Liberal Leader Zed Seselja is flogging his dead horse about Shane Rattenbury’s past links to Greenpeace.
Weirdly Zed feels it’s important for the Green MLA to say things Zed wants him to say. But his argument gets weirder still:
Two Greenpeace members have pleaded guilty to property damage of CSIRO experimental crops reportedly worth $300,000. ACT Opposition Leader Zed Seselja said today it is now up to Shane Rattenbury to finally condemn illegal, destructive behaviour.
“Now that the Greenpeace members who broke into the CSIRO facility and ruined these crops have pleaded guilty, it is up to Shane Rattenbury to condemn it, as he has refused to do to date,” Mr Seselja said.
“Just last week, he refused to immediately and unequivocally condemn the apparent destruction of property at a Canberra egg farm.
“It’s indefensible for any lawmaker to support unlawful behaviour, let alone the Speaker of the Assembly.
“I call on Shane Rattenbury to today publicly state his position on the CSIRO case,” Mr Seselja concluded.
Let’s look at that again:
It’s indefensible for any lawmaker to support unlawful behaviour
It seems to me that history is replete with great law makers who supported unlawful behaviour, because they believed the law was wrong, and were vindicated by history.
Springing to mind are the parliamentarians who said no to Charles I and gave birth to what we think of as Westminster Democracy, slavery abolitionists both in the UK and the USA, Germans who opposed genocide, and South Africans who stood up against apartheid.
I’m also pretty sure the great US legislator Lyndon Johnson would fall afoul of Zed’s dictum with his work towards civil rights.
I’m not convinced Shane Rattenbury’s conscience falls into this category. But if all lawmakers will be forced to subvert their consciences to the laws as they stand we’ll be, in my opinion, in a pretty dark place.
Aside from the poll I invite readers to nominate individuals from history, greater than Zed Seselja, who supported unlawful behaviour?