Premier Daniel Andrews repaid with UFU threat

NO matter how many treats UFU boss Peter Marshall gets, he won’t stop. Daniel Andrews should have been the one to sever their relationship many years ago, writes Matt Johnston.

UFU boss Peter Marshall. Picture: Mark Stewart

AFTER three years of delivering sweetheart deals, political scalps, and other gifts for firefighters, this is how Premier Daniel Andrews is repaid.

A union leader publicly declares on radio that he has a secret agreement with Andrews, and that he won’t rule out spilling his guts before November’s state election.

If that’s not political blackmail, I don’t know what is.

Why is UFU boss Peter Marshall suddenly severing — for now — the relationship?

Apparently, because the union doesn’t like the new chief officer of the MFB.

Marshall’s rant on Wednesday night shows why Andrews should have been the one to sever their relationship, and many years ago.
No matter how many treats he gets, the UFU boss won’t stop.

Daniel Andrews should have been the one to sever the relationship. Picture: AAP

For him, the world is not enough. As Labor MPs quietly say: “What more could we do?”

Look at the political carnage caused.

A CFA board was sacked, senior leaders were forced to resign, and tens of thousands of volunteers were left feeling like outcasts as a result of union EBA demands.

Ask Bill Shorten if he’s bitter about that saga, which culminated during the 2016 federal election campaign.

When the Turnbull Government later blocked that EBA, the Andrews Government set about devising a restructure of the state’s fire services. But it couldn’t get the legislation through, after two Liberal MPs reneged on an Easter deal not to vote on the Bill, saying their dastardly act had been to “save the CFA”.

We haven’t even seen the Human Rights Commission’s review of bullying and sexism in the fire services yet, because the UFU is blocking it in court.

Despite all this, Andrews finds himself at the centre of an  extraordinary UFU attack.

Marshall’s declaration that a secret deal is in place, and his suggestion that this is what is dictating Andrews’s behaviour, is incredible.

If true, it would have to be looked at by integrity officials.

If not, then a union boss has showed he is willing to blow up the election campaign of a Labor government that could not have done more for him.

How Andrews and his Cabinet respond will define whether he is willing to risk more of this in an election year, or whether enough is enough.

[e-mail]

@media_matt