Matthew Guy quiz on mafia ambush

MATTHEW Guy is guilty of a massive error in judgment. The controversial Lobster Cave meeting the state Opposition Leader had with alleged mafia identity Tony Madafferi must be fully investigated.

Matthew Guy speaking about the controversial meeting. Picture: Jason Edwards

MATTHEW Guy is guilty of a massive error in judgment.

The controversial Lobster Cave meeting the state Opposition Leader had with alleged mafia identity Tony Madafferi must be fully investigated.

Facing a barrage of questions yesterday, Mr Guy still has more to answer and has referred himself, the dinner meeting and transcript leaks about its organisation to the Independent Broad-based Anti-corruption Commission.

The would-be premier, who has run hard on a law-and-order platform, paints the meeting as an unforeseen encounter, unknowingly ambushed.

But he must fully clarify when he became aware “cousin Tony” at the Lobster Cave was in fact the alleged mafia figure Tony Madafferi.

At times yesterday, Mr Guy said the name “didn’t trigger any alarm bells” but then muddied the waters when asked if he should have left the meeting when he realised Mr Madafferi was there, saying: “Once you’re there you’re there.”

Leaked phone transcripts of Liberal Party fundraiser Barrie Macmillan, which claim Mr Guy’s office was briefed beforehand about Antonio Madafferi’s presence at the dinner and the need to keep the meeting confidential, have been referred to IBAC.

Mr Guy’s office must explain what was done with that alleged information and whether it was passed on to Mr Guy and, if not, why not. Mr Guy acknowledged his office was advised an Antonio Madafferi would be attending the April 12 event but insisted the name was not passed on to him. The problem for Mr Guy, at least on the surface, is it is not the first time he has faced questions about the checks and balances he has in place to protect against the risk of exploitation through political access.

In 2013, as planning minister, Mr Guy was guest speaker at a Liberal fundraiser in the Docklands hosted by Mr Madafferi and attended by several Liberal MPs. While Mr Guy insisted he had no knowledge of Mr Madafferi at the time — he should have known of him in April when the Lobster Cave dinner occurred.

Just where are the checks and balances to protect against probity questions and ensure the Liberal Party, in all its dealings, runs a ruler over all politicians’ meetings, fundraising activities and donations?

Mr Guy’s insistence the latest Madafferi encounter was not foreseen by him, and was a dinner meeting organised by long-time Liberal Party donor and AUSVEG Victoria executive Frank Lamattina to discuss fruit and vegetable markets should be taken at face value.

But a full investigation must be conducted to ascertain the facts. The spectre of criminal or questionable character attempts at political influence, or even the potential for it, is poison for democracy. As are fundraising activities or donations from such sources. Tony Madafferi, who denies any wrongdoing, and Mr Lamattina have a history of Liberal donations and lobbied in 2006 to overturn deportation of Mr Madafferi’s brother, Francesco Madafferi, who has since been jailed for his part in Australia’s biggest ecstasy importation. While Tony Madafferi has never been charged or convicted of any crime, he was named as a suspected hitman in two coronial inquests, police allege intelligence of serious criminal links and he has been banned from Crown casino and Victorian racetracks.

Mr Guy is either guilty of a gross due diligence failure or the victim of a secret ambush.

COWARDS ATTACK DOYLE

DEBATE is a cornerstone of democracy and civil society.

But the aggressive, personal attacks against Lord Mayor Robert Doyle, his family and his private residence amount to cowardly, criminal conduct.

Rather than meet policy decisions and politics with rational counter-arguments or respectful protest, a motley band of anarchists and urban activists prefers to hide behind anonymous guerilla tactics and callous threats.

But the paint-bomb attacks on Cr Doyle’s South Melbourne family home, where his wife and young child reside with him, cross every line of decency, civility and legality.

The repeated targeting of his private residence is beyond any category of prank. The overt threats of identifying where prominent people live and an intent to “make their lives uncomfortable”, including neighbours, carry sinister meaning: the threat of violence and intrusion is aimed at forcing political change.

There is a term for using violence or the threat of violence in the pursuit of political aims — but, given the state of the world today, including in Australia, it’s best used in the national security context.

Victoria Police must set a high priority on identifying and prosecuting the offenders in this latest attack on Cr Doyle, which follows incidents in February. A group of anarchists, The Street Artists for Doyle Collective, has claimed responsibility for the latest, which occurred at 1.30am on Monday.

Any message these activists have on homelessness or social welfare nets is lost through their fanatical and criminal actions. Charges should be laid and the book thrown at them.