Costa: Police watchdog

It’s now clear that the people of NSW live in a dual reality. I saw most of the TV news programs on the night of last week’s march through the city, and saw no violence from protesters. I did see a mounted police officer charge into a reporter.

The next day The Daily Telegraph splashed with “WHAT A BLOODY DISGRACE” and a picture of a small man held by three large police being led towards the camera. The lead paragraph, by reporters Ben English and Rachel Morris, read:

“Violent street demonstrations over the World Trade Organisation’s meeting in Sydney by a coalition of professional protesters have cost taxpayers more than $5 million to police.”

The Tele published no pictures of protester violence.

The man Bob Carr will entrust with supervision of police activities under their new terrorism powers is police minister Michael Costa. I recorded his rhetoric and actions in the lead-up to last week’s WTO protests inLabor’s new crime: Civil disobedience (webdiaryNov1), Protesting GATS, if you’re game (webdiaryNov10) and Hey Joh: Costa’s the new demon along the watchtower (webdiaryNov14)

Tonight, the text of what Costa told Parliament last Thursday after the reporter smashed to the ground by police on horseback had been taken to hospital, a note I faxed to Premier Carr late today, and early reactions to Bob Carr and me. from Rodney Sewell and Mark Hyde.

I’ll publish your accounts of last week’s protests in the next entry.

***

The Hon. PETER BREEN (Reform the Legal System Party): My question is to the Minister for Police. Is the Minister aware that a number of people were arrested and others were injured in the protest march in Sydney today as a result of the World Trade Organisation meeting at Homebush Bay? Is the Minister also aware that, because the protest march involved unlawful policing, several demonstrators acted irresponsibly by defacing public buildings and spraying graffiti on public transport vehicles? Is the Minister also aware that the traffic in the city came to a halt and business was disrupted because police had no control over the boundaries or direction of the march? Can the Minister inform the House of the cost to the community of the protest march? Can the Minister compare that cost to the cost of giving police approval? Will the Minister indicate why police approval for the march was not given?

The Hon. MICHAEL COSTA: There are elements of the question that are sensible, and I am happy to respond to those. I have asked the police to detail the cost of this WTO meeting and the cost of all of the precautions that had to be taken because of the threat of violent protest action. And there was a threat of violent protest action. Last night it was pointed out to me – I have not read the adjournment debate – that Ms Lee Rhiannon made some accusations that the Greens have conducted a search of the web to find where these disturbing threats of violence were. The fact of the matter is that they are on the web site. Today I can give the House some more information. A site called “Active Sydney” runs a messaging system. These are sophisticated protestors. They use information technology to cause maximum chaos in the city. They are running an SMS messaging service, which allows people involved in the demonstration to contact and be informed of where they should do something called “spin the bottle”. I read from the site.

For example, if your text message reads “SMUG the bottle is spinning on the corner of pitt and park” then all subscribers to SMUG will get the message on their phone: “the bottle is spinning on the corner of pitt and park”. It’s simple!

Then you try to work out what is “spin the bottle”. That is even more intriguing. It says: Spin the bottle takes the form of a blockade. The spin the bottle blockade takes on the WTO in a no-holds-barred fight to the finish. And you can join them.

I will not read the rest of it, but it goes on to say: We invite you to join us for the most militant game of spin the bottle ever attempted – turning up the heat until every kiss becomes a molotov.

The Greens come into this Chamber and pretend they are running peaceful protests. If they wanted a peaceful protest, they would go to protests permitted by the police. The police have permitted demonstrations against the WTO, and they ought to attend those. No. What do they choose to do? They choose to run wild in the streets. I heard Ms Lee Rhiannon and I think Hon. Ian Cohen as well making comments that I and the police were responsible for the violence that they – until this question time – had not sought to distance themselves from. I have asked Ms Lee Rhiannon on three or four occasions to distance herself from violent protest action. She chose not to – until it actually occurred in the streets this morning. Then did she come into the House and made a personal explanation, to try to distance herself from it. The Greens are hypocrites, and they have been exposed as such.

I have in front of me, off the web site again, the “[No2wto] sydney minutes”. These are the minutes of the meeting from 21 September 2002, in which there is an endorsement of mass action and a game of spin the bottle. I asked the Greens to tell me that none of their people participated in the “[No2wto] sydney minutes” meeting, where that particular strategy of spin the bottle was endorsed. It is a simple question. Did the Greens get involved in that? Were the Greens involved? If so, what did they discuss? And why are they condoning this sort of action? I might note that the very group that was running this forum in this Parliament is actually providing information on “arrest procedures, charges and rights”. Now, why would you be providing that information if you are going to go along to a peaceful demonstration? So they are preparing their legal action for a violent confrontation with the police. That is what they have got. They are responsible. They cannot hide from that.

BREEN: I ask a supplementary question. I attended the protest rally this morning, and was interested to note that no bottles were spun. There was no violence, despite what might have been in the Minister’s information. Why is it that other protests in the city, involving similar groups of people, are approved and this protest was not approved?

COSTA: I think I answered this question a number of days ago. Dick Adams, the commander in charge of the operational police involved in controlling the crowds and the protest actions in relation to the WTO, advised that he was not prepared to give a permit because he had evidence that there would be violent confrontation. That has been confirmed. The Greens might try to distance themselves from it, but it has been confirmed; it has happened in the streets of Sydney. That is the reason that they were not given permission. The police asked them to give an assurance that there would not be any violence, and they could not do that. That is the fact of the matter.

More important are the “[No2wto sydney minutes”. This is the meeting they held. It goes through a range of actions that they are preparing. It is all in very brief form, obviously, because they know that somebody like me might get on the web and have a look at these things. But the code is not all that good, because you can piece it all together. They have organised and endorsed a “mass action game of spin the bottle”. So these people have prepared for this action. They have defined what spin the bottle is in other postings on the Internet. They have come here for violent confrontation, and they are preparing lawyers for arrests. If you are going to a peaceful demonstration, why do you need to prepare legal strategies for arrests? It does not make any sense.

Apart from that, I did challenge Ms Lee Rhiannon yesterday to tell this Parliament what laws she believes require civil disobedience in this State. She made some very broad statements about civil disobedience, the role of civil disobedience, and a number of other things, and how her position in this Parliament was as a consequence of that. But she has never outlined to anybody here what laws she is opposed to that would justify the action in which she has been involved and which she has been sponsoring in this Parliament. The Greens are hypocrites. They stand condemned. The personal explanation given today will not distance the honourable member from that.

***

 

Note to Lee Rhiannon, Nov 17

 

I am writing on behalf of the No-WTO Spin The Bottle Bloc in reference to comments Michael Costa made in parliament on the 14th. As you may recall, Mr Costa denounced our group, apparently believing “spin the bottle” was some kind of code for violent disruption. We are now trying to make clear that what we called for, simply and literally, was a game of spin the bottle in the streets of Sydney. It is hard for us to imagine a less aggressive form of protest, and we find it incredibly bizarre that the police minister talk a call for teen kissing games as some kind of threat. At worst we are guilty of a use of metaphor that sailed over Mr Costa’s head. Thus, we will be holding a small game of spin the bottle outside parliament on Wednesday afternoon. Since Mr Costa seemed, in the hansard transcripts, to be maligning you personally for your participation in “spin the bottle”, we are extending the invitation to join the bloc as we spin. Please let me know if you are interested; I assure you the greatest danger posed by this action is having to kiss someone who didn’t brush their teeth that morning (a danger I will be vigourously discouragig). Please let me know, also, if you do wish to participate, whether I can include that in our press releases. Alternately, we would welcome your non-salivary presence at the event, possibly to make a brief statement to the media. Below is the press release we have sent out this morning for your perusal. Thanks for your time,

 

Morris Day.

 

Cops Crack Down On Spin The Bottle, Protestors Promise To Pash Anyway

 

The Spin The Bottle Bloc, an activist group involved in the recent No-WTO protests, are planning a game of spin the bottle outside State Parliament on Wednesday after their six-foot bottle was confiscated by police at the Olympic site on Friday. “We put it down for about fifteen minutes. When we came back it was gone,” said Morris Day, a member of the Bloc. “It’s bad enough the police stopped us getting to the hotel, but when they stop us snogging each other, it’s just unAustralian.” The bottle – a fragile and completely unthreatening prop made of chicken wire, acetate and sticky tape – was obviously no danger, so why was it seized? The Spin The Bottle Bloc blame Police Minister Michael Costa, who denounced their planned action in State Parliament on Thursday. Mr Costa, having come across the phrase “spin the bottle” in activist communications, pondered the “intriguing” question, “what is ‘spin the bottle’?” “Who doesn’t know what spin the bottle is?” asked Day. “Costa obviously wasn’t invited to the right parties, but that’s what you get for wasting your youth in party politics.” Mr Costa liberally and inaccurately paraphrased from the Spin The Bottle Bloc’s call to action, explaining: “Spin the bottle takes the form of a blockade. The spin the bottle blockade takes on the WTO in a no-holds-barred fight to the finish. And you can join them. I will not read the rest of it, but it goes on to say: We invite you to join us for the most militant game of spin the bottle ever attempted – turning up the heat until every kiss becomes a molotov” “[Protestors] have defined what spin the bottle is in postings on the Internet. They have come here for violent confrontation.” The idea that spin the bottle is a “violent confrontation” is absurd. In context, the use of words ike “molotov” was obviously a joke, a metaphor. A metaphor, for the police minister’s benefit, is when you use words in a symbolic rather than a literal way. For example, when we say we’ve been laughing our arses off at what a fuckhead Michael Costa is, we do not actually mean that our bottoms have fallen from our bodies, or that Michael Costa’s cranium is some kind of sexual plaything. Although it’s hard to take any of this seriously, there is an important issue at stake. The New South Wales Police Minister cannot tell the difference between pashing and terrorism. In Parliament, spin the bottle was his one and only example of protestors’ “disturbing threats of violence”, his justification for aggressive police tactics. The minister has wasted millions of dollars and injured dozens of people defending WTO delegates against the threat of tonsil hockey. Contact the Spin The Bottle Bloc: Email: montezboy@yahoo.com

 

***

 

 

The Hon. IAN COHEN (Green): My question is directed to the Minister for Police.

Costa: Here we go.

COHEN: Yes, that is right – here we go. Will he acknowledge his role in vilifying protests and take responsibility for all police actions, including unlawful police actions, at the World Trade Organisation [WTO] protest today? Does he stand by the statement he made in the House during question time yesterday about “rabble [taking] control of our streets”? Does he regard Patricia Karveles, from the Australian newspaper, as rabble, given that she is now hospitalised with a suspected broken pelvis after being trampled by a police horse in an illegitimate and illegal charge by police horses when she was standing on the side of the road?

The Hon. Richard Jones(Former Democrat, now independent): You don’t care, do you, Minister?

COSTA: That is not right. It is important to acknowledge, although I do not know the circumstances

Cohen: I saw it.

COSTA: If the honourable member saw it, obviously he was participating in an illegal demonstration.

Cohen: That is correct.

COSTA: The honourable member is admitting to the House that he was participating in an illegal demonstration.

Cohen: That is correct.

COSTA: Okay, fine. The Greens have acknowledged that they have participated in an illegal demonstration. All honourable members have heard that. Let me deal with the issue of the media person who was injured. I heard news reports about that. I have asked for a report from police about it. Let me say that I think everybody in the House, including myself and the police involved, sympathise with the person who was injured and hope that she makes a speedy recovery. She was there, as were many people in the media, to cover events. She is obviously a person who was injured in the course of her work, as opposed to somebody who went there illegally to demonstrate, like the Hon. Ian Cohen – as he has just admitted to this House.

Breen: Point of order: The Minister is not entitled to denigrate another member of the House by saying that the member went to a particular place in a particular way. There was no admission by the Hon. Ian Cohen of why he was there.

COSTA: Yes there was.

Breen: I witnessed the Hon. Ian Cohen at the demonstration and he was not taking part in the demonstration. For the Minister to suggest that he was is an imputation against the Hon. Ian Cohen and it ought to be withdrawn.

The PRESIDENT: Order! In previous rulings I have made a distinction between imputations against a member and imputations against actions of a member. The Minister for Police was making statements about the actions of the member. The Minister may proceed.

COSTA: I am actually surprised at that point of order. I think the Hon. Ian Cohen takes pride in the fact that he was at that illegal demonstration, but that is a different matter. Discussion has taken place about the WTO during question time in this House and in speeches that other members have made in adjournment debates. I am sure all members would be aware of the potential for problems to occur at a WTO meeting. On web sites, people have been advocating violent confrontation with the police. I read only a moment ago some other material from a web site called “active sydney”, which is one of the co-ordinating sites

Reverend the Hon. Fred Nile (Christian Democratic Party): It happens in every city.

COSTA: Just because it happens

Nile: I am supporting you. I am trying to help you.

COSTA: I thank Reverend the Hon. Fred Nile. I appreciate the help.

The Hon. Michael Gallacher (Liberal, shadow minister for industrial relations): There is no support coming from the members behind you, but there is some from the crossbench – from on the Right.

COSTA: I do not mind having support from the Right. The fact is that these sites have been advocating violence against the WTO meeting. Clearly our police are charged with the responsibility of maintaining social order. The fact of the matter is that if these people go out to close the WTO”shut it down”, to use their terminology – the implication is that they will use violence against those who are involved in it. How else is a legal, legitimate, peaceful meeting shut down? The only way it can be shut down is by illegal means. It is clearly the case that the demonstrators were there with the intention of shutting down the WTO meeting, by their own admission.

The Hon. Duncan Gay (National Party leader in the Upper House): And this is against a group that is charged with making things better for those who need help.

COSTA: We do not want a debate about the WTO.

COHEN: I ask a supplementary question. Will the Minister first of all answer the question about the media person who was seriously injured? Will he give a directive to stop using police horses as weapons in peaceful protests?

COSTA: Weapons?

COHEN: Yes, weapons. Will he undertake to provide the House with a full police report on this matter?

Jones: He should do that, at the very least.

COSTA: I have already indicated that I will ask for a full report from the police.

Cohen: Will you provide it to the House?

COSTA: I am happy to provide a report to the House on the matters associated with the WTO meeting, including the costs and all the actions taken. I think the House is entitled to have that to be able to understand the conduct of some of its members. I have not made any direct comments about it because I am waiting for a report. I could have made references to a news report I heard alleging that demonstrators were slapping the horses and that this caused the horses to move forward. I have not said anything about that because I am waiting for a full report, and I will get a full report on the matter. But that does not excuse the fact that a journalist conducting her work-related activity attended the place because an illegal demonstration was being conducted, and that illegal demonstration was being conducted in the face of police, government and other concerns about the likely outcomes of such activities in the city.

The people who are responsible are those who are running wild in the streets of Sydney. They are 100 per cent responsible for the problems in the city today. I have told the Greens that they have a challenge. It is no good their coming into this House trying to distance themselves on the day an event occurs. They had the opportunity to distance themselves earlier in the week and they did not take that opportunity. In fact. they refused point-blank to distance themselves from these activities. Now that an incident has occurred, they want to distance themselves and blame the police. Well, that will not wash. I have challenged the Greens to tell me whether there were any representatives of the Greens at the protest against the WTO meeting that is being held in Sydney who were planning these events and who talked very clearly about a spin the bottle action – an activity conducted this morning that has led to disruption of the city and illegal behaviour.

***

I faxed the following note to the Premier’s office tonight:

To: Premier Carr

From: Margo Kingston

Sir,

I refer to the press conference you gave at midday today in Parliament House and the interview with you broadcast on 2GB at 12.30 pm.

At the press conference you falsely accused me of having written in The Sydney Morning Herald that the victims of the Bali bombing were to blame for their own deaths.

You said: “To blame the Bali dead for the bombing is a disgrace and you are a parody of a journalist.”

You also said: “What happened in Bali was the murder of innocent Australians, not people who were guilty because they were celebrating in a third world country as you argued in the Sydney Morning Herald. Not that at all.”

Despite my denials, you broadcast a variation of this damaging slur against me to a much wider audience on 2GB. You said I had written a column “attempting to argue that it was Australian tourists who provoked the Bali bombing, words to that effect”. You later said in the same broadcast that you had read my piece, which said “it was something in the way Western tourists behaved in Bali that invited the bombing”.

Your allegations are false and baseless.

For your information I enclose everything I have written about the Bali bombing. I invite you to find one instance where I have blamed the Bali dead for the bombing, or said that Australian tourists in Bali provoked the bombing.

In the event that you are unable to do so, I expect a public retraction and apology. Given the vicious nature of your attack upon me, I do not think it is unreasonable to ask your office to respond within 24 hours.

Sincerely,

Margo Kingston

***

Rodney Sewell in Munich

As an Australian living in Munich, I very much value reading your column online in the SMH. It’s one island of intelligent calm in a sea of Padraic McGuinnesses.

I was shocked at the behaviour Bob Carr, at his intimidation and his insults.

Please, for what it’s worth, accept my support and my thanks for the stand you’ve taken and the articles you’ve written. I may not agree with what you say, but you have every right to say it. Take care but don’t stop.

PS: Was 2GB presenter Chris Smith’s line “those nosey reporters – they tend to ask questions…” meant ironically or seriously? As you can probably tell, I’ve been away from Sydney for a long time…

***

Mark Hyde in Armidale, NSW

While it’s easy to put the Premier’s Kennettesque style put down down to a just a ruffled ego, I do think that (after reading all you’ve published) you brought this whole episode on yourself (not Carr’s demonstrably misogynist attitude:)).

I agree with you that the whole allegations against are sickening, however there was some words in your first article that could have lead a desperate political operator like Carr to exploit the fears and worries of a hand wringing public.

I quote the paragraph I’m referring to:

“I know little about Bali, and whether we’ve respected and nurtured the place we love to visit or colonised it with our wants. A friend in Byron Bay said Australians had taken Bali over, business wise, and that acquaintances with businesses in Bali were considering coming home before this horror. They sensed resentment, and felt a growing unease.

“Maybe part of it is the lack of services for locals. A completely inadequate hospital, for instance, so graphically exposed in the aftermath of the horror. Some people – foreigners like us, elite big-city Indonesians – make their fortunes. Have residents lost their place, their power to define it? Did the big money fail to give enough back to the people who belong there, whose home it is? Have Muslim extremists destroyed the vibe of Hindu Bali to force us out?

Supporting Carr’s allegations is not my purpose here, but a clutching politician who is itching to get his law and order/security credentials across is bound to exploit words such as these to his own advantage.

No Australian deserved or is responsible for the tragedy in Bali. But base political motives are bound to flow through town seeking out people to blame and the first questioner of these movements tends to be singled out and made an example of.

By the way, Paddy really outdid himself today. Linking the protesters with terrorists is the one of the most reprehensible acts a so-called commentator can make. I also pity future protester movements who have not made better cases to get a marching permit. But did they have to tear down ‘carefully’ constructed barricades to Costa’s base political motivations?:):)

Anyway thanks for the Webdiary voice on smh.com.au.

Leave a Reply