Table of Contents
Cr Danielle Wheeler has issued a statement defending comments she made on a private Facebook page that were later circulated publicly, framing the controversy as a debate about racism rather than the language used in the post.
The councillor said the comments were originally written on a “friends only” Facebook page and were shared publicly without her permission.
“Recently, I shared thoughts on my private Facebook page, visible to friends only that were photographed without my permission and shared without context,” she wrote.
The post has since circulated widely online.
Cr Wheeler said the comments were made in response to online commentary from people she believed were supporters of Pauline Hanson's One Nation encouraging others to throw pig’s heads and allow dogs to defecate on land they assumed would become a mosque.
She said the comments prompted a reaction written in anger.
“Those comments deeply disgusted and saddened me. I believe that everyone should be treated equally, regardless of their race, colour or religion.”
Cr Wheeler also rejected claims circulating online that she had interacted with Pauline Hanson, stating she had “no interactions with Pauline Hanson, as has been claimed elsewhere.”
Limited Apology
In her statement, Cr Wheeler apologised specifically to Christians who may have been offended by language used in the original post.
“For those of you who are committed Christians who found my blasphemy offensive, I sincerely and unreservedly apologise.”
However, she made clear she did not regret condemning racism or bigotry.
“I do not regret my condemnation of hate and division.”
The apology was directed narrowly at those offended by religious language rather than addressing the broader controversy over the tone of the original post.
Political Framing
Cr Wheeler also suggested criticism of the post was politically motivated, saying those offended by the language were unlikely to support the Australian Greens, the party she represents.
“If you find swearing more problematic than racism and bigotry, or if you find Pauline’s parliamentary record linked below acceptable, I doubt you were ever likely to vote Greens.”
The remark indicates the councillor views the dispute as a clash of values rather than simply a matter of inappropriate language.
The Private Post Defence
A central part of Cr Wheeler’s response is the argument that the original comments were written privately and circulated publicly without her consent.
“I reiterate that this post was private and I did not intend to give offence.”
The issue raises broader questions about the expectations placed on elected officials in the age of social media, where even posts shared with limited audiences can quickly enter the public domain.
A Different Crisis Strategy
Political observers note that public figures facing controversy over social media comments often adopt a more conventional crisis-management approach.
Typically this involves acknowledging the issue quickly, accepting responsibility for the tone of the remarks and offering a broad apology aimed at calming the situation and closing down further debate.
Statements in those situations often emphasise that elected representatives must be mindful of their language at all times and seek to reassure the wider community that lessons have been learned.
Cr Wheeler’s response takes a different path.
Rather than retreating from the original comments, she has largely defended the intent behind them and reframed the controversy as a question of whether racism and bigotry should be condemned forcefully.
More to Come
Cr Wheeler indicated the issue is unlikely to end with her statement, telling both supporters and critics she plans to address the matter again soon.
“For those of you who shared more robust opinions, follow along. I’ll have more to say on Monday.”
The promise of further comment suggests the debate surrounding the original post may continue in the coming days.
The full statement can be viewed on Cr Wheeler Face Book page.
Monday's MAGA Like FaceBook Post
ANALYSIS
Cr Wheeler shared a post on Monday 16 March on her Councillor page expressing again strong views about supporters of Pauline Hanson and the One Nation.
While framed as a personal opinion, the post which referred to voters as having “the IQ of cardboard” has drawn criticism for targeting individuals rather than engaging with policy or ideas.
In doing so, the Councillor positions herself within a political divide, relying on ridicule and profanity rather than argument. For many, this moves beyond political disagreement into the use of derogatory language, dismissive characterisation of voters, and a tone inconsistent with public office.
Despite the disclaimer saying the post does not express the views of Hawkesbury City Council, Cr Wheeler remains a sitting councillor speaking in a public forum and shaping community discourse. This creates a tension with the expectations of civic leadership, which call for respect, inclusion, and representation of all constituents.
The post appears directed less at persuading undecided residents and more at reinforcing support among an existing base appealing to those already aligned, while risking further division. This is the well trodden path of Make Amercia Great Again (MAGA) political discourse.
At a local level, this approach carries particular consequence. Councillors are elected to represent entire communities, and effective governance relies on trust, cooperation, and respectful dialogue not deepening political divides.
Beyond the content of the posts, a significant question of accountability remains regarding where these views are aired. While Cr Wheeler maintains a private Facebook profile for personal interactions, she has chosen to use her official "Councillor" page complete with her title and civic branding as the vehicle for these divisive remarks. Although a disclaimer was recently added to her bio stating the views are her own, this does not decouple her from her role as an elected representative of the Hawkesbury City Council.
Critics argue that an official page is a tool of office, and anything published there is inherently a reflection of her standing in the community. Furthermore, a glaring inconsistency has emerged in the page’s moderation: while the Councillor’s bio explicitly warns visitors against being "defamatory, bigoted, or abusive," her own descriptions of constituents as having "the IQ of cardboard" mirror the very hostility she claims to prohibit.
By employing the same "MAGA-style" rhetoric of ridicule she purports to stand against, the Councillor risks being viewed as a hypocrite demanding a standard of respect from the public that she appears unwilling to return.
