Helen Dalton MP and NSW Premier Chris Minns

What can be concluded from this video?

NSW Member for Murray, Helen Dalton, asks Premier Chris Minns “will you fight to protect rural NSW please”.

This is an indistinct question with no definitive demand or request.

Premier Minns replies that “we oppose water buy backs in NSW from the Federal government”.

This is an indistinct reply that certainly does not express a definite rejection of the Federal Government’s water purchase intentions.

The reality of politics, and in this example Labor Party politics, is that Chris Minns is from Sydney and is the leader of the NSW Labor government. The Federal Water Minister, Tanya Plibersek, is also from Sydney and is a Cabinet member of the Federal Labor Government.

Minns and Plibersek are from the same political party, same city, same State, and attend the same Labor Party conferences and other meetings. They are obviously familiar with each other, and are bound by similar political ethics and ambitions.

In practise, it is the normal intention of politicians to eventually advance from State politics to Federal politics. This advance requires the support of many other members of that member’s Party.

Premier Minns will not endanger his political career, or disturb the stability of the Labor party, by opposing Minister Plibersek. He will not, and probably cannot, act contrarily to the policies of his Federal Labor Party colleagues.

In conclusion, Premier Minns will not reject (as he has the Australian Constitutional authority to do) Federal Government water purchases from NSW.

Does Helen Dalton understand, or not understand, these politics? Does Chris Minns understand, these politics?

The indistinct question, the indistinct answer, and the apparent misunderstanding of politics by professional politicians, all leave me not convinced that this question and answer episode contains any genuine participants at all.

David Landini.