Now that Barnaby’s gone, what did he actually do wrong?

EVERYBODY knew Barnaby Joyce had to go and by the end even Barnaby knew he had to go but, well … why?

OPINION

WELL, it has been a week since Barnaby Joyce stood down as National Party leader and Deputy Prime Minister but there is still one little thing that confuses me: Why?

Don’t get me wrong — everybody knew he had to go and by the end even Barnaby knew he had to go but, well … why?

The final straw, as Barnaby said himself, was a complaint of sexual harassment lodged with the Nationals at the height of the scandal last week. And now there is apparent shock and outrage that the identity of the person who brought down the Deputy Prime Minister in the middle of what is perhaps the biggest political scandal this decade has somehow been made public. What a surprise.

MORE: How Barnaby Joyce and Vikki Campion’s affair began

But again, why? What is it about Barnaby’s uniquely bumbling set of circumstances that has brought him down when so many other politicians have survived far worse indiscretions?

Personally, I do think the sexual harassment claim made Joyce’s position untenable. In any other organisation someone subjected to such an allegation, even though he denies it, would be expected to stand aside while it is investigated and the truth laid bare.

The only difference is that politics doesn’t tolerate temporary vacancies. It is often said that every MP has a leadership baton in their knapsack. It is hard enough for a minister to stand aside and recover. For a leader of a party it is all but impossible.

And yet there are leaders not just of parties but of the free world who have managed to survive and even be lionised while fighting claims of sexual misconduct, including two American presidents in as many decades. One is currently in charge of the world’s most powerful country and the other is widely regarded as a Democratic hero whose wife nearly beat the other guy.

Meanwhile back home, Opposition Leader Bill Shorten has been subjected to claims of historical sexual assault — for which police found he had no case to answer — and current innuendo from a government minister just this week, which she rapidly withdrew. This is not to say there is any substance in either suggestion. On the contrary, it is just a political reality that when mud is thrown at someone already balls deep in trouble it has a very different impact to that of someone whose star is on the rise — even if it is the same mud.

Point being that Bill is running with the bulls to the Lodge while Barnaby was a wounded bull waiting for the final skewer from a rodeo clown. That’s not right or wrong, it’s just the law of the jungle. You don’t ask if a gazelle is right or wrong when it gets eaten by a lion. All that matters is it got caught.

Barnaby Joyce entering the Senate doors at Parliament House in Canberra. Picture: Kym Smith

So now the dust has settled let’s call bullshit on all the faux moralising or ideological grandstanding that has surrounded this bizarre new world order that Australian politics has somehow conjured to replace the previous bizarre new world order.

MORE: Email joke sums up how the Liberals feel

And first among equals is Malcolm Turnbull’s bizarre ministerial bonk ban. Telling a married, family-values minister he’s not allowed to run off with a knocked-up pretty young staffer is a bit like telling your mate Crazy Dave he shouldn’t stick his dick in the blender. It’s not that the advice is wrong, it’s more that some things shouldn’t need to be said.

Likewise an edict telling ministers who they can and can’t sleep with lies somewhere in the grey area between insulting and pointless. A bland, studious and conscientious politician like, say, Mathias Cormann, would never do so in the first place. A maverick, instinctive and contrarian politician like, say, Barnaby Joyce, would do so anyway — and perhaps would be even more likely to do something simply because he was told he wasn’t allowed to.

Little wonder that when Barnaby was deemed unfit to be Acting PM last week it was the robotically reliable Belgian that Malcolm turned to in a crisis. Even his steely-gazed deputy Julie Bishop and ambitious treasurer Scott Morrison were bypassed, in a move that will no doubt make future Cabinet meetings as interesting as a Manson family reunion.

But here’s the really funny bit: Virtually every politician, journalist, analyst and activist has tied themselves in knots trying to argue that it’s not the fact that Barnaby had sex with a staffer that is the problem. It’s always some random other fig leaf, such as:

1. The girlfriend was moved to another office;

2. They stayed in a mate’s empty house rent-free;

3. It was a conflict of interest; or

4. Barnaby was anti-same-sex marriage but deserted his own traditional marriage.

Let’s just look at these one at a time:

1. Ministers have just been banned from having sex with anyone in their office and yet when their chief of staff has the person they’re having sex with moved to another office that is even worse. Okay.

2. If you’ve been booted out of your family home for being a cheating douchebag and your rich mate says I’ve got a place sitting empty you can crash at, that is a violation of public office. Okay.

3. It’s a conflict of interest to have a relationship with a staffer whose sole job description is to serve your interests, but not to have a relationship with a journalist, opposition MP or any other member of the community who might have a thousand reasons to bring you down. Okay.

4. If you are anti-same-sex marriage you are not allowed to cheat on your wife, even if it is with someone who is pro-same-sex marriage. Okay.

Each of these arguments might as well be written on wet tissue paper, but even if you accepted them all it still doesn’t explain why there is suddenly a ban on ministers bonking staffers, when even the PM himself couldn’t make a coherent argument that that was the reason Barnaby had to go.

Personally, much like Malcolm, I like same-sex marriage and I don’t like people cheating on their wives. But as I recall, we had a rather widely publicised vote last year which declared pretty comprehensively that other people’s moral judgments have no authority over what two consenting adults choose to do with each other.

And what I really don’t like is the government telling people who they can and can’t shag — which is perhaps the most fundamental cornerstone of individual liberty.

And yes, that even includes the government telling itself who it can and can’t shag. Governments have been screwing people left, right and centre ever since time began and I don’t see why they should have to stop now.