top of page

Serious questions raised about NSW premier Chris Minns' truthfulness

It is a sad reality that politicians are prepared to tell falsehoods, but how many times does a politician have to deceive the public before they are considered untrustworthy?

Sky News Australia's political editor Andrew Clennell slammed Chris Minns as being gutless and untruthful in relation to his comments about ICAC's "seriously corrupt" finding against former NSW premier Gladys Berejiklian. Read the article below and ask yourself whether you agree with Clennell.

​

Also, in February 2021 Minns' office was contacted about the NSW police' failure to prosecute the former NSW police minister David Elliott for impersonating a police officer, despite the overwhelming video evidence against Elliott, but he did not respond.

Campaigns - Minns_588x331.jpg

Minns said he was not prepared to claim Berejiklian had acted corruptly, even though the ICAC investigation found she had been "seriously corrupt". He should be required to provide the evidence he used to contradict the ICAC's findings or did he just make it up?

Was Minns untruthful as suggested by Andrew Clennell from Sky News?

When asked for comment on the ICAC's "seriously corrupt" findings against former NSW premier Gladys Berejiklian Minns said “It’s not for me to pass judgment about findings made by independent organisations or investigatory bodies like the ICAC."

 

However, it appears that Minns was being untruthful because in the same conversation he did pass judgement on the ICAC's findings against former MP Daryl Maguire, describing them as "deplorable".

 

Why did Minns contradict himself? Was he being untruthful as suggested by Sky News Australia’s political editor Andrew Clennell?  Read Article

 

 

Minns should provide the evidence he used to contradict the ICAC's findings

Minns said he was not prepared to claim Berejiklian had acted corruptly, even though the ICAC investigation found she had been "seriously corrupt".  Why would Minns not support the ICAC's findings? Does he have any evidence that contradicts the findings? If so, what was the evidence?

​

If Minns has put his opinon above the ICAC's findings, then it is an astonishing overreach that raises serious questions about his character and his suitability to be premier or even hold a political office.

 

If Minns has no evidence that contradicts the ICAC's findings, then he has chosen not to support the findings based upon his opinion. Minns is not above the law, he has no right to put his opinion above the ICAC's findings. If he has, then it is an astonishing overreach that raises serious questions about his character and his suitability to be premier or even hold a political office.

How you can help

If you would like to help Justice Matters has made it easy, all you have to do is subscribe because there is power in numbers. The more subscribers we have the more impact we will have - because together we're unstoppable...

bottom of page