Perth is such a long way from Sydney. Easy to forget those over there, despite the fact that my anticedents come from that part of the world.

Didn't take too much notice of the WA state election campaign. Kept up to date with Rob's blog, but not much more than that. Took it for granted that Labor would lose. After all, they (seemingly) won last time because One Nation split the coalition vote. Huge conservative gerrymander. An uphill battle.

Until J.W. Howard wouldn't come to the party with Federal funding for Colin Barnett's proposed canal to supply water to Perth from the Kimberley.

Then, driving home late last week, listening to an interview with Barnett on the ABC's PM program. I didn't realise what a turkey he was.

"Yes, I'm [Barnett] going to go ahead with the canal. No need for costings or feasibility studies. I'm decisive, unlike the government who insists on looking at options and performing cost / benefit analysis."

Maybe Labor is in with chance!

Finally, the disastrous interview when the numbers didn't add up. Barnett debates with the media. "Of course I'm right!" Whoops, maybe there is a mistake. Most swinging voters would have made up their minds at that moment.

Labor is re-elected, keeping all the State governments in Labor's hands.

A nice result, at a time when progressives are on the back foot. Is it an omen? The heart says 'yes;' the head says 'no.'

I posted a previous piece about the cavalier way the government treated David Hicks and Mamdouh Habib during their incarceration by the US. Since then, Habib's been released, and despite threats to prevent him from going public and profiting from his story, he's appeared on commercial TV (for a fee) with allegations of torture and Australian officials' compliance to the fact.

Last night the Attorney General, Philip Ruddock was interviewed on the 7.30 Report .... an interview which showed just how disinterested the government was in the welfare of an Australian citizen.

The interview needs to be read in its entirety, but I'll pick out a few quotes to give the idea.

KERRY O'BRIEN: Attorney-General Philip Ruddock joins me now from Parliament House. Philip Ruddock, as Australia's first law officer, why don't you know the reasons that the Americans released Mamdouh Habib without any charges, without any trial, after holding him for 40 months?

PHILIP RUDDOCK (ATTORNEY-GENERAL): Well, it's a matter of what the Americans are prepared to tell us, Kerry.......

....... A decision was made in the United States that they did not have evidence that they could put before a military commission to obtain a conviction. That's the judgment they made. They came to that view.

KERRY O'BRIEN: And you haven't even asked them why? I mean, you might say they've got a right not to tell you, but you haven't even asked them?

PHILIP RUDDOCK: Well, we know what they've told us, and they've told us they did not have sufficient evidence to proceed with the prosecution, and I assume it relates to a range of potential issues that might be involved in that. .....

We can take it that the question wasn't asked.

O'brien then asked if the reason the US didn't proceed in charging Habib was due to the fact that the evidence could have been extracted under torture.

PHILIP RUDDOCK: .... there are a range of other issues and some people have written about these matters. Even before the military commission process, there is no guarantee that sensitive security related information might not be jeopardised if it were adduced before a trial.

KERRY O'BRIEN: But my question was, you can't rule out torture as a possible reason and you haven't answered that.

So there is a real possibility that Habib wasn't charged by the US because the evidence was extracted under duress.

KERRY O'BRIEN: Are you in a position to deny that the Americans involved with Mr Habib in Pakistan may have worked with Pakistan and the Egyptians to have Mamdouh Habib taken to Egypt for tough off the books interrogations where the niceties of human rights wouldn't have to be observed?

PHILIP RUDDOCK: Well, I'm not able to make observations on matters that I have no personal knowledge, and I have no knowledge...

KERRY O'BRIEN: That being the case, you can't rule out that he was tortured in Egypt?

PHILIP RUDDOCK: I have no knowledge as to what may have happened to him in Pakistan when our officials were not there. I have no knowledge of what might have happened to him in other places, if he were taken to any other places.

Makes you wonder why we have a Department of Foreign Affairs. Obviously not to ask any difficult questions of an ally to find out what's happening to our detained citizens, it seems.

Reading between the lines it appears the government didn't really care what happened to Habib. They put no pressure on the US for answers regarding Habib's status, even though they knew he'd been shipped to Egypt. They took the American's word that Habib would be charged, and assumed that Habib wouldn't be a problem as it was unlikely he'd be back in Australia for many years.

Now Habib is back, and has the potential to embarrass the government if he goes to court to claim compensation for his treatment and / or to retrieve his passport. He's not been charged or convicted of any crime, so the government will have to defend itself by producing evidence of wrong doing or prove he's a threat to the community.

The episode shows just how compliant we are to the United States, even in relation to the welfare of one of our own citizens.

The UK is a strong ally to the US, but they didn't desert their citizens held at Guantanamo Bay. The relationship between the UK and the US survived.

It's about time we stopped behaving like wimps. Time to stick up for our own.

An interesting aspect of the planned APEC summit to be held in Sydney in 2007, apart from dashing the ambitions of Peter Costello for another five years or so, is that it's traditional for the participants to attend a photo session wearing the host nation's traditional apparel.

On the radio yesterday morning, the presenter asked the listeners for their suggestions of what the leaders should wear in Sydney.

Suggestions ranged from Akubra hats with Drizabones, to Speedo budgie smugglers. (Wouldn't George look great in those?)

But the best suggestion, in my opinion, was that the world leaders wear t-shirts emblazoned with the words "I went to Sydney APEC 2007 and all I got was this lousy t-shirt!"

Priceless.