From the desk of Roland Rocchiccioli – 9 May

The astounding public confession by a New South Wales politician, conceding he signed documents which he neither read, nor understood, is cause for the gravest concern.

A MINOR portfolio notwithstanding, the shock waves from the revelation ought be sending a terrifying message, to everyone.

Government is the highest calling in the land. It demands exemplary standards on every front. Personal probity, with all its consequences, must be unquestionable.

We live in a global village. In seconds, our actions register in the remotest parts of the world. Simplistically, it is mindboggling that one types a message into a phone and, almost instantaneously, it arrives at a distant destination.

The luxury of time to contemplate and debate has passed. Today we are expected to respond instantly, regardless of the consequences, or the efficacy, of the decision. Technology has created a world of mass information. We are bombarded. News has become a form of infotainment. Unreasonably, ministers of the crown are expected to be informed on a vast range of topics, and often not connected to their specific portfolio.

Clearly, the system is defective when a former minister admits, by implication, that he lacked the required intelligence, experience, and academic agility to comprehend the contents of official documents and the nuance of the complicated legal language, which is the machinery of democratic government.

While a government formed from a huddle of former doctors, lawyers and barristers is undesirable, the revelation is cause to consider the urgent need for a level of acceptable academic achievement. Conversely, it might be argued the former Prime Minster, Paul Keating, left school at 15 with a Junior Certificate; however, he was possessed of a fine mind, and one swallow doth not a summer make. Mr Keating was an exception rather than the general. In the same way, the former Prime Minister, Ben Chifley, was an engine driver, and an exceptional man.

As a rule of thumb, and painting with broad brushstrokes, there have been too many instances of parliamentarians whose intellectual nimbleness is concerning. Famously, Senator Pauline Hanson’s: “Please explain?”, which has since passed into the vernacular.

A former Victorian public transport minister was a functioning illiterate. As it transpires, English was his second language, while his powers of comprehension were, obviously, borderline average. Certainly, he lacked the ability to prosecute an argument, and struggled to sustain a logical train of thought. His limited vocabulary was pedestrian, by any standard.

Since we are determined to set the most exacting standards for immigrants seeking to settle in Australia, it would not be preposterous to expect our aspirant politicians to pass a similar Australia Test. While one is not talking Mensa, it should be both written and oral; be conducted by academics; and of a rigid, but not daunting, standard. It might include general world history, with a particular emphasis on the Australia political landscape; English grammar and syntax; a smattering of physics, chemistry, geography, and general mathematics; English composition; and, most importantly, a comprehension test – both written and oral – of a tertiary entrance standard (year 12). The pass mark should be set at about 60 percent. With respect, a TAFE hospitality diploma is not an acceptable academic standard for public life.

Such a proposition is fraught with obvious danger; however, if the questions were prepared by academics in conjunction with a panel of clinical psychologists, it might, possibly, work. Certainly, in recent times we have witnessed unseemly controversies which would have been avoided had there been a workable system of detection.

The argument for ‘working men’ in parliament is archaic, and patronising. Life is too complicated and moves at an alarming rate. We need to be represented by academically fit minds best able to cope with the complex minutiae of the world in which we live.

Survival is a struggle, exacerbated by technology.

Politics is no place for the smug, or the dim-witted.

Roland can be contacted via [email protected].