The standoff between Annastacia Palaszczuk and Robbie Katter gets ugly

The very public spat between Annastacia Palaszczuk and Robbie Katter shows no signs of resolution, writes SARAH VOGLER

WHEN Annastacia Palaszczuk faced the press pack last year to answer questions about her decision to rip up a staffing deal she had struck with the Katter Party she batted away criticism, insisting it was just the “argy-bargy” of parliamentary debate.

She had taken away the Katter’s Australian Party’s extra staffing because its MPs had refused to denounce then KAP Senator Fraser Anning over his divisive “final solution” speech as she had demanded.

The fight between Annastacia Palaszczuk and Robbie Katter is getting ugly. Picture: AAP/Darren England

They had responded by referring Ms Palaszczuk to the Crime and Corruption Commission.

The CCC found the Premier’s demands could be considered “entirely inappropriate and to have exposed her to the prospect of facing a charge of bribery under S60 of the Criminal Code”.

But the CCC said it would not be in the public interest to pursue the matter as such a prosecution “would never have any reasonable grounds or prospects of success”.

It also said that is did not consider that “S60 is intended to apply to statements made openly during parliamentary proceedings”

It was a parliamentary issue and the CCC found it should be for parliament to decide if any breaches occurred.

The Ethics Committee is currently doing just that. It was not an ideal CCC ruling for the Premier. But it was what it was.

“In the heat of Question Time, people make comments in the argy-bargy of parliament,” the Premier said. That was in September.

Fast-forward five months and the Premier appears to have taken a different view to some commentary around the issue.

She this month instructed her lawyers to issue a legal letter to Katter’s Australian Party state leader Robbie Katter over public comments he made about the ongoing saga.

Robbie Katter shows no signs of backing down in his fight with the Premier. Picture: AAP/John Gass

Mr Katter had called on the Premier to stand down after he commissioned his own legal advice which found Ms Palaszczuk may have breached the law.

He insinuated the Government would attempt to cover it up and accused Labor of having one law for the Premier and one law for others.

His comments shocked Ms Palaszczuk and her office.

The Premier engaged lawyers that very same day. Her lawyers demanded a public apology from Mr Katter by Thursday of last week.

“To avoid any scope for misunderstanding, we confirm this correspondence is a concerns notice as provided for under Part 3.1 of the Defamation Act (2005) and our client reserves her rights to rely upon it in the questions of costs, including indemnity costs, if she is required to commence proceedings in relation to these matters,” the letter stated.

Mr Katter has responded with his own legal letter calling for Ms Palaszczuk to apologise by this coming Tuesday.

“I want to make it clear that I’m not going to apologise,” he said before doubling down on his insistence Ms Palaszczuk may have broken the law.

Now, there is no doubt his comments about the Premier were confronting.

Exchange of legal letters is not something that has been seen regularly since the days of Joh Bjelke-Petersen and is not a good look.

But the exchange of legal letters is not something that has regularly been seen in Queensland politics since the Joh days.

Clive Palmer’s high profile actions being the exception. That is primarily because parliamentary debate can be heated. That debate often spills outside the chamber.

But it is all part of the cut and thrust of politics.

The last thing the public wants to see is its politicians taking each other to court for the claims they make against each other.

They expect politicians to take these things on the chin.

They also don’t want to pay for it.

So far Ms Palaszczuk and Mr Katter have met the legal costs themselves. But their legal fight is not a good look.

And it just continues to escalate the staffing saga rather than to resolve it.