Skip to main content

Who is Godwin Grech ?

Holy utegate Batman ! What happened there ?

Friday 19 June was a fascinating day in politics. We were introduced to Godwin Grech at a Senate inquiry. He seemed a mild mannered Treasury official in anguish over testimony that contradicted the Prime Minister.

Monday 22 June was gobsmacking. The Federal Police raided Godwin's home in the morning. Found evidence on a home computer that the alleged damaging email from the Prime Minister's department to Godwin at Treasury had been concocted inside Treasury. By mid-afternoon the Feds had announced their findings to the world. And thereby exculpated the Prime Minister from the Opposition's assault on his credibility. Malcolm Turnbull's case against the PM for misleading Parliament collapsed. With a hiss.

Other than a gloating and more than usually sanctimonious Prime Minister, the big winner is going to be Federal Treasurer Wayne Swan. His goose was all but cooked by the actual emails tabled before the Senate inquiry on Friday that showed unequivocally that the Treasury officials had been asked to treat Kev's mate Mr Grant with special attention in his request for funding. Now no-one cares that Swannie misled Parliament about this. The allegation against the PM has collapsed and Swan looks like he will sneak through under the ensuing rush of emotions: disbelief, gloating, exasperation, relief and schadenfreud.

Mal has suffered a prosecutor's biggest nightmare. The key prosecution witness spectacularly failed to come up to proof.

It in fact looks a bit like he was played. There are a thousand unanswered questions here. Here's a few that leap out:

Who the hell is Godwin Grech?

Did Godwin concoct the email from Andrew Charlton in the PM's office to himself in Treasury which contradicted the PM's statement to the House?

Why did he concoct it?

When did he concoct it?

Why wasn't it found and released by the Government earlier?

Who did Godwin leak it to?

When did Lewis at the Telegraph get it?

When did the Opposition get it?

When did the PM's Office find out about it?

When did Treasury find out about it?

Why were Treasury officials trying to stop Godwin giving evidence about it to the Senate inquiry on Friday?

Why were Labor Senators trying to stop Senator Eric Abetz ask Godwin questions about it on Friday?

If the Government knew about Godwin and his email, why didn't they tell Parliament?

Why weren't the Police called in earlier?

Why did the Police make such an early announcement of their findings?

What more evidence do the Police have about Godwin?

The list could go on and on. But will we ever be told the answers to these questions?

Tell me again does anyone know what happened to that enquiry into how the people smuggler boat was burnt to the waterline off Christmas Island in January? The Navy wouldn't tell us at the time how it happened, and neither would the NT Police. It was kind of important then.

Will this be the same: the real facts forgotten because the main event has passed?

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Michael Jackson, martyr ?

. Someone has to die for their beliefs to be a martyr . Drudge pointed to headlines last Friday saying that Jackson's was a " Death by Showbusines s". So in the sense that Jackson seems to have died for his belief in celebrity, yes, he might be called a martyr. I never got Michael Jackson. Thriller didn't thrill me at all ( Now Noel Coward, that's another story ). But I did get a bit of a kick from seeing others get him. He was boppy and catchy and slick, as well as monumentally fluffy and hugely impaired. What I struggle with is the apparently massive consequentiality of fluffiness and impairment like Jackson's. What is the fuss about the passing of a semi-talented song and dance weirdo from decades past? Boris Johnson, the London Mayor, has had a stab at explaining it to we mystified souls who struggle to get with the programme. He reckons it's just like Princess Di. And I agree, to the extent that I was almost as unprepared for and dumbfounded by th...

Bullshit detection is our main AI protection

The volume of chatter in recent online musings about the hydra headed peril of AI dominance, is becoming ear piercing. These piercings will likely support even more garish burbles of thought to dangle decoratively in front of both the curious and accidental victims. A brief diversion - it seems one of the more remarked upon "tells" of the presence of AI in a piece of writing at the moment, is what I now know to call the " Em Dash " (_). Thank you NYT of 18 Sept 2025.  I'll keep an eye out for them. And I'll need to, if I'm to live up to the pleas of the balance of this post. The main subject of this post has been prompted by yet another article that Arts & Letters Daily has pointed me to recently. It's entitled " Large Language Muddle "  and is an editors article from an online magazine called "n+1" published in the Fall of 2025. The central proposition of this muddle piece seems to be that we human authors need to fight back...

The list of "tell"words for LLM speak grows, but these Bots are now teaching us to speak like them ..

According to an article in the Washington Post on 20 August 2025 by Adam Aleksic " people are starting to talk like ChatGTP ".  The previous post here on the Realm pointed to some words that have been nominated as indicators that a Large Language Model (LLM) is the likely author of the piece. According to Mr Aleksic's article we can now add to our list of" delve ", " adept ", " realm " and " meticulous ", the words " intricate " and " commendable ".  As he says elsewhere, it is becoming hard to keep up. But his more telling point is that as LLMs become more and more prevalent contributors in our discourse, it's not just the bots that are using these words, we've all started using them more too; in our own speech.  It seems that the feedback loop from the LLMs gulping up so much of their own outputs when scraping content from the web, is intensifying this linguistic shift.   Aleksic says:  ...  In the two...