Talk:Peter Debnam

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article must adhere to the policy on biographies of living persons. Controversial material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted or if there are other concerns relative to this policy, report it on the living persons biographies noticeboard.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.	Biography Portal
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]

Portal	Peter Debnam is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.
Start	This article has been rated as start-class on the quality scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as mid-importance on the importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Australian politics.
Assessment comments This article has been rated for quality and/or importance but has no comments yet. If appropriate, please review the article and then leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need.

Why on earth is the member for Vaucluse the Shadow Minister for Western Sydney? Slac speak up! 10:32, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

It's generally considered to be the responsibility of the Premier, so to present himself as Shadow Premier of sorts Debnam has been made Shadow Minister for Western Sydney. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 219.89.36.133 (talk • contribs)

The above is incorrect. The portfolio of "Minister for Western Sydney" (and therefore "Shadow Minister for Western Sydney") was created in 1995. No Premier or Opposition Leader has ever held the portfolio before Peter Debnam.

A more likely reason is the lack of Liberal seats in Western Sydney (the Liberals currently hold no Sydney seats outside the North Shore, Cronulla and Vaucluse), and a recognition by Mr Debnam that his party must win western Sydney seats to form government. Jeendan 01:55, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

So what did he do in the Navy and at Dalgetty ? Cabin boy ? Captain ? Janitor ? CEO ? Why so little information ?

He was a lieutenant in the Navy, serving on a number of ships in the first few years and then as a schools recruitment officer in the remainder of his tour. He served a total of 7 years (one tour of duty) before resigning his commission and going into business. I think he was a director of Dalgety - I don't know what actual day-to-day role this involves.

Why haven't I added this to the article? I can't be bothered with the footnotes, at least tonight. Maybe another day. Jeendan 10:19, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Debus allegations

I have added a few lines regarding the Debus allegations last year. Is it notable enough for a mention? I believe so. It received substantial media coverage, derailed what had hitherto been a successful Opposition focus on the sacking of Scully and Orkopoulos, and remains relevant to the current election campaign in a similar manner to the Labor scandals of Chaytor, Scully and Hickey (but not Orkopoulos, which is a bigger scandal than any of these).

It also reportedly had a substantial impact on the Opposition Leader's popularity, which ahs not yet recovered to pre-Debus levels. And lastly, it raised questions about Debnam's judgement which Labor has and will continue to exploit in the election.

Sources are provided in the article, but a quick Google search and a read of the opinion columns and news pieces from November-December last year will back up the blanket coverage this received.

It may be argued that this section would be better placed in New South Wales general election, 2007. I have placed it here because it relates specifically to Debnam and was not a wider campaign by the Coalition, but would welcome any alternative views.

I won't particularly welcome reversion without explanation, which is something of a common theme when anyone adds less-than-glowing information to Liberal Party articles. If you don't agree that this deserves to be in the article, then let's discuss. Jeendan 02:29, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

This belongs here, but could probably use a brief mention in the election article - the pre-election advantage delivered to the Libs by the scandals was somewhat squandered on the Debus attack. And don't worry, Jeendan, I'll help to defend you against the vast right-wing conspiracy. ;) Joestella 02:55, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Ha! You actually made me smile. Did you detect a defensive tone in my post above?

P.S. I still don't agree on Nola Fraser, but thanks for the above :) Jeendan 03:12, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject class rating

This article was automatically assessed because at least one article was rated and this bot brought all the other ratings up to at least that level. BetacommandBot 01:55, 28 August 2007 (UTC)