State Recognition vs Local Legends
by Cat Holloway
I received three interesting emails today.
One was about a Remembrance Day gathering. One was an important reminder to nominate a local hero for Shoalhaven's Australia Day citizen awards. And another, published below, criticised the state funeral for Australian Labor Party powerbroker, Graham Richardson, and urged all three local MPs to "be the change so many of us hope to see, to speak out against this decision."
All three of those messages are connected to a single question: How do we, as a society, celebrate and support selfless effort and genuine altruism?
This also reminded me of three recent local social media posts.
One was a comment (since deleted) claiming that ex-Councillor Jason Cox landed in court and resigned because he was a victim of political pressure. One was about Gareth Ward seeking to avoid jail claiming his conviction of sexual assault was a political smear campaign (never mind that the assaults actually happened). And another reported on 30 Code of Conduct Complaints against Shoalhaven Council in the last year (up from six the year before) that cost $72,838 but found no breaches - not one.
Those three seemingly unrelated items all highlight a single issue: Watchdogging authority is inevitably political, but that doesn't diminish actual corrupt behaviour. Challenging politics is the heart of democracy. Silencing dissent is autocracy.
Blame the victims, or fix the problems?
Stephen Prothero of Eye of Shoalhaven (Substack, Facebook) may be an irritating stone in Council's shoe. But he's only one of a growing number of investigators and critics of Shoalhaven's messy political house. Disturbing that, in Tuesday's meeting, no-one questioned why Council received so many Code of Conduct complaints, but there was open disdain for the people lodging them.
Cr Peter Wilkins, almost audibly scoffed at "these community grievances". Likewise, Andrew Constance's response didn't show much respect for local advocates. The Deputy Mayor and CEO neither acknowledged the important role of community scrutiny in a democracy, nor offered to examine why so many ratepayers in Shoalhaven are disillusioned and angry enough to write in demanding a better return on investment.
Cr. Peter Wilkins: "Would you agree that it is distorted therefore if one person - or two - is making a significant number of those (complaints)?"
CEO Andrew Constance: "We can't divulge that on the grounds of confidentiality, but you can make of it what you will."
So, as we commemorate extraordinary but usually unknown service men and women who courageously died or suffered in wars or armed conflicts, and as we nominate the many dedicated local volunteers that truly define our community, let's also ponder: Do our politicians deserve quite so much automatic accolade?
The provocative letter (below) to local MPs was penned by Kate Dezarnaulds, a two-time independent political candidate, local business owner, former Berry Chamber of Commerce president and outspoken community advocate.
As well as sparking debate, Dezarnaulds' letter brings into focus the hypocrisy of leaders who routinely disregard criticism as "politically motivated" while imposing their own self-congratulatory political narrative in State-sanctioned (and funded) pomposity.
By the way, families of several high-achieving but humble Australians, like Sir Richie Benaud, Margaret Whitlam and Steve Irwin, turned down offers of government funerals.
Interestingly, of 51 individual state funerals and memorials arranged by the Federal government since 2000, only five were for women. In Victoria, six out of 47 services held by the state government were for women. In NSW, nine out of 42 individual state funerals and memorials were women. (Broadcaster John Laws will soon be honoured with a NSW state funeral.)
In Western Australia, community calls were ignored for a state memorial for Daisy, Molly and Gracie, the Indigenous children who escaped Moore River Native Settlement in 1931 and walked 1600kms, alone, to return home to Martu country, inspiring the iconic Rabbit Proof Fence book and film, illuminating Australia's stolen generation history.
Victoria refused a state funeral for the artist, Michael Leunig, who for more than 55 years created cartoons, poems, essays and art across newspapers, magazines, television and theatre in Australia. He was declared an Australian Living Treasure in 1999. His work featured at the 2006 Commonwealth Games, on Melbourne trams, at the National Gallery of Victoria, in performances at Hamer Hall with Australian Chamber Orchestra, Neil Finn and Peter Garrett. A rare tree was planted in Leunig's honour at the Royal Botanic Gardens. He received honorary degrees from La Trobe, Griffith, and the Australian Catholic universities for his unique contribution to Australian culture.
As Leunig's son, Sunny, wrote:
"His work was part of Australian culture long before today’s state ministers were out of nappies. His art's lasting impact transcended politics, class and religion for decades and meant a great deal to a great many people."
With those snippets of context, read what Kate Dezarnaulds today wrote to Kiama MP Katelin McInerney, South Coast MP Liza Butler and Federal Member for Gilmore, Fiona Phillips about Graham Richardson's planned send off.
Feel free to add your opinion to the comments.
Kate Dezarnaulds calls on local MPs to oppose state funeral
Dear Katelin, Liza, and Fiona,
I woke up this morning to Kate McLymont's brilliant overview of the life and times of "Labor legend" - the crook who got away with it- Graham Richardson. And then to the news that our State and Federal Labor Governments are keen to celebrate him with the honour of a State Funeral. Wtf?
After falling down the rabbit hole researching who qualifies for a State Funeral and why, I’m writing to express my disbelief and deep disappointment at your Party’s hubristic and tone-deaf decision to grant Richardson such an honour in New South Wales.
Long lunches, Swiss bank accounts and a kangaroo scrotum: My decades pursuing Graham Richardson
by Kate McClymont, Sydney Morning Herald.
"I know that you know, but you’ll never be able to prove it,” Graham Richardson once said to me more than 20 years ago, back when we were still talking. For a reporter whose career has been spent uncovering crime and corruption, Richo was the one who got away.
This recognition — one of the highest the State can bestow — has historically been reserved for leaders whose conduct elevated public life. To extend it to a man defined by controversy, impropriety, and moral compromise is not only arrogant and staggering, it’s an extraordinary misreading of public sentiment toward politicians of this culture and conduct.
There is no precedent in NSW for such an honour being extended to someone carrying such a long and public cloud of disgrace. Other governments have known “when to hold them and when to fold them” — Victoria rightly withheld one for George Pell; Western Australia did the same for Alan Bond. Yet here, Labor chooses to elevate a figure synonymous with factional thuggery, backroom deals, and allegations that would have ended most political careers.
I had plenty of opportunity in my twenties to experience Richardson up close. He regularly lunched at Bills Café in Woollahra while I worked upstairs at Sotheby’s. Week after week, he leered at the young female staff, boasting about his preferred table because it allowed him to look up our skirts as we climbed the stairs to work. A pig of a man — and a pig of a party to celebrate him, parading him as the “one who got away with it.”
Kate McClymont’s decades of reporting outline an exhaustive list of alleged misdeeds that should make any self-respecting party recoil. Instead, Labor celebrates him? Is this an act of political chest-beating — flexing the muscle of your State and Federal dominance with a smug “our crook’s better than yours”? It’s the kind of triumphalism that happens when a government grows too comfortable, with too much power and too little opposition.
I urge you, as genuinely good women who have risen through the swamplands of politics to be the change so many of us hope to see, to speak out against this decision.
To grant Richardson a State Funeral diminishes the dignity of the Premier’s office and tarnishes the standing of the State itself. It signals that moral accountability is optional and that notoriety can be mistaken for contribution.
Please raise this matter within your caucus and advocate both for the withdrawal of this toxic offer and for the establishment of clear, integrity-based criteria for future State Services.
The standard a government honours is the standard it accepts. You might not have an opposition capable of holding you to account right now — but you do have a community that will.
Best wishes,
Kate
PS. Below is a list of State funerals and VIC/NSW/QLD policies to compare. Over the past decade, every NSW State Service has honoured people of generally unimpeachable reputation—public servants, judges, artists, community leaders—none with the kind of enduring corruption allegations or criminal associations now tied to Graham Richardson.
