds like some creepy Fox News poll. C’mon Crikey, do better than this. Everyone wants politicians held to account but the obsession with Andrews in particular is starting to get weird.
Yeah, Bernard seems to have a been in his bonnet about Dan Andrews.
He also seems to have forgotten that it was the Federal Government who “outsourced” quarantine to the states.
A bee in his bonnet!
Knickers in a twist?
Dan supporters not the best at Spelling Bees
Well it was the feds who passed on the control – offering it to the states.
Who cannot ignore a chance to take complete control.
Which means that it was Dan Andrews who bungled it – giving the power to $12 per hour ‘security’ guards because of the inordinate amount of power the police union have – and Police Chief: Grah Grah Ashton simply said: “no, we aren’t doing it”.
Oh, righto.
As if Dan Andrews is under the control of these powerful unions and has to give them whatever they want – regardless of the consequences to the people.
Still has never prosecuted a single police officer for breaking the Rule of Law for a decade (Lawyer X). But apparently the Victorian public don’t care about the Rule of Law.
Dan Andrews has mastered that brilliant trick of turning oneself into the underdog – not so hard with News Corp behaving the way they do. Now people just see ANY News Corp story as propaganda.
What a terrible state of affairs.
You seem to forget that the States banned people from arriving unless quarantined. Dan also banned everyone from doing anything because he stuffed up the quarantine and blamed someone else for it. Dan takes credit not criticism very well.
Absolutely. Leave the bloke alone – he’s copped it constantly from Murdoch, and if he gets some brownie points from other, good on him.
Really?
Can you remember when the Liberal government signed a (was it 2? or 10?) billion dollar contract in the ‘Caretaker’ period for the East – West link – and then Labor got in and tore it up?
Dan Andrews did the exact same thing, apparently, on the eve of the last election. But worse – without tender.
Imagine being able to just appoint a contract to anyone you want worth billions?!? Almost sounds Russian doesn’t it?
I get that you don’t like News Corp or the “right” but do you have to be so blind to corruption in the “left” while you are at it? Or is that the only option?
No wonder they call it “blind” loyalty.
Dan Andrews borrows from Kennett’s propaganda lessons
It’s true that the right wing media and the Liberal party fail to hold Andrews to account because he’s playing their game and winning the politics.
Take the F1 grand prix for example. After Andrews signed on for another billion dollars of state subsidies, he’s sitting on the annual report as he knows it is a lossmaking event. The Auditor-General found it causes a net annual loss to the economy. He doesn’t want any attention paid to it as he’s used up all the Kennett propaganda such as passing off the tv audience for a whole season as if they watched his race. Another one is the lavish corporate hospitality he hosts there – a million or two of taxpayers’ money but buried in the ‘operating loss’ in the accounts.
Andrews uses Kennett’s style of ‘big projects’ that actually don’t measure up against benchmarked alternatives. It’s clever but has landed Victoria in the situation of having the worst deficit in Australia.
Peter Logan
Almost every suburban Victorian is reminded every day of the Andrews government’s decison to get rid of rail crossings.
It is laughable to claim that Andrews ‘uses’ what you call ‘Kennett style propaganda’. Kennett had the Herald Sun, 3AW and all the commercial TV networks on his side. He wasn’t facing a visceral and irrational campaign against him that owes more to tribalism than it does to rationality.
Just so I understand your argument:
Therefore:
You actually have made a very poor argument there.
Haven’t actually said a thing about Andrews at all.
In fact, you have exhibited “tribalism” yourself, I would say.
Not only are you misusing the word ‘deficit’ but you’re also reciting a hackneyed line from the Murdoch press about other states’ combined debts being the same as Victoria. Neither are true. Just look it up.
That is right. Andrews is brilliant at propaganda – “Mr Underdog”.
Where are the cost/benefit analyses for all his “big ticket” projects? Do we really need a massive railway going around the outside of the city in a big loop? Or would it be better to just what we already have?
You can’t make a big announcement about maintenance: “We are going to make sure our system works by maintenance”. Just doesn’t sound that sexy.
Utopia is so accurate it is scary.
It just boggles my mind why people are so willing to buy what Andrews’ is selling: hook line and sinker.
Just because you will never vote for the Liberal party or the “right” doesn’t mean you have to accept corruption in the left people.
The Metro Rail Loop is worlds best practice in terms of future proofing public transport. And a public owned State Electricity Commission will free us from the price gouging perpetrated by our currently dominant energy oligarchs.
We’ve got too much to loose to risk loosing the ALP run government. Seriously – you want Mr. LobsterHead and his Pentecostal branch stacked dung beetles running our state ?
I usually trust my political instincts. With the Herald Sun, for example, I’ve always thought their naked campaigning was so obvious as to almost drive voters away from right wing causes.
I don’t have any evidence of this, but a significant number of Victorians, I suspect, still buy the Herald-Sun because of their first-class sports coverage and in-depth formguide. Surely, even though most adherent of acolytes looks at an Andrew Bolt opinion piece which has ‘climate warmists’ in the headline and already knows what he’s going to write.
So, in short, the Left can almost regard the right wing hysteria as an ally. They have become an unwitting self-parody.
Has the Andrews government got stuff to answer for? Well, yes, Bernard. Gold star for pointing it out that the rest of the media, and indeed the electorate, are aware of it.
My sense of the Victorian electorate is that they VERY progressive right now, understand that no government really knew what to do during the pandemic, and have yet to see a smoking gun about a Premier whom they have come to regard as always keeping his promises.
I agree with most of this Joe, except for the Hun having a first-class sports coverage. It’s good for AFL, cricket and racing afficionados if they don’t mind hype and jingoism, and sport occupies more pages than other kinds of news. Sorry, that should be “news”. I’ve always thought that if it weren’t for the Collingwood football club and its supporters the Hun would have gone bust decades ago.
Yeah nah. Dustin Martin has kept the Hun afloat for the last five years.
When in my local coffee shop, where there are usually three or four free copies of the paper, most people turn to the puzzles page, if early enough, they never take time to read any articles even when the puzzles have already been done. The Age is no longer provided.
Absolutely – the Murdoch tabloids in this country, and even The Oz now, regularly score own goals. They are an asset to independents and left wing politicians
Is there any story about Dan Andrews other than Red Shirts, IBAC, branch stacking, hotel quarantine? This whole list gets trotted out every time you mention the man. Perhaps what accounts for some of the side-eye is that we as Victorians took on so much during the pandemic and developed a sense of real community here. Bag the Premier as much as you like but the idea that we are all breathless acolytes is really annoying.
Have you put any of your questions to Mr Andrews, Bernard?
When you do so, could you mention it in your articles, even if he or his office don’t respond. Actually, it would be informative if you would tell us when you ask them for comment and get no response.
Yes, this seems more like a thought-bubble piece – very unusual for Bernard Keane.
The article is about the media’s treatment of Andrews and it’s not obvious putting questions to Andrews, rather than News Corp etc., would add much.
The article is, according to its headline, about News Corp shielding Andrews from legitimate scrutiny.
Do you not think a journalist of Bernard Keane’s undoubted ability putting intelligent, evidence based questions to the premier would count as legitimate scrutiny?
Well, it would be.
So, how does News Corps shield prevent that from happening?
It can’t. It just can’t.
If the premier fails to respond, the hard working journalist can always publish the questions, tell us when the questions were put to the premier, and remind us how long the questions remain unanswered. That would be a compelling herd of elephants in the room, so long as the questions were of such quality that they demand a response on the merits of the evidence on which they are premised.
Exactly. What I said.
I read what you said, ship rat, and replied to it with the observation that nothing prevents Bernard Keane from scutinising the premier by putting good questions to him.
Curious that you don’t reply to the substance of my comment.
Why would Keane question Andrews about News Corp’s editorial policy? How would that inform the article? In what way is Andrews responsible for News Corp? Are you hinting that Andrews and News Corp are in collusion?
My preference to not reply to the substance of your comment reflects the lack of substance in your comment.