4 February 2009

Hanson-Gallagher snit

| johnboy
Join the conversation
51

The Liberals’ Jeremy Hanson is in high dudgeon.

Apparently Katy Gallagher has taken criticism of her dual health/treasury role to be driven by sexism rather than her own performance.

Colonel Hanson is not very happy about being called sexist and wants to know how he can do his job as shadow minister if Katy is going to burst into tears every time anyone says something unkind about her performance (I paraphrase).

Join the conversation

51
All Comments
  • All Comments
  • Website Comments
LatestOldest

Granny said :

thetruth said :

Granny said :

Well, perhaps we need a man for the job. A good, strong man who won’t cry. Then Katy can get back to the kitchen where she belongs, and all of our health problems will be solved forever.

Again no one is suggesting that….. extremist irrational comments do not help.

You’ve not heard of irony then?

I took it as sarcasim – it is difficult to discern the difference in the written form. I trust you understand the subtle difference.

thetruth said :

Granny said :

Well, perhaps we need a man for the job. A good, strong man who won’t cry. Then Katy can get back to the kitchen where she belongs, and all of our health problems will be solved forever.

Again no one is suggesting that….. extremist irrational comments do not help.

You’ve not heard of irony then?

What’s equally rediculous as having ministers responsible for 5 portfolios is that some government departments report to up to 3 ministers. The Department of Disability, Housing and Community Services is one, where it currently reports to 4 different ministers:

Stanhope for Indigenous Affairs
Gallagher for Community Services and for Women
Hargreaves for Disability and Housing, Ageing and also Multicultural Affairs
Corbell for Children and Young People

I fail to see the point of doing this, I’d imagine all it would do is complicate the operations of the department even further.

dexi said :

“Minister for Gender Equality”

It will never exist. The genders are not equal. Why would you want them to be?

Sounds bland to me. Equal attraction would be fun but may prove a little difficult for some. All that homosexuality action.

Hah!!!

“Minister for Gender Equality”

It will never exist. The genders are not equal. Why would you want them to be?

Sounds bland to me. Equal attraction would be fun but may prove a little difficult for some. All that homosexuality action.

What can be done to fix ACT health?

Does Hansen have any ideas?
He does seem to at least be agitating for improvement, which is good.

Zed was on telly saying he doesn’t trust labor to deal with the stimulus package, cos they messed up the GDE. Old news now = he should have some more current points to talk about.

Granny said :

Well, perhaps we need a man for the job. A good, strong man who won’t cry. Then Katy can get back to the kitchen where she belongs, and all of our health problems will be solved forever.

Again no one is suggesting that….. extremist irrational comments do not help.

Men have understood for decades the cost to family (and their part in it) of a career at the highest levels. It contributes income and economic security, but costs time with loved ones and requires emotional detactment (ie thick skin).

This is changing rapidly, but the perception remains. Why do you think the family court award residency to woman in over 90% of cases? Because men are precieved as being not as good at nurturing or are required to put in long hours etc etc? I am sorry, but I cannot, on the law of averages, believe that 90% the children are actually better off with their mothers (I have met some pretty loopy mothers. Can you imaging the uproar if the Family Court found the children are better off with their fathers in 90% of cases??

So if everyone can put down the stereotypes that would be good….. instead of being the Minister for the Status of Women, why not the “Minister for Gender Equality”….women status will be better served by looking at injustice where ever it exists….Katie is just plain incompetent and out of her depth (and so is Stanhope and he is a man)

dexi said :

I like making men cry. They feel so human afterwards.

LOL!

A good, strong man who won’t cry unless he meets dexi ….

; )

“Well, perhaps we need a man for the job. A good, strong man who won’t cry.”

I like making men cry. They feel so human afterwards.

Since I am not an apologist for Katy Gallagher she will now have to fend for herself. All the people who voted for her do seem to be staying pretty quiet, however.

I wouldn’t trust Katy to boil an egg correctly………

Well, perhaps we need a man for the job. A good, strong man who won’t cry. Then Katy can get back to the kitchen where she belongs, and all of our health problems will be solved forever.

maryhow said :

When will the protectionism by the Labor Times for Katy come off……. Jeremy is correct, everytime Katy doesn’t like a comment she calls you a sexist… grow up Katy you have been in the Kindergarten long enough now to have a thick hide. If you don’t like the heat go back to the kitchen you belong in.

Katy does seem to have a record for having a cry whenever someone says somerthing about her poor performance.

Who was it who had a go at her for being a part-time minister last year – which was then turned by Katy into an anti-single mothers rant?

I think sometimes the people who have the best ideas about how to fix things are the people on the ground, and they don’t always cost money – sometimes they are just common sense improvements to a process or procedure.

I think if you can work with the Minister, give them suggestions that they can implement fairly easily and get the credit for, then sometimes you can achieve things you couldn’t otherwise.

The people who advise Ministers are often not the people who are intimately concerned with the area, and having ‘middlemen’ can prevent the person in charge from seeing what is happening on the coal-face.

Yes, they probably don’t want everyone to know when things are going badly, but they probably do want to be informed themselves, particularly if you can think of a cheap yet practical solution for a particular issue.

Sometimes you may need to kick up a big stink, at other times you can work with a person.

gun street girl4:37 pm 05 Feb 09

I’d prefer a minister who had half a clue about what was going on in the system (rather than relying on the bureaucrats in town to run the joint). I don’t know if such a minister exists, but I think the current minister has a huge crisis on her hands and doesn’t seem to be doing anything practical about it. The ACT is just a hair’s breadth away from ending up where NSW Health is right now. The front line in ACT Health is in a terrible way. I suppose exposing it doesn’t win many votes.

Which minister would you prefer? And would it really make a difference?

gun street girl4:31 pm 05 Feb 09

Granny said :

I think there should be better systems put in place to assist all Australians achieve a healthy work/life balance.

Again, agreed. On the other hand, as somebody who’s finding it increasingly difficult to achieve said balance, particularly due to the fact that Katy’s doing a pretty poor job at handling one of her portfolios (run health into the ground –> run its workers into the ground with it), I find it hard to feel much sympathy for her dilemma.

We often comment when she is on TV, how tired she looks. Big black rings around her eyes.

I think there should be better systems put in place to assist all Australians achieve a healthy work/life balance.

However, I don’t think it’s been demonstrated that other ministers would achieve better outcomes in those portfolios than Ms Gallagher.

Anyhow, I’m not the leader of the Katy Fan Club or anything. I just wanted to make that point, as I have spoken to female politicians who have talked to me about how hard that aspect can be.

gun street girl4:17 pm 05 Feb 09

Agreed. Then again, if you can’t do both at the same time (be you male or female), the responsible thing to do is drop some of your obligations, rather than constantly attempt to achieve the impossible.

That is true. However, it is still a big thing to do as Julia Gillard pointed out some time back.

gun street girl4:10 pm 05 Feb 09

My apologies. It’s just that you referred to “traditionally feminine responses”, and given that the OP was all about Katy’s response to being criticised at work, I did make that initial connection – but then thought better of it on second thoughts.

That aside, it’s also worth pointing out that balancing a family and life with a demanding job isn’t an exclusively female domain.

Oh, for goodness’ sake. Of course it’s not.

I said what I meant and I meant what I said.

gun street girl4:00 pm 05 Feb 09

I don’t think flippant or manipulative accusations of sexism should be regarded as “traditionally feminine”. I hope that’s not what you meant!

I don’t believe that this is a case of sexism at all.

However, I also don’t believe that women should be expected to behave as if they were male just because they are elected to a political role. The whole value of having women in positions of power is that they will bring some kind of gendered balance to the political environment.

In the same way, I think it’s a mistake to expect CEOs or senior executives to have to be ‘man-like’ in order to get ahead. A woman is quite capable of making a meaningful contribution in a feminine way, and should not be made to feel that traditionally feminine responses are equivalent to weakness.

No matter what you think of her politics or performance, it can’t be easy to go into a male-dominated workplace and get to where she has today in addition to trying to raise a family and sustain meaningful relationships.

She certainly hasn’t done any worse than the other male ministers, and has remained a lot more popular with the electorate as I understand it.

When will the protectionism by the Labor Times for Katy come off……. Jeremy is correct, everytime Katy doesn’t like a comment she calls you a sexist… grow up Katy you have been in the Kindergarten long enough now to have a thick hide. If you don’t like the heat go back to the kitchen you belong in.

We need a council. Councils usually suck (ours does) but at least they’re cheap.

mutley said :

Why do we have to have so many portfolios?
If we are limited to 5 ministers, why not have:
* Treasury
* Health
* Education
* Infrastructure
* Attorney-General

You’d then have to clump the other issues under them anyway. At least then by being in their own titles, they might occaisionally see light of day.

Anotehr issue in the territory is that there are ministers responsible for different bits of the same department.

Why do we have to have so many portfolios?
If we are limited to 5 ministers, why not have:
* Treasury
* Health
* Education
* Infrastructure
* Attorney-General

These days whenever I think about her I can’t get the ‘I heart Stanhope’ political ad from the last election out of my head.

It was just so…weird.

Was that the one where you could easily see her eyes reading her lines?

Katy, she’s such a funny wee girlie!

Christ, no wonder she’s in politics: she wouldn’t last 10 mins out in the real world.

Econman makes some salient points above. Having the Health Minister also be the Treasurer is not a good recipe.

I believe the ALP cite the numbers in the Legislative Assembly (and being restricted to 5 Ministers isn’t it?) as the problem.

I would suggest vastly decreasing the scope and size of Government however I know that isn’t going to happen so I think there might be a case for increasing the numbers in the Legislative Assembly. However my stipulation is that the total pool of MLA salaries stay the same.

It works quite well in New Hampshire. They have a population of 1.2 million, a parliment of over 400 (I think the third or fourth biggest legislative body in the world), and each Rep gets a $300 travel allowance every year.

neanderthalsis9:10 am 05 Feb 09

Maybe the stress of multiple portfoios made her mis-hear his opening line as “Back in the kitchen with ye woman, and fetch my supper.”

VYBerlinaV8_the_one_they_all_copy9:09 am 05 Feb 09

Good to see people denouncing this sort of behaviour. Ultimately, equality is what we strive for, and leaning on sexism (or racism, etc) when it’s not the case derails the cause.

This is something that always bothered me about Raiders of the lost Arc. You have this woman who runs a bar, drinks her fat patrons under the table, and can stand up to Nazi’s. but then she turns into a dribbling crying girl shouting “Indy, save me” later in the film.

If you want to get into politics you need to be consistently tough and arrogant. If you cant do that then get out and go and arrange flowers.

“What’s wrong with being sexy anyway?”

The sluts would get all the power. Its an unfair advantage and the sluts already get enough.

Pommy bastard7:58 am 05 Feb 09

baueran said :

What’s wrong with being sexy anyway?

It’s not allowed to think of someone as sexy these days, we are to consider everyone as a person in their own right.

What’s wrong with being sexy anyway?

What made me angry was when she took on the role of Treasurer, she freely admitted to having no knowledge, background or study in finance. Now, somebody please explain, how does that work??
As for her sexist remarks, I don’t think someone who is the Minister For Women has any place to comment. I can’t see a Minister For Men anywhere in the Assembly.

Now I’m convinced she’s a whining loser.

Econman said :

Ignoring the political snipery viz. sexism, he is spot on. This has been an issue in the Assembly Ministerial structure for a very long time.

Here is the issue: imagine budget time, there are thousands of submissions for funding of things as variously stupid as a light/mono rail, extra bike lanes, cardiothoracic specialists and retaining unviable schools. The Treasurer must be able to sift through the crud to isolate the genuinely stupid ideas, so when the cabinet considers their own little silos, s/he (the Treasurer) can fight for what is right for the Territory tax payer. It is the job of the portfolio Minister to get debating points from his/her Department or hacks to argue why the stupid ideas merit funding.

It is not possible for the biggest spending portfolio to be rationally reviewed if the Treasurer is the same Minister. Equivalently it is not possible for Health to be rationally considered when the Treasurer is fending of the thousands of other claims. Can you imagine the debate? ‘Katy, I need more money for doctors and nurses’, ‘no, Katy, we need more savings to funds roads and teachers’, ‘but Katy, doctors are really important’, ‘yes, but Katy so are teachers’. It would be enough to drive you crazy!

Treasury/Deputy CM, Treasury/CM or Treasury/Minister for opening things (Tourism, sports, arts and so forth) may be feasible combinations. But neither the Treasury nor the Health portfolio are served well by being run from the same office.

Especially not a left leaning office in a left leaning parliament.

Now I am off my soapbox.

Very well put – I wonder if she has a hissy fit at when she loses one of these arguements? Can she be a misogynist and a feminist? Perhaps katie should consult Schrödinger’s cat for the answer?

It really annoys me when women play the ‘sexist’ card and denote any (valid or invalid) criticism as being ‘sexism’. Devalues and diminishes actual sexism. Grrrrrrr.

gun street girl9:57 pm 04 Feb 09

Anyone running Health has a political noose around their neck – the ACT system is beyond a joke. If she had any sense at all, she’d be trying to offload that portfolio ASAP.

Who else is there though? Hargreaves? Ready for retirement Corbell? Just cant get it done. Barr seems competnent but cant do everything. Its going to be a long four years if Katy cries foul everytime she is criticised…

Thats ridiculous.
Why does she have/need all those portfolios? Is there noone else who can do the job?
Does she get paid extra for each one?

And then there’s the other little portfolios that aren’t Health or Treasury that fall under Katy Gallagher…

Apparently, it’s http://www.chiefminister.act.gov.au/section.php?v=20

Treasurer
Minister for Health
Minister for Community Services
Minister for Women

Where is the Kindergarten Cop when you need him? Katy, stop being such an economic girly..er..girl and do your flippin job.

Ignoring the political snipery viz. sexism, he is spot on. This has been an issue in the Assembly Ministerial structure for a very long time.

Here is the issue: imagine budget time, there are thousands of submissions for funding of things as variously stupid as a light/mono rail, extra bike lanes, cardiothoracic specialists and retaining unviable schools. The Treasurer must be able to sift through the crud to isolate the genuinely stupid ideas, so when the cabinet considers their own little silos, s/he (the Treasurer) can fight for what is right for the Territory tax payer. It is the job of the portfolio Minister to get debating points from his/her Department or hacks to argue why the stupid ideas merit funding.

It is not possible for the biggest spending portfolio to be rationally reviewed if the Treasurer is the same Minister. Equivalently it is not possible for Health to be rationally considered when the Treasurer is fending of the thousands of other claims. Can you imagine the debate? ‘Katy, I need more money for doctors and nurses’, ‘no, Katy, we need more savings to funds roads and teachers’, ‘but Katy, doctors are really important’, ‘yes, but Katy so are teachers’. It would be enough to drive you crazy!

Treasury/Deputy CM, Treasury/CM or Treasury/Minister for opening things (Tourism, sports, arts and so forth) may be feasible combinations. But neither the Treasury nor the Health portfolio are served well by being run from the same office.

Especially not a left leaning office in a left leaning parliament.

Now I am off my soapbox.

Workload is not Katy’s problem. Incompetence is.

I’m sure she can mismange both portfolios together just as well as she did when she only had health.

Daily Digest

Want the best Canberra news delivered daily? Every day we package the most popular Riotact stories and send them straight to your inbox. Sign-up now for trusted local news that will never be behind a paywall.

By submitting your email address you are agreeing to Region Group's terms and conditions and privacy policy.