EDITORIAL: Chief Minister Lia Finocchiaro’s defence of her selection of David Connolly as Administrator this week has done nothing to calm rising tensions in the wider community and instead raised questions about what type of agenda she’s driving that was not fully disclosed to Territorians ahead of the last NT election.

As the leader of the Territory, we expect her to put the community above herself and lead honourably, taking everyone in the community along to help fix our problems and ultimately achieve a better outcome for the Territory.

Instead, she has shown by her actions and comments this week that she’s intent on taking us to a dark place by fuelling community division and stoking racial tensions.

The Northern Territory is already fragile after consecutive governments put its individual members’ interests ahead of the best interests of the NT and used the Territory’s institutions as their own plaything, shattering the public’s confidence in its systems.

When comments that attack a wide cross-section of the community by a public offical rear their head publicly, it’s the leader we look to, to show us how to respond.

To steal a line from the political film ‘The Ides of March’: “Society has to be better than the individual”.

That’s especially true when the individual has been appointed to a role established to reflect and encourage community cohesion and represent the best of us and what we aspire to collectively.

The choice of David Connolly as Administrator has become political poison for Lia and her CLP team that has only served to divide and harm the community while the government attempted this week to silence debate, while inadvertently shooting itself in the foot.

The Connolly affair has carried on for more than three weeks now, with no end in sight.

When a government cannot execute its day-to-day political agenda because the air is clouded with scandal, a responsible government removes the scandal to clear the air.

There is nothing for Lia Finocchiaro to gain politically at this point by keeping Connolly in the role, and when the expected protests start and continue at every one of his events, it will be a constant reminder of the CLP’s choice to sow community division rather than admit an error in judgment and correct it.

So why dig in on Connolly? Who recommended him to Lia for this job in the first place and for what reasons?

There’s dozens of well-deserving Territorians who have helped the community for years who would be better suited for the role.

The political poison has now spread into the functions of our Parliament, affecting its day-to-day business, while we all shake our heads and wonder what the hell is going on.

The crossbench and Opposition were right to walk out of a Parliament that was gagging them from asking simple questions for their constituents about the selection of Connolly and the processes behind it.

They attempted to have the standing orders suspended to discuss the situation openly, but the CLP used its numbers to shut that down. By the time Speaker Robyn Lambley was shouting down a respected Indigenous MLA for daring to ask questions for his constituents about Connolly’s racist remarks, it was clear the appointment had caused harm and hurt to many in our community.

Speaker misinterpreted standing order

What caused the “disruption and chaos” on Thursday afternoon was Robyn Lambley’s deeply flawed interpretation of standing order 30, that was so fundamentally wrong we have to question who is giving her advice and if there are enough competent staffers in the NT Legislative Assembly to keep it functioning.

Taken from Federal Parliament, standing order 30 dictates that no member can refer to the “Australian Head of State or their representative…in a disrespectful manner or in a manner intended to influence Members during a debate”.

Questioning why the government chose Connolly is not being disrespectful, it’s the function of the Opposition and crossbench members’ roles in holding the government to account for its decisions.

Lambley should have known that the interpretation of any standing order needs to be done with the widest lens possible, with particular care and consideration given to ensure debate and public discourse in the public’s house is not stifled.

A blanket ban on naming Connolly, asking about the process of appointing and selecting him, and forbidding any questions about his past social media and other public commentary is not in keeping with the intent of that standing order and you don’t need to have been in Parliament for 15 years to figure that out.

Lambley appeared to forget the role of the Opposition and crossbench, which she is technically still a member of, but fell for Lia’s trap after the election to silence her strong voice by putting her in the plum Speaker role. Which it appears paid off nicely this week for Lia.

It would also be good to know who raised the issue of standing order 30 with the Speaker before Parliament started.

All week the CLP hid behind Lambley’s misguided interpretation, at one ridiculous point objecting to a motion that contained the phrase “community concerns”, arguing that mentioning community concerns about the appointment was disrespectful to His Highness the Administrator.

This is where Parliament descended into farce and continued for days, leading to the walk out to protest the clear gagging of public debate on Thursday afternoon.

And let’s be clear here, if the Gunner-Fyles-Manison-Lawler Labor government was still in power, they would have pulled the same tactic as the CLP to hide from answering questions.

That’s one of the most disappointing facets of this Finocchiaro CLP Government; their stubborn insistence on politics as usual in the NT, a straight continuation of the last bad Labor government, appointing mates for senior statutory roles, taking bad advice from conflicted senior public service executives, hiding from the media, changing laws to block transparency or enable human rights abuses, and ultimately putting their own individual interests ahead of the larger Territory community.

Both have continuously put the individual above the whole of the community and above the public importance of the high public office in which they have been granted the privilege of being temporary custodians.

Chief Minister would not condemn Connolly’s remarks

Comments that insult and degrade wide sections of the community, including Indigenous people, women, LGBTQI+ people and domestic violence survivors is not wise politically for anyone, particularly for the politician who condones those comments and promotes the man who made them to the highest office.

This is where the issue differs from that of a politician. Any politician can make those comments as well, as is their right to free speech, but they would be judged by their constituents at the poll.

In this case, there is no such democratic function, except appealing to the Chief Minister’s good sense and character not to appoint that person to such a prestigious public role.

Connolly himself has not fronted the media and for such a self-professed loudmouth, suddenly went silent outside of a poorly thought-out statement last month that offered no apologies for the hurtful comments, but included a sort of disclaimer that he would never have said that stuff publicly had he known he would become the Administrator. Which didn’t exactly address the issue or quell community concerns.

He’s had more than enough time to retract the comments and explain why he thinks he’s entitled to this position.

The Chief Minister has not been upfront either about her reasons for appointing him outside of his vast agricultural experience and that he might somehow help with rebuilding the economy, which is not his role. She wouldn’t take responsibility for him either, at one point this week claiming the Federal Government was responsible for vetting her choice of Administrator.

Lia seems to relish the combative approach to politics. But she’s misreading the effect this appointment will have on her and her CLP team politically, and the community more broadly, which after this week has become the biggest test of her leadership yet.

We all saw what happened to Brent Potter after his social media posts were made public. Labor too at the time backed Potter to their detriment.

This is not about freedom of speech, cancel culture, or being ‘woke’ or ‘anti-woke’. This is about appointment to a vice-regal position with vast constitutional powers – essentially the highest office in the land – who needs to have the public’s confidence to carry out the role effectively and as the NT Bar Association said this week, needs to be politically neutral, act with restraint, “and be widely seen as dignified, impartial and suitable for the role”, while representing the whole community, “not just those with power and influence”.

Not only could Lia not bring herself to denounce Connolly’s comments this week or offer a proper explanation, she doubled down and claimed she would appoint Connolly to the role again if she could, after becoming fully aware of the contents of his past speeches and social media posts.

The political poison was lapped up and its effects will come to be seen soon enough, not just for the individual, but the entire community.