Media
CAN THE VAN: Pouting Peter’s hidden agenda and secret past exclusively revealed
The Australian’s Peter van Onselen’s extraordinary attack on the highly regarded Communications minister Stephen Conroy left some wondering this morning who is this man? And should he be axed as the Australian’s contributing editor for slopping up such muck?
van Onselen’s snide attack appeared blessed from some within the patriotic News Corp family who are a little peeved with some of the minister’s decisions recently. Nothing wrong with carrying out a corporate vendetta, as per instructions, yet the arrogant and self-righteous tone of it could not have been more provocative for this patriotic publication.
The shockingly vain former minor academic at Australia’s worst university argues that giving Australia fibre optic cable to allow a time-proof world class internet infrastructure is a waste of money. Having received a salary for some time from the “Super TAFE” Edith Cowan where he disinterestedly “taught” politics to what he described as the “savages” within, van Onselen is probably well-positioned to assess what’s a waste of public money quite well. He goes on to claim the NBN’s appointment of Mike Kaiser was “dodgy… even in the shady world of political decision-making.” If politics is shady, we hate to think what makes its commentators, perhaps shadowy. Kaiser is probably the most qualified person the NBN could have hired to manage government relations, certainly much more qualified than van Onselen is to do anything, perhaps other than counting Daddy’s money. But we’ll get to that in a minute.
SHOW ME THE MONEY
Pouting Peter then gets to the point which is a complaint of sorts that if free to air TV gets a discount in the hundreds of millions of dollars in taxes they pay the Commonwealth, why can’t the part News Corp owned Foxtel get a little something as well. The correspondent is silent about other Conroy provocations, including decisions that could give the News Corp owned Sky News a little competition and so on.
The NBN of course will provide an enormous level playing field for a new era of information broadcasting in this country, challenging monopolies like Foxtel.
van Onselen receives pay cheques for regular appearances on Sky News but didn’t round to disclosing these conflicts of interest in his article. Perhaps he’s too rich to be corrupted, but we’ll come back to that.
News Corp hates Kerry Stokes for good reason, the quirky billionaire who tied them up with expensive and annoying litigation for years, so hearing that Conroy met with Stokes on a social occasion was enough to have the News Corp Guns of Navarone firing at the minister implying wrongdoing.
It was ugly but hardly impactful stuff. And silly, with no-one credibly arguing that the Minister for Communications ought not be meeting with all key players in the industries he deals with.
57 CHANNELS AND NOTHING’S ON
The truth is that free TV’s best days are behind it. The days of cocaine and champagne flowing like a mighty stream of advertiser largesse are over. They’re battling, being squeezed by Foxtel on the ad revenue front and losing young eyeballs by the hundreds of thousands to Youtube, torrents, streaming and the internet generally. The party’s over and we suspect that TV licence fees will continue to drop (permanently) regardless of whether Conroy is minister or not. He’s made the right decision on this, we don’t like most TV spivs either but taxing a declining industry to death is clearly not in the national interest.
Unlike van Onselen, whose supposedly conservative political position can be corrupted by a corporate directive, we believe in low taxes and limited government. He believes in high taxes for his boss’s competitors and zero taxes and zero competition for his boss. We can all dream but it doesn’t do a lot for his credibility to take these positions. He seems to be as bendy-stretchy as the most athletic street-walker on issues like this, it’s all rather sad and demeaning.
And so for all this, van Onselen claims that Conroy ought be removed. It’s embarrassing poppycock printed in the only decent broadsheet in this country. He does rather lower the tone of a usually superb read.
OFF WITH HIS PRETTY-BOY HEAD
So we demand in return that van Onselen himself be removed as contributing editor, for being out of touch with Australian values and undermining the hard-earned reputation of one of the world’s great newspapers. Our investigations reveal a man who has little in common with patriot readers of the Australian.
Sources familiar with van Onselen tell VEXNEWS that he is an extremely wealthy man, inheriting a fortune estimated in Perth at around $20 million. The source of this unexplained wealth is unknown, but in Perth – the home of John Kizon and Alan Bond– anything is possible.
van Onselen made a big splash in Perth spiv circles by slapping down cash to purchase a magnificent multi-million dollar home in one of its ritziest suburbs of Subiaco. He’s since moved to Sydney, moving a fleet of luxury cars across the Nullabor with all the subtlety usually associated with the flamboyant end of the nightclub owning fraternity.
AN HEIR HEAD
For a time, van Onselen was happy being a wealthy, interest-accruing, lazy Paris Hilton style heir but made a conscious decision to pursue political fame without submitting himself to vulgarities of seeking public office.
His wife, a successful lawyer, is believed to have expressed her concern with his lack of ambition and shooed him out of the mansion, replacing him with a nanny who now takes care of the domestic business.
The first move was accepting a job as associate professor at Edith Cowan University, an institution regarded slightly less favourably than the Oxharvard Institute de Hairdressing above an Indian curry takeaway restaurant down one of Melbourne’s colourful laneways. He shrewdly turned that humble post into a springboard for writing opeds about anything that moved and because he was so rich, he didn’t feel the need to charge much, making him instantly popular with budget-constrained opinion editors. The rest is mystery.
His biography of John Howard was an average tome, uninsightful and unexciting. His main claim to fame at Edith Cowan was launching an attack on the credibility of the Harvard Business School, something laughed off contemptuously by Liberal deputy leader Julie Bishop who did a course there. She said:
“He wrote a particularly vicious article about me. He is even attacking a Harvard Business School course that I did. Now this is Harvard Business School’s most prestigious course in its executive management program and Edith Cowan University must be worried about one of their academics attacking Harvard Business School. It is bizarre.” Nice put-down of the “Super TAFE.”
Bishop asserted that van Onselen was obsessed with her and was a political stalker. A little over the top but that’s what airhead on airhead violence will produce.
His response was not the most convincing denial ever uttered to a charge of stalking, asked whether he was obsessed by Julie Bishop he responded:
“Not that I am aware. No, no,” he said.
What did he mean, “not that I am aware”? How very strange.
It got stranger. He continued, opening up to the inquiring mind of his now colleague Samantha Maiden who was chasing down the yarn:
Asked what (van Onselen’s) wife thought about the suggestion (that he was obsessed with Julie Bishop) , he replied, “My wife is closer to my age than Julie, there’s no doubt about that,” he said.
Another non-denial denial. Whether he likes his ladies on the mature side or whether his true affection lies with his betrothed, we cannot say and do not much care. Fortunately, Samantha didn’t dig into the matter further and van Onselen seems to have backed off his pursuit of the Parliament’s highest profile and most stereotypical blow-wave blonde after her feisty counter-attack.
WITH FRIENDS LIKE THESE
WA Liberals tell VEXNEWS that van Onselen’s choice of mates says much about his lack of moral fibre.
One of his best mates is current WA Attorney-General Christian Porter, condemned by foes as a serial philanderer and cheater. While working at the Director of Public Prosecutions, Porter achieved considerable notoriety for leaving his then missus after eight months of marriage for a subordinate secretary at the DPP.
On his return from a dirty weekend with the legal secretary, he was apprehended by the First Wife who expressed a desire to reconcile. The heartless van Onselen chum wasn’t having any of it and told her “I never loved you anyway.”
van Onselen’s missus is believed to have banned any discourse with Porter after the debacle but those familiar with the matter insist that the WA Attorney remains in Peter’s speed-dial.
Another van Onselen close chum, Phillip Senior who also regularly fronted with him on Sky and was the co-author of another book about Howard is believed to be one of many who’ve fallen out with the prima donna over ego issues. It is said that van Onselen can be very loose in his descriptions of the private lives of individuals and can be just as harsh in his characterisation of his friends as he was today with Stephen Conroy. At least he’s consistently bitchy.
The up-thrusting and hair-obsessed scribe has made no secret in the Australian that Paul Kelly should be forcibly retired or euthanised and that he should replace him as chief opinionista. Kelly is believed to be furious at van Onselen’s impertinence and is not going anywhere soon, particularly if cryogenics can be proved up in time. Will the old bull Paul eventually be shoved out of the way by the rich – but thick – young goat Peter?
We’ll be sure to chronicle what happens next. Because he’s toeing the company line, vain Van Onselen will probably not be removed. And yet he’s crossed Paul Kelly, who is the grand old stayer of the News Ltd stable and if anyone could kick the uppity Perth poseur where it hurts, it’ll be him.
Discussion
36 comments for “CAN THE VAN: Pouting Peter’s hidden agenda and secret past exclusively revealed”
Post a comment
A takedown of beauty, whip that showpony.
I don’t have much time for the Van Man, but describing Conroy as highly regarded is rather a stretch. A shiny new broadband network will be worth bugger all when his internet filter is in place.
Other than that, a good interesting piece.
I take your point about Peter but I’m a little puzzled about the defence of a $40bn + (but who really knows) project that is unfunded, uncosted and subject to all sorts of external technological risks, with nary a feasibility study in sight.
We’ve written about the NBN before but we’ll make this point. The NBN deals with market failure. Market failure that has given Australia third world standard internet access. Market failure that imperils the future prosperity of the country. The government does many wasteful, completely unnecessary things. Ensuring the nation has world-class internet infrastructure is absolutely necessary and it’s a shame it took taxpayers to fund it but that’s just how it is.
Long after the kerfuffle of the now completely discredited CPRS is over, the NBN will be a rich legacy for the nation and – you watch – the Libs will continue it if they get elected before it’s finished. It’s too important to be a political football.
Julie Bishop if you were 30 years younger I’d offer you a ride.
Dirt rotten Tory
This story seems to be about shooting the messenger. Play the ball not the man. The Kaiser appointment stinks – no evidence that due process was followed. Why does a government entity (the NBN) need a government relations officer? Where is the cost benefit / prospectus for the NBN – how can we be spending $40b without this? Re the handout of $250m of taxpayer funds without condition. Thats up there with the gift of cash to Toyota. The government stinks. Its not just Van Onselen and News hacks who is / are saying this.
This piece ignores Peter’s extensive political experience. He was on Julie Bishop’s team while she was in the Federal parliament and worked for Peter Debnam in Sydney, so he is not a rookie.
Well done, vexnews – this guy deserves to be exposed
Conroy assumes he is untouchable. He will soon learn otherwise. Not even you branch stacking stooges can save him and Kevvie now.
The current big issue with internet in this country is that one monolithic network was manufactured by the government without regard to competition or any reasonable scheme for infrastructure sharing.
The answer to this is not to build another, faster structure in the same mould, especially when the private sector has offered to do it for far less, and when half the cost is associated with provision to 5% of the population.
A well-aimed hatchet job with all the subtlety we’ve come to expect from VexNews. I particularly enjoyed the delicate irony of describing Murdoch’s disgraceful vanity sheet as “one of the world’s great newspapers.” This is a rag which lies even about its own polls. Tuesday’s story on Newspoll, in which the Labor vote went up, was headlined “Rudd hits new low.” Murdoch does not publish newspapers. He publishes shit-sheets, some of them disguised as newspapers, some not.
whats the hidden agenda and secret past? That he works for News Ltd and is worth $20m. Wow, there goes his argument. Talk about hidden agendas, Landeryou aren’t you best mates with Conroy?
There is no doubt that we are watching a fight to the death between the Australian Labor Government and the Murdoch Media empire.If you take just one publication, today’s Australian there is not even the slightest pretense at news.”Abbott pledges fair deal,Not Happy Julia, going backwards under Gillard,Ruebens boss blames Garrett,Coalition making inroads,TV fee cut a bribe,Rudd scraps early election option(with a sad pic), protest poll flags rush to coalition,net losses strip away PM’s advantage,Opposition making inroads, Abbot leading race,minors savage IR laws,Gillard prepares to launch scare campaign,what julia gillard claimed on ABC radio yesterday and the reality,Abbot pledges fair deal,bike shop backpedals on teen job,electrcal inspections not safe,Rueben’s boss blames Garrett,Garrett labelled a goose pic, – and this all by page 6, before we get to nasty Albrechtsen and the team in Commentary. Van Onselen’s tranparent article rounds it out in the business section for Murdoch. Well done VexNews.
Nice Mane – though not your best angle Pete – have they taken you in reverse?
And to think that some suggest that Vexnews does dirty work for certain ALP right wingers
Peter’s a great journalist and a successful one. For me his articles are always are must-read. Insightful and accurate would describe him. Vexnews is way off the beam this time. The Australian, a world-class broadsheet but the way, is lucky to have him.
Conroy is handing our money over to TV proprietors and Carr is giving it to car companies.
May we taxpayers have a tax cut please?
yes we all pay tax and vote why do people who say this think they’re special???
EH – Peter worked as a part time electorate office for Julie and used to pass himself off as a senior liberal party adviser!!!!
What a joke – it’s like the electorate officers who like to call themselves Chief of Staff when there are all of 4 staff in the office. Ha!
I think its great Conroy is cashing up the TV stations – I would live to see a remake of the Sullivans.
Usual Landeryou bucketing of individuals. Why dont you debate the issues Andrew rather than bucketing the individuals who express alternative views to you.
Geez Andy,when I’m looking for a good dose of “arrogant and self-righteous” I go straight to Vexnews,it always works for me.Young Peter is nothing but a pale shadow of yourself when it comes to arrogant or self-righteous but he does have the advantage of being much prettier and much,much richer.Not jealous are we Andy? (VEXNEWS: Will gladly swap fortunes with the lad, yes]
Maybe rupert got the shits with Rudd. they where supposed to be good mates,Rudd even flew all the way to the US to have dinner with Rupert and to Broome for lunch with Stokes.
About time some of the media went to the other side, its called DEMOCRACY.
Peter who? Seriously though, he seemed a failed wanna be liberal pollie who could not make it & blamed everyone else for his own failings.
Better in the east than here in perth, a good export. As for the $250m hand out to the tv stations some merit here. No reasons given apart from giving the stations a leg up in tough times.
Might be valid but on what conroy has said so far it does not add up. If he explained the reasons a bit more we might understand but then i guess, like rudd, we stupid voters are not the intelellectual giants like them so we need to be treated as mushrooms.
Conroy is a dirty hack and must go. Peter was spot on with his analysis and actually quite kind to Senator F-Wit.
van Onselen is a total lightweight. He once worked for Tony Abbott in the Warringah electorate office, was lent out to Jackie Kelly for the 2001 campaign, but had to be removed from the campaign after he, and a coterie of fellow spivs were caught by Campaign Director (and now NSW Liberal Party President) Nick Campbell, preparing a late night session of unauthorised push polling in the electorate – from the Lindsay electorate office phones.
Andy, a nice article, PVO is definitely a pinhead; but your description of Conroy as “highly regarded” lacks two things:
1. A hyphen.
2. A basis in fact.
The praising of this Soviet-style info-vandal has reduced my Vex visits to bi-monthly instead of daily.
andrew – you are my hero. Conroy is a master – the sad part of all these mupppets who could not get anywhere in unions, workplaces or in electorate offices – are just trying to get payback. he is the hero of the bright person. such a critiical portfolio on positioning in the media – he has got them all onside apart from murdoch – and he will have them eating out of his hand – he is the most sophisticated man in the world. he may play numbers – but so does Rupert. I’d back Steph for PM anytime. And as fro Andrew and the website, as i said on the weekend – it’s the best in Australia. if only he would start a newspaper – The Age would be dead and maybe Murdoch would be challenged as well. I think Andrew needs a donate here button on his website. We should be paying him for the rivers of gold> Go andrew, go steohen.
Conroy highly regarded? Get ya hand off it!
The problem Conroy,
Carr and other big spenders of our money pose for the government is that tax cuts for ordinary people
which would be an election winner become more difficult to accomplish.
And they also present an image of fiscal recklessness which is unhelpful for the government’s re-election.
The OZ is a Tory rag, as are its Journo’s.
Wasteful government expenditure means no tax cut for ordinary people
conroy is a thug, until the insulation fiasco he was the worst performing minister
Wonder if Conroy has started washing his hands yet?
What a distasteful piece of work this is. Talk about sour grapes published to try and rubbish someone that deserves encourages support for engaging in a part of the political process rather than sniping on the sidelines.
Why don’t you try and drop the hate?