Abalinx Newsletter 9

From Robert Clark.

Dear Members,
I’m writing further to my email of late last year, to update you about requisitions the Party has received seeking to hold a special meeting of State Council within the next few weeks.
In brief, the requisition I informed you about in my previous email was referred to the Party’s Constitutional Committee for advice, and the Constitutional Committee has advised that both the original and the amended versions of the motion proposed by the requisitionists are unconstitutional and therefore the requisition is invalid. However, the organiser of the requisition has now lodged a second requisition seeking to overturn the Constitutional Committee’s advice and, if successful, to again prevent any Federal pre-selections being started prior to 1st September and to terminate all pre-selections already underway.
This second requisition has also been referred to the Constitutional Committee for advice, including on the constitutional validity of each of the various motions it proposes. Once that advice is received, the Administrative Committee will make any necessary arrangements for the holding of a special meeting of State Council. I have asked the State Director to make inquiries and provisional arrangements regarding potential dates and venues. This further attempt to delay the Party’s pre-selections, if successful, will have significant consequences for the pre-selection of candidates for key target seats we want to win at the next election, as well as for traditional Labor seats that we need to seek to win over time.
Invalidity of first requisition. The Constitutional Committee has provided detailed written advice on the first requisition. That advice is that the requisition is void and of no effect, meaning that it has not validly requisitioned a special meeting and no such meeting should be held as a result. The Constitutional Committee have advised that the Party’s constitution does not give power to State Council to direct the Administrative Committee about the timing of the holding of pre-selections, as the requisition sought to do. The Committee points out that the constitution expressly makes a number of the powers of the Administrative Committee subject to direction of State Council, but does not do so for other powers, including the power to determine the timing of the holding of pre-selections.
Flexibility needed. The timing of pre-selections is often a crucial decision with important electoral implications, on which the Administrative Committee needs to have as much flexibility as possible, and the capacity to exercise judgment, sometimes at short notice. It therefore makes sense that the drafters of the constitution would not have intended to allow crucial decisions on pre-selections to be tied up by a resolution of State Council, potentially months in advance and without full knowledge of the facts and considerations involved, save by full and careful consideration of an amendment to the Party’s constitution.
Advice available on Party’s web site. Given the importance of the Constitutional Committee’s advice, the Administrative Committee considers that all Party members should be able to read the full terms of the Committee’s conclusion and their reasons. Accordingly, a copy of the Constitutional Committee’s advice is being made available on the member resources page of the Party’s web site. This advice includes a full copy of the requisition as lodged, save for the redaction of the membership numbers, phone numbers, email addresses and signatures of the requisitionists. (Note that, following the lodgement of this first requisition, some requisitionists have contacted the State Director asking to withdraw their support for the requisition.)
A second requisition. On Friday last week a second requisition document was emailed to the State Director, and a signed original was lodged with the State Director yesterday. This requisition proposes four lengthy motions, which I am setting out in full at the end of this email. As you will see, the first motion seeks to re-state part of the existing wording of the constitution on the role the Administrative Committee, about which the Constitutional Committee has already advised. The practical effect, if any, of this motion is unclear. The second motion seeks to declare that the Party’s constitution means something the Constitutional Committee has concluded it does not mean, namely that State Council can overrule the Administrative Committee about the timing and other arrangements for pre-selections.
The third motion seeks to direct the Administrative Committee not to start any pre-selections prior to 1st September this year, whether for Liberal held seats or for other seats, and to scrap existing pre-selection processes. This would include allowing sitting MPs to be challenged after 1st September even if they have not been challenged when preselection applications close as scheduled on 29th January. The fourth motion seeks to amend the constitution, for pre-selections for the next Federal election only, to set aside all current preselection processes and to prohibit any pre-selections being started before 1st September 2020.
Overriding the constitution. The Party’s constitution includes (at clause 27.2) a mechanism to enable unclear issues about the meaning or effect of the constitution to be resolved. This is a mechanism that needs to be used properly and responsibly to seek to arrive at the correct legal interpretation of the constitution, in other words, at the interpretation a court would reach if the issue were taken to court. The mechanism should not be used simply to interpret the constitution to mean whatever best suits those doing the interpreting. For many years, the Constitutional Committee has operated as the accepted authority for advice on the meaning and effect of the Party’s constitution, providing its advice on what it considers to be the best legal interpretation.
The Constitutional Committee currently consists of 10 well qualified members, chaired by respected QC, Daryl Williams. In my view, the attempt by the requisitionists in their second motion to overturn without constitutional justification the clear legal advice provided by the Constitutional Committee, and instead to impose their own interpretation of the Party’s constitution, is very dangerous for the future proper running of our Party. If successful, it creates a precedent for a simple majority vote either at State Council or on the Administrative Committee to declare that the Party’s constitution means whatever that majority wants it mean, by-passing the normal requirement for a two-thirds vote of State Council to amend our constitution.
Timing of pre-selections. The second issue raised by the requisition is that of the timing of pre-selections. This issue is one on which there are a range of considerations and views, and it is ultimately a matter of judgment. The Administrative Committee resolved last October that pre-selections for Liberal held seats would commence early this year, in order to open the way for pre-selections for selected target and other seats to be held during the course of 2020. I set out in my previous email the Administrative Committee’s reasons for starting pre-selections earlier than has been done for recent elections. The key reason is to have candidates in the field earlier for the crucial seats we need to win, so we can win more seats. The requisitionists want to delay the commencement of pre-selections for a period of 7 ½ months, from 15th January until 1st September. However, it is hard to see the logic in a delay of this period in itself, which may mean that additional delays are also being envisaged for the future if these initial delays are implemented.
Federal re-distribution. One concern that has been raised about timing is the likelihood of a Federal redistribution, and thus the possible need to re-assign pre-selected candidates once the new boundaries are known. This likely redistribution does indeed create significant difficulties for all political parties. However, any new boundaries are unlikely to be known until well into 2021, meaning the proposed 7½ month delay will make no difference to this. We either have to postpone pre-selections until after the new boundaries are known, and risk running out of time for a full pre-selection process and not having candidates in seats for long enough time to win them (as happened before the last election), or else we have to start pre-selections prior to knowing the new boundaries, and make any adjustments afterwards.
Vetting. Another concern that has been raised is the need to have proper vetting of candidates. Better vetting of candidates is of vital importance, as the last election showed. However, the Administrative Committee has already addressed this issue, adopting a new candidate vetting mechanism for Victoria based on the well-regarded NSW model, including expert and detailed candidate background checking.
“Quality candidates”. Concern has also been raised that quality candidates will be deterred by early pre-selections, particularly those who have jobs that they wouldn’t be able to keep once they became a candidate. However, to avoid this possibility by delaying all pre-selections would require pre-selections to be delayed until very close to the next election. This would mean that for every “quality candidate” the Party might succeed in attracting by such a delay, there would likely be multiple seats we would fail to win because our candidates in those seats weren’t given enough time to campaign. It is far better to follow the approach the Administrative Committee has adopted, namely to decide on pre-selection timing for target seats on a case by case basis, so that in the relatively rare case where there is a known high calibre potential candidate for a specific target seat who is not currently able to nominate, this can be taken into account in setting the pre-selection dates for that seat, but without requiring the delay of pre-selections for all other seats.
Parliamentary majority. It has also been claimed that early pre-selections will put the Parliamentary majority of the Morrison government at risk. However, this assumes that, if any of our MPs are challenged and are not pre-selected, they would cease to support the government. No evidence has been provided to support this grave insinuation against our MPs.
No sufficient reason for change. For all of these reasons, while there will always be a range of views and competing considerations regarding the best timing for any pre-selections, in the view of the Administrative Committee, there is no sufficient reason to throw away the many advantages of the pre-selection arrangements that were resolved upon by the Administrative Committee in October last year and notified to Party members at that time.
Applications for Liberal-held seats open tomorrow. A reminder that, as resolved by the Administrative Committee, applications for endorsement for all Liberal-held House of Representatives electorates will open tomorrow, Wednesday, 15th January, and close at 5pm on Wednesday, 29th January.
Hon Robert Clark
State President
Liberal Party of Australia (Victorian Division)
Motion 1. This State Council affirms that, pursuant to clauses 11.4 and 13.4 of the Constitution:
a. State Council is the governing body of the party; and
b. The Administrative Committee conducts the business and affairs of the party subject to the direction of State Council
Motion 2. Pursuant to clause 27.2 of the Constitution, this State Council:
a. rejects and does not ratify the determination of the Administrative Committee that the powers to determine pre-selection timings (under clauses 21.3 and 21.3A of the Constitution) are exclusive to the Administrative Committee, and that the Administrative Committee does not exercise those powers under the direction or oversight of State Council;
b. directs that the meaning and effect of clause 11.4 of the Constitution is that State Council, as the governing body of the Party, has the inherent power to override or countermand decisions of inferior bodies such as the Administrative Committee;
c. further directs that the meaning and effect of clause 13.4 of the Constitution is that all decisions of the Administrative Committee are ultimately subject to the direction of State Council made by way of an organisational motion; and
d. with particular regard to pre-selections, directs that the meaning and effect of clause 21.1(a) of the Constitution is that anything done by the Administrative Committee pursuant to its powers under clause 21 of the Constitution to ensure that “all necessary action is taken for the preselection of candidates” is subject to any direction by State Council. This includes, for instance, aspects such as the date of opening and closing of nominations, nomination fees, dates of conventions, and all other issues associated with the proper conduct of pre-selections in accordance with the Constitution.
Motion 3. If this State Council endorses the interpretation of the Constitution set out in Motion 2, this State Council further resolves, and directs the Administrative Committee, as follows:
a. in compliance with clause 21.3A of the Constitution, that nominations for preselection for the next Federal Election are to open no earlier than 1 September 2020;
b. to the extent that any preselection processes have already commenced and/or been closed or concluded as at the date of this meeting of State Council, those pre-selections are to be set aside, with nominations opened afresh, no earlier than 1 September 2020;
c. in Liberal-held seats requiring a convention after 1 September 2020, the State Director is to propose a timeline that ensures completion of the preselection and endorsement process by 18 November 2020, in compliance with clause 21.3A of the Constitution; and
d. to provide for the unlikely event of an early election, if the Federal Director of the Liberal Party advises the Administrative Committee that a Federal Election is likely before 1 July 2021, the Administrative Committee may amend the schedule for pre-selections as it considers reasonably necessary.
Motion 4. This State Council resolves that the Constitution be amended to insert the following provision:
30.6. 2020-2022 Pre-selections – Special Provision
a. Subject to this clause 30.6, nominations for preselection of candidates for the Federal Election to elect the 47th Parliament of Australia are to open no earlier than 1 September 2020.
b. To the extent that any preselection processes have already commenced and/or been closed or concluded as at the date of this meeting of State Council, those pre-selections are to be set aside, with nominations opened afresh, no earlier than 1 September 2020;
c. In Liberal-held seats requiring a convention after 1 September 2020, the State Director is to propose a timeline that ensures completion of the preselection and endorsement process by 18 November 2020, in compliance with clause 21.3A.
If the Federal Director of the Liberal Party advises the Administrative Committee that a Federal Election to elect the 47th Parliament of Australia is likely before 1 July 2021, the Administrative Committee may amend the schedule for pre-selections provided for in this clause 30.6 as it considers reasonably necessary.
The Administrative Committee has resolved that applications for endorsement for the following Electoral Divisions are called today, 15 January 2020 and will close on Wednesday, 29 January 2020 at 5:00pm: An application fee of $3,000 applies to applications for endorsement for these Electoral Divisions. To obtain an application form please call the State Director’s office on (03) 9652 3114.
Applications for Endorsement for the Casual Vacancy in the Victorian Legislative Council
The Administrative Committee has resolved that applications for endorsement for the anticipated casual vacancy in the Victorian Legislative Council for the Eastern Metropolitan Region caused by the retirement of the Hon Mary Wooldridge MP are called today, 15 January 2020 and will close on Wednesday, 29 January 2020 at 5:00pm. An application fee of $2,500 applies to applications for endorsement for the casual vacancy. To obtain an application form please call the State Director’s office on (03) 9652 3114.

Twinkle twinkle little star, how I wonder how bright you are. A wonderful nursery rhyme from my youth. I have been a member of the Liberal Party for some 30 years and not once in that time would I demonstrate disloyalty to the values and beliefs of the party. I have a Duty First attitude, inherited from my 30 years Australian Defence Force Career and it has held me in good stead. I would argue, disagree, fight the good fight and still support the Liberal Party when the time came for election campaigns.
Now I find someone whom I respected, to be demonstrating everything that the Liberal Party does not stands for. Karina Okotel, once the darling of right and progressive conservatives, a shining star whose actions indicated that she was going places. However ever since she allegedly leaked emails to the press and was found to be undermining Matthew Guy and Michael Kroger, my respect for her diminished. I find that she has been seduced to the Dark Side by the Whisperer, the General and the Fumbler and their confederates the Rainbow Warriors, Sycophants and Social Media Butterflies.
I have known of Karina Okotel for some time and initially impressed with her person, character and overall demeanour. I was under the impression that she was going places and would day be the shining star amongst the new generation. However while I was overseas in Europe for an extended holiday due to health related reasons, I was subjected to numerous emails and telephone conversations regarding the actions of Karina Okotel. At first I put all the negative feedback due to gossip, jealousy and character assassination. Upon my return, I conducted my own research and found to my dismay that the information provided to me was accurate.
As a result, I began to conduct my own investigation and unearthed much of what is now the basis of my results below. To say that I am disappointed in Karina Okotel would be an understatement for I feel betrayed and somewhat disillusioned with what Karina had been doing by stealth. This lengthy Political Biography is as a lesson to others that what you sow you must reap.
This political biography is based on Karina Okotel’s contribution to the Liberal Party and it up to the readers to decide what is in the best interests of the Party. Remembering that Robert Clark and company have failed to admonish her for her negative actions.

As someone who voted for Karina Okotel at State Council, organised for her during the senate campaign and defended her right to be heard during the Same Sex Marriage debate I like many Liberals was shocked with her behaviour and ongoing denials, prevarications and misinformation. After Karina Okotel attempted to conflate criticism of her treacherous and dishonest behaviour with religious persecution, it is time to explain why I and so many other Liberals no longer support Karina Okotel and her so called ‘Okotel Faction’.
MEMBERS AWARENESS. Like many people reading this I consider myself a Christian, I believe in God and do what I can to live a moral life. I do not believe my Christianity entitles me to a higher moral status than others, or an opportunity to judge others. I also consider myself a Conservative and my values align with those of Tony Abbott, Scott Morrison and Peter Dutton. However just because I am a Christian and a Conservative doesn’t mean I will ignore lies and bad behaviour that is confusing and destroying our Party.
THE ‘OKOTEL FACTION’. A group of members engaged by Karina Okotel and part of her secret Facebook page “Values Based Liberals”. Most have been Party members for only a few years, and over the last two years have run a malicious and damaging campaign seeking to divide our Party.

KARINA OKOTEL’S RISE THROUGH THE LIBERAL PARTY. Karina Okotel was first discovered under the wing of left-wing faction numbers man and Mantach ally Frank Greenstein. Having been recruited by him after joining the Liberal Party in 2010, Karina Okotel was mentored and sponsored financially by Frank onto Glen Eira Council. Once elected Karina Okotel soon worked to win favour with Frank’s nemesis and Liberal Party power broker Michael Kroger, who was newly elected to the State Presidency. Karina Okotel won favour with Michael Kroger’s team through providing important insights into Frank and his factions organising strategies, who was who and any titbits of gossip and information. For the first twelve months she ran a double agent role, soliciting information for senior Right operatives, and feeding bogus information back to Frank and his Left allies. For this piece of political bastardry, she was supported for the third spot on the Liberals senate ticket.
When I first met Karina Okotel, I like many conservatives were delighted to see an apparently similar minded multicultural young woman seeking leadership in our Party. Karina Okotel following her successful preselection to the senate was then elected to Admin with the support and patronage of State President Michael Kroger, Womens Section Chair Carol Walters, former Vice President Sandra Mercer Moore, Josh Frydenberg, Alan Tudge, Greg Hunt, Michael Sukkar, Jason Wood, Andrew Robb and Sarah Henderson. Karina Okotel spent her time on admin furiously building relationships with Party members all over the state, having learnt what it takes to win preselection. Karina Okotel’s privately stated focus was on getting herself elected to Parliament. Her first choice was a Federal seat, understood to be either the Senate or replacing Kevin Andrews for the seat of Menzies.
During Karina Okotel’s role in the marriage campaign Karina Okotel received a lot of scrutiny about her earlier progressive views, and her apparent changing of political stripes. Many traditional conservatives were not convinced by her presentations during the Marriage debate. Nonetheless they were proud to rally behind a hard-working young woman advocating on their behalf. It seemed after the Marriage Campaign things changed dramatically for Karina Okotel. She became obsessive about defining herself as a “Conservative” and as a “Christian”. This was seemingly at odds with her aggressive politicking. However as she often explained to newer members she recruited, dishonest and underhanded action could be always be explained through scripture, one such phrase she and her supporters deployed was “Be wise as serpents and innocent as doves” Matthew 10:16.
Then came her and the ‘Okotel Factions’ campaign to denounce others as fake conservatives and political Christians. At this point Karina Okotel started to associate more closely with failed Evelyn Candidate and self-promoting Christian Grant Hutchinson. The two of these political players began picking off young conservative members with their pitch about “True Christians” and “Fake Christians”. Grant used the offices of Hutchinson Legal and camping retreats co-hosted by Kyle Hoppitt to befriend and “convert” younger members to the “Okotel Faction”. The aim of the group was a Christian only faction within the Liberal Party.
Screen shots obtained by Abalinx News from various secret chat groups display a tale of religious fanaticism and aggressive sectarianism.
In one particular WhatsApp group titled “The True Christians” members discuss internal Liberal Party plans to organise against other conservatives and recruitment strategies to take over the Party and force policy change. These conversations largely sought to define true conservatives from fake conservatives. One former members of the chat group who left describe the fanaticism as a form of “madness”.
In another secret Facebook chat group the “Helmeted Honey Eaters” – purportedly just for Protestants, which included Grant Hutchinson, Karina Okotel and Joshua Bonney – the members of the group ridiculed other Christian denominations such as Catholics, Latter-Day Saint’s and those of the Jewish faith, as well as denouncing their Admin colleagues, Members of Parliament and various senior Liberals. The chat group’s name “Helmeted Honey Eaters” was purportedly thought up by Karina Okotel and Grant Hutchinson, taking its name from the endangered Helmeted Honey Eater bird, a native of Victoria’s East.
Karina Okotel and her faction joined up and took over the South Croydon Branch to use as a launching pad for apparently “Christian Policy” in the Party. Her brother Joshua Bonney was instrumental in manipulating the agenda and running training nights to recruit and elect Okotel Faction loyalists. It was at this point that Karina Okotel drafted and submitted several policy motions on transgender issues and same sex counselling.
For the most contentious motions Karina Okotel used other branches. In one case she emailed the Menzies Young Liberal Branch to submit her so called “Conversion” motion. Karina Okotel kept her name off the motion and denied involvement when asked by senior Liberals after the matter exploded in the Fairfax Press. Only later upon investigation emails emerged that had been sent by Karina Okotel to the Young Liberal Branch instructing them to submit the motion. The Australian Newspaper revealed her dishonesty in a later article. This left many conservatives wondering whether Karina Okotel was in fact either not courageous enough to submit them herself, or did not believe in the motions she drafted.
At the time the motions caused an uproar within the Party, and then Party President Michael Kroger stepped in to withdraw the contentious motions. This incensed the ‘Okotel Faction’. The ‘Okotel Faction’ had up until then been content to quietly undermine Michael Kroger and his Party allies; Josh Frydenberg, Michael Sukkar, Greg Hunt, Helen Kroger, Matthew Guy, Marcus Bastiaan, Russell Hannan, Ivan Stratov, Georgie Downer, David Lau, Tim Smith, Nick Lamanna, Bev McArthur, Greg Hunt, Alex Lisov, Sarah Henderson and Paul Mitchell. However after Michael Kroger stepped in to remove the contentious motion the attacks on Michael Kroger and his allies became public, targeted and nasty.
The understood aim of the ‘Okotel Faction’s had been to find a safe Liberal Seat for Karina Okotel and a new paid staffing role for her brother Joshua Bonney. This ambition purportedly only came to the forefront when Western Region MP Simon Ramsay announced his retirement weeks from the election. Karina Okotel used her role as Vice President to lobby for an Admin Preselection, expecting consensus support to fill the vacancy. It is then understood that Joshua and fellow ‘Okotel Faction’ members worked the phones and held meetings to promote the concept among members – the response was lukewarm at best. When State Liberal MP’s found out about ‘Okotel Faction’ plan, they rapidly moved to draft long term Western Region identity and Vice President Bev McArthur. Ultimately Bev was elected.
From then on, the ‘Okotel Faction’ swapped allegiances from the Kroger, Frydenberg, Sukkar alliance governing the Party, back to Karina Okotel’s former mentor and left-wing power broker Frank Greenstein. It is alleged that figures within her new factional grouping promised Karina Okotel a senate vacancy to entice her to leak against Matthew Guy during the election campaign and to attack her former Admin allies.
Many serious allegations of organisational misconduct have been raised against Karina Okotel by members of the Party and MPs. To date Karina Okotel has received no sanction or admonishment. Many believe Karina Okotel is being protected by the group she helped support back into power – the very same group she betrayed years earlier to be promoted by her friend’s enemies.
I have been a Party member for 30 years. I have seen many come and go. Traitors, lairs, frauds and manipulators and of course those sycophantic wannabees. As a volunteer Campaign Manager for 28 Years, I have never seen anyone as ruthless and foolish as Karina Okotel. From her meteoric rise within the Party to her unprecedented fall, much can be learnt by Liberals about the nature of power, religion and desire. I am very disappointed at such abuse of power. What Karina Okotel has done is cast a dark shadow on all those of an ethnic background and has divided the Liberal Party.
BACKGROUND AND INCONSISTENCIES. Some may feel what is written above is a stinging critique. However, over the past year many Liberals have spoken to me about what they heard, what they saw and why they ultimately walked away from the ‘Okotel Faction’. Below are some of Karina Okotel’s Public V. Recorded policy positions, and just some of her documented instances of purported political bastardry, leaking and dishonesty. I hope that the ‘Okotel Faction’ will fade into the past and no one else will be caught up and used by these brutal players.

GAMBLING. Karina Okotel’s Public Position: Karina Okotel expressed her strong opposition to the damaging and dangerous impact of gambling in our community during her preselection.
Karina Okotel’s Record: 6.11.2013 while on Glen Eira council Karina Okotel voted AGAINST recognising the public health crisis caused by poker machine gambling and voted against resolves to raise public awareness.
Source: Council Minuets Archive: Glen Eira: Meeting 6 November 2013
LIQUOR. Karina Okotel’s Public Position: Karina Okotel has expressed during her preselection a deep concern about the impact of alcohol on families and rising rates of domestic violence. Karina Okotel previously worked for a government body providing support to “people living with vulnerability and social disadvantage”. This included helping people with “drug and alcohol issues”.
Karina Okotel’s Record: Karina Okotel’s local government election campaign was funded by Liquor distributor ‘Donald’s Town’. Paying for her promotional material and campaign activities. Another donor was Left faction numbers man Frank Greenstein.
Source: Barwon Community Legal Services submission to the ‘National Human Rights Action Plan’ 31.8.2011 Source: Glen Eira Council Archived Records 9.4.13 Source: https://au111565378.fm.alibaba.com/
SAME SEX MARRIAGE. Karina Okotel’s Public Position: “Its ok to say NO.” Spokeswoman for the no vote during the same sex marriage campaign. Karina Okotel’s Record: Karina Okotel expressed her earlier views during the marriage campaign as “I thought that if two consenting adults want to marry what does it hurt anyone else?“
Source: Melbourne Press Club Address 13.9.2017 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DbiG6Xfoa7Y
CHILDREN’S SEX EDUCATION. Karina Okotel’s Public Position: Karina Okotel’s response during the Same Sex Marriage campaign was “it should be up to a parent to decide when their child is exposed to sexualised content.” Karina Okotel has provided the same response within the Liberal Party regarding the Safe School program. Karina Okotel’s Record: Karina Okotel has subsequently written in support of core Safe Schools curriculum content, stating “In schools today, children are taught that sexuality is fluid which I do not disagree with.”
Source: https://www.spectator.com.au/2019/10/victoria-flawed-jewel-liberal-crown/
Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DbiG6Xfoa7Y
SAME SEX ADOPTION AND PARENTING. Karina Okotel’s Public Position: Karina Okotel’s advocated that all children deserve a mother and a father, she has also purportedly advocated within the Liberal Party that children do better when raised by heterosexual parents. Karina Okotel’s Record: When asked by Tony Jones on the ABC whether Karina Okotel had a issue with same sex parenting Karina Okotel responded with “No, no I don’t have any issue with Gay people parenting.”
Source: Q&A, ABC – 23.10.17 https://www.abc.net.au/qanda/qa-same-sex-marriage-debate/10650139
ABORTION. Karina Okotel’s Public Position: Karina Okotel has articulated a prolife position during preselection and supported the prolife cause during her courting of the Conservative right. Karina Okotel’s Record: According to multiple senior sources from Toorak based Canterbury Evening Discussion Group (Woman’s Section), when asked whether she was pro-choice, her response was words to the effect of ‘You don’t need to convince me, I have seen first-hand what happens to women in Uganda when they don’t have safe legal access to abortion.’
THE POLITICISATION OF INDIGENOUS AUSTRALIANS. Karina Okotel’s Public Position: Regarding the ‘Change the Date’ campaign Karina Okotel criticises the left for using minorities to attack Australia’s history and identity “this is how the left consistently treat minorities – as pawns to be used for their own purpose to rewrite history and disassociate Australia from its British heritage.” Karina Okotel’s Record: Karina Okotel’s submission to the Rudd government’s ‘National Human Rights Action Plan’ – expressed her negative views on Australia’s humans rights record and sought to use Aboriginal Australian’s to make her point. “It is inaccurate to say that ‘Australia has a strong human rights record…in particular, policies affecting indigenous people including those giving rise to the Stolen Generation.”
Source: https://www.spectator.com.au/2018/01/the-left-want-to-rewrite-the-past-to-seize-control-of-our-future/
Source: Barwon Community Legal Services submission to the ‘National Human Rights Action Plan’ 31.8.2011
CRIME AND AFRICAN GANG VIOLENCE. Karina Okotel’s Public Position: Karina Okotel appeared on the ABC the day before the state election and spoke at length regarding one of the Liberal Party’s key election promises to clean up African Gang violence and Victoria’s rising rate of crime. She stated during the interview that “Crime is skyrocketing in Victoria, we need to look at the real statistics” and strongly supported Matthew Guy’s tough on crime approach.
Karina Okotel’s Record: In the days after the election in Karina Okotel’s leaked a private email she states “We ran such a divisive campaign. No migrant of colour could vote for us.” She also stated on Sky News after the election “We focused on crime very heavily and to our detriment”.
Source: ABC, The Drum 23rd November
Source: https://www.theaustralian.com.au/nation/politics/leaked-email-how-victorian-liberals-marched-off-cliff/news-story/035200be166fe4225aaab9e2b8c06d56
Source: https://www.theaustralian.com.au/nation/politics/Karina Okotel-okotel-wont-criticise-leakers-of-her-victorian-election-email/news-story/c136cd4d7a70334cd17e45f8a4ad1b02
KARINA OKOTEL’S POLITICAL BASTARDRY. Whilst I was overseas I was receiving numerous emails and phone calls from various sources detailing the acts and instances. I was disappointed to read all the negative emails about Karina Okotel, because I had believed she was a decent person and I found them hard to believe. Upon returning I followed up the complaints and was even more disappointed to find they were true.
LEAKING. Karina Okotel’s Public Position: I would never leak against the Liberal Party. An undertaking Karina Okotel made as a member of our party’s Administrative Committee. Karina Okotel’s Record: Karina Okotel has been CAUGHT multiple times leaking internal documents to Fairfax Media. Two cases were investigated by the Lawyer HR Legal, and the report’s findings were suppressed by her ally current Party President Robert Clark. To date Karina Okotel has not been publicly admonished for her actions.
TREACHERY. Karina Okotel’s Public Position: I would never do anything to damage the Liberal Party. An undertaking Karina Okotel made as a member of our party’s Administrative Committee.
Karina Okotel’s Record: Visited State Parliament in the lead up to the 2018 election to meet with a group of State MP’s about releasing a series of “dirt files” on senior Liberals and preselected candidates. The assumed intention was to bring down Matthew Guy and the coalitions election campaign. Several of the MP’s were so shocked they reported the incident to senior Liberals. When approached Karina Okotel denied any knowledge of it.
KARINA OKOTEL’S PUBLIC POSITION: Supportive of senior conservatives such as Peter Dutton, Michael Sukkar, Tony Abbott and Mathias Corman.
Karina Okotel’s Record: In the lead up to the October 2019 Federal Council, Karina Okotel visited some of the Parliamentary offices and spoke to staffers of the following conservative Federal members; Amanda Stoker, Andrew Hastie, Zed Seselja, Tony Pasin, Connie Ferravanti-Wells, Mathias Corman and Eric Abetz attacking Victorian conservatives’ Michael Sukkar, Tim Smith and their organisational allies. The response Karina received was shock and disgust. In one particular case, a member of parliament cut Karina off and asked her to leave their office. Many were appalled that Karina Okotel spoke to brutally against her former supporters, the very people who had introduced her to many of them. This act was one of the reasons why she was dumped as Female Federal Vice President for Tim Smith ally Caroline Inge.
CIRCULATING DAMAGING MATERIAL 1. Western Metro Preselection 2018. Karina Okotel was caught and then lied to the State Director regarding the circulation of disparaging material regarding candidate Hamish Jones. Directly contravening 21.12 (d) of the Party’s Constitution. A complaint was submitted to the State Director by party member Sol Green, when confronted by the Party’s Admin Committee Karina Okotel changed her story and admitted to sending the messages. Karina Okotel was not sanctioned by Robert Clark.
CIRCULATING DAMAGING MATERIAL 2. Senate Preselection 2019. Karina Okotel was again caught circulating disparaging material regarding successful candidate Sarah Henderson. Again, directly contravening 21.12 (d) of the Party’s Constitution. When questioned about the circulation she prevaricated and refused to respond. Karina Okotel was not sanctioned by Robert Clark.
FAKE LETTER: In 2018 after the State Election loss Karina Okotel wrote a 1,500+ word letter to one of her Federal Executive colleagues. The same letter was leaked to News Corp journalists before the recipient even opened it! The letter titled “What went wrong?” was a savage critique of Leader Matthew Guy, Shadow Minister Ryan Smith, President Michael Kroger, State Director Nick Demiris and Admin colleagues. The content was a storm of conspiracy theories, lies and baseless criticism designed to damage former allies and set a narrative for Frank Greenstein to take over. When Karina Okotel was asked on Sky News about the leaked letter she would not criticise the leaker, instead trying to justify her actions: “It has been an emotional time so I understand that people might do things that are what they think is right at the time.” Karina Okotel was not sanctioned by Robert Clark.
SUNDAY MEETINGS AND VOTING: Karina Okotel’s Public Position: Doesn’t support Sunday AGMs or voting on Sunday’s because it discriminate against Christian’s ability to attend and vote. Campaigned and spoke at Admin in 2018 regarding Sunday meetings discriminating against “faith communities”. Karina Okotel’s Record: At the Admin meeting on the 23.5.2019 Karina Okotel, Grant Hutchinson and Robert Clark voted in favour of Sunday voting, later purportedly misleading members by blaming Michael Kroger for the change.
CONCLUSION: Beware of false prophets, (Dark Side) which come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves. Matthew 7:15

  1. https://www.theage.com.au/national/victoria/gay-conversion-off-liberal-agenda-after-party-president-pulls-pin-20180416-p4z9ug.html
  2. https://www.theaustralian.com.au/nation/politics/Karina Okotel-okotel-out-of-contention-after-liberals-dispute/news-tory/d473773efa41c34803e9ddbbea96b30c
  3. https://www.smh.com.au/national/young-libs-accuse-party-vice-president-of-malicious-behaviour-20190216-p50y98.html
  4. https://www.news.com.au/national/politics/antigay-figure-Karina Okotel-okotel-one-of-several-hopefuls-vying-for-the-liberal-partys-vacant-senate-spots/news-story/602cdd90948ba736334a58e65d720e20
  5. https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/katrina-okotel-the-bleeding-heart-lawyer-who-opposes-samesex-marriage-20170919-gyki7y.html
  6. https://www.imdb.com/name/nm6680127/
  7. https://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/breakfast/code-of-conduct-needed,-says-liberal-vice-president/11372898
  8. https://www.npc.org.au/speakers/lyle-shelton-Karina Okotel-okotel/lyle-shelton-and-Karina Okotel-okotel/ https://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/gay-marriage/no-campaigns-unlikely-secret-weapon-a-young-lawyer-with-a-human-rights-background/news-story/4059578f7d3ed56722f557bd286fd702
  9. https://www.pinknews.co.uk/2017/09/13/anti-gay-marriage-chief-wants-kids-tv-to-ban-kisses/
  10. https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/katrina-okotel-the-bleeding-heart-lawyer-who-opposes-samesex-marriage-20170919-gyki7y.html
  11. https://www.crikey.com.au/2017/09/19/who-is-karina-okotel/