Skip to content

Craig Thomson: The Gift That Keeps on Giving. Edition 6, Volume 12, Chapter 5…

April 4, 2012

Craig Thomson reappears in Parliament on Tuesday after recovering from mystery near-death illness: "I'm cured! I'm cured, Praise God I'm cured!!!"

The continuing saga…

Craig Thomson is creeping closer towards criminal proceedings after it was announced that Fair Work Australia has referred its report into the Health Services Union to the Department of Public Prosecutions.

The findings of the investigation, which took some three years to complete now remain under wraps at the Director of Public Prosecutions.

The Opposition has been attacking the Government and the union for months over the length of time the investigation has taken.

Now that the investigation is over, Federal Opposition Leader Tony Abbott wants the findings open to public scrutiny, saying anything less amounts to a cover-up.

And he has demanded to know if Mr Thomson – the Labor MP accused of using his union credit card to pay for prostitutes during his time at the HSU – is named in the report.

“Certainly the Coalition is going to move to get the thing out as soon as possible,” Mr Abbott told AM this morning.

“The public deserve to know whether a member of the Gillard Government has been referred to the DPP for possible criminal charges.”

Mr Abbott rejected claims that he was simply “playing politics” saying that he just wants the Government to be transparent.

“This report was prepared at vast taxpayer expense, and the public deserves to have this report,” he told AM.

“There is ample precedent for it. The Labor deputy speaker of the Parliament, Anna Bourke, herself was calling for transparency on this matter.

“Fair Work Australia released an earlier report into the HSU affair at the Senate’s request, The Fitzgerald Inquiry [into corruption in Queensland] released its full report in the 1980s, including recommendations that criminal charges be laid against named ministers of the Crown.

“So, look, if the Prime Minister is fair dinkum about her statement that Labor is the party of truth telling, she should want this report out in the open now.”

Fair Work Australia says its decision not to make the report public was based on legal advice.

But Mr Abbott says advice provided to him from shadow attorney-general George Brandis clears the way for the report to be opened.

The Opposition Leader denies using the Thomson affair to hammer the Government in Parliament and in the media.

“I think that everything about the way this matter has been handled, over three-and-a-half tortuous years, smacks of cover-up,” he said.

This morning the man at the centre of the controversy said he had not seen the report, and claimed he was just as frustrated by the process as anyone.

Speaking to reporters outside his home, Mr Thomson said he “found out about [the report] on Twitter, with no notification from Fair Work Australia”, and expressed his dismay at the protracted investigation process.

“It is incredibly frustrating that after four years it appears [the report] has been sent to someone else to do exactly what Fair Work was meant to do for the last four years,” Mr Thomson said.

“We have no notice, no knowledge, no details. There’s four people, we don’t even know who the four people even are at this stage,” Mr Thomson said.

If I had to hazard a guess, I’d have a reasonably strong suspicion that he’s likely to be one of them.

Meanwhile Opposition Senate leader Eric Abetz has joined his leader’s call for the report to be made public and individuals responsible for breaches identified.

“Craig Thomson or Ms Gillard need to tell the Australian people whether in fact Mr Thomson has been named in this report and, if he has, in relation to what issues,” Senator Abetz said.

“The fact that Fair Work Australia, a Gillard Government initiative, has taken over three years to come to a finalisation of the matter and then still not tell the Australian public who is involved is quite frankly inexplicable, it is unbelievable. Is this standard practice for Fair Work Australia?

Mr Abetz says the Opposition’s decision on whether to move a motion of no confidence in the Gillard Government will hinge on the detail of the report.

“If Craig Thomson is not mentioned in this report, then of course any basis or a vote of no confidence would disappear, whereas if he is mentioned and there are huge allegations of criminality against Mr Thomson, then it might be a different story.”

 

 

Advertisements
544 Comments leave one →
  1. April 4, 2012 9:28 am

    ACTU to hold a press conference at 11.00am….

  2. April 4, 2012 9:31 am

    Kathy Jackson was impressive on the 730 report last night…

    It’s refreshing to see someone concerned about misappropriation of Union members’ funds and unethical conduct..

    http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2012/s3470436.htm

  3. JAWS permalink
    April 4, 2012 9:34 am

    If I was a member of the HSU I’d want to know if one of the heads of my union was named in the report.

  4. Tom of Melbourne permalink
    April 4, 2012 9:54 am

    So it takes FWA 3 years to decide that they’re not going to deal with the breaches of the law.

    By the way, the previous head of the FWA general division is a former union/ALP hack. Now promoted to Commissioner. But that would have nothing to do with the length of the investigation.

  5. JAWS permalink
    April 4, 2012 10:10 am

    I thought Howard was sneaky. But this government makes him look like an amateur.

    And just as the Howard government lost but still managed to retain a very respectable number of seats these guys will be absolutely decimated just as their colleagues in NSW and Qld already have been.

  6. JAWS permalink
    April 4, 2012 10:12 am

    “……..Mr Thomson said he “found out about [the report] on Twitter,………..”

    At least he knows where his mobile is these days

  7. Tom of Melbourne permalink
    April 4, 2012 10:15 am

    FWA have found evidence of breaches of the law.

    It’s taken them 3 years to find 181 instances.

    The investigation was overseen by an ALP/union hack.

    Thousands on cash withdrawals and prostitutes.

    An MP who the government relies on is at the centre of it all.

    But the public doesn’t have the right to know.

  8. Tom R permalink
    April 4, 2012 10:17 am

    Craig Thomson: The Gift That Keeps on Giving. Edition 6, Volume 12, Chapter 5…

    And some argue that Labor are doing this on purpose 😯

    Of course, if you believe the hype that they are as bad as they are made out to be, that could be right.

    Then again, if they were that bad, Parliament couldn’t operate, especially with as many effective outcomes as it has.

    Anyways……..

  9. Splatterbottom permalink
    April 4, 2012 10:52 am

    Craig Thomson is emblematic of this government. This grub is the glue that holds the government together. He has the full support of the PM, probably because his ethics and their’s are cut from the same cloth. The government is, after all, a Unionland subsidiary.

  10. April 4, 2012 11:08 am

    BREAKING NOOZE!

    The ACTU is considering suspending the Health Services Union following Fair Work Australia probe…

    ACTU says it supports the referral of the Fair Work Australia report to prosecutors…

    President Ged Kearney: ACTU executive to meet tomorrow to consider possible suspension of Health Services Union from ACTU…

    Ged Kearney says the allegations are of such a serious nature that the union movement has to do whatever is in its power to send a msg…

  11. April 4, 2012 11:09 am

    “At least he knows where his mobile is these days”

    LOL!! 🙂

  12. April 4, 2012 11:09 am

    Outgoing ACTU Secretary Jeff Lawrence ‘we wanna make sure the union [HSU] is cleaned up.’

  13. April 4, 2012 11:11 am

    ACTU’s Jeff Lawrence says the union has zero tolerance for corruption and misuse of members’ funds..

  14. Tom of Melbourne permalink
    April 4, 2012 11:20 am

    While the ACTU may not tolerate misuse of member’s funds, it’s not a standard the government wishes to apply to MPs.

  15. Tom of Melbourne permalink
    April 4, 2012 11:22 am

    Will those who have been so critical of Kathy Jackson now have the character to retract?

  16. armchair opinionator permalink
    April 4, 2012 12:12 pm

    “The public deserve to know…”

    Mr Abbott rejected claims that he was simply “playing politics” saying that he just wants the Government to be transparent…

    Of course he does, at least when in Opposition, but then it all changes when in government doesn’t it?
    Call me cynical, but it’s just the same old, nothing new about any of this. I find it quite boring, Abbott blustering on, doing whatever he can to get his bum on the big chair. Labor trying to be as “small target” as possible, circling the wagons against an organised media and coalition attack on them from all fronts. Dare they be allowed to govern in this country, when everyone knows that it is a Coalition birthright. Labor ploughs on under pressure not lurching but positively running evermore to the right with stupid, zombie economic rationalism and neoliberalism.

    Now we have a two party system of government that offer the same outcomes to the voters. That is what makes me despair, the lack of choice for people, the lack of a democracy. There is nothing on offer for people who want change and visionary, best practices in policy and leadership.

    Both political parties are not worthy of office.

    By the way, the previous head of the FWA general division is a former union/ALP hack. Now promoted to Commissioner. But that would have nothing to do with the length of the investigation…

    I think you may have mentioned that once or twice before!

    As the ACTU mentioned this morning [I paraphrase] breaches in law occur in the corporate world on a daily basis, but nothing is ever heard of it in public, or acted upon by the toothless tigers of pretend regulation. Seems there is a happy acceptance of corporate malfeasance and power behind government in this country yet a heavy emphasis on the demonising of unions and control of ordinary workers.

  17. Tom of Melbourne permalink
    April 4, 2012 12:34 pm

    I disagree KL
    The reason this is always in the media is because Thomson remains an MP. If a company manager used the employer funds as his personal bank account, he’s have lost his job. He wouldn’t have the opportunity to hang around for years generating the all the reports.

    Thomson is only able to remain in his position because he’s an MP. There is a different standard applied to everyone else, thankfully.
    —————————–
    And unions do (or should) occupy position of greater trust, they’re the custodians of a lot of the members hard earned wages, they’re supposed to be the guardians of the of the rights of workers.

    Stealing from the union is morally more serious than fiddling the expense account. It’s more like a manager of “Feed the Starving Children Charity” using the contributions to support a couple of mistresses.
    —————————
    Kathy Jackson has been criticised for her campaign to clean up the HSU, many have impugned her motives.

    They know who they are. It’s time they showed the courage and retracted their shocking slights against a courageous woman.

  18. Bacchus permalink
    April 4, 2012 12:43 pm

    http://www.news.com.au/hsu-president-kathy-jackson-faces-accusations-she-misused-a-union-funded-credit-card/story-e6freuzr-1226145396520

    Why? She’s in this right up to her eyeballs, along with her ex-husband. Is this just another shot fired in the internal war going on for control of the HSU? Is what we’ve been privy to via the media, truth or fiction?

    That’s the point ToM – we don’t know what’s really going on, yet your ideolgical blindness has Mr Thompson tried, convicted and hung.

    Given what “information” has been released via the media, it’s quite likely that Mr Thompson has a case to answer, but it may well turn out that his opponents have setup Mr Thompson as part of the war.

    Bottom line is still, we don’t fckn know. I for one am happy for the DPP to do their work, free of political interference from the government or that failed wanna-be lawyer Brandis!

    Courageous – you are joking! She’s using this to further her position in the internal faction war within the HSU!

  19. Bacchus permalink
    April 4, 2012 12:45 pm

    And your continued anaolgy of a manager in private enterprise being sacked is still as invalid as it ever was. Craig Thompson is not accused of any wrondoing against his current employer. Who’s going to sack him & what for? The HSU certainly can’t sack him – he doesn’t work for them!

  20. April 4, 2012 12:54 pm

    This is just another EXAMPLE of what’s systematically wrong with this place. In fact, it’s ENDEMIC.

    Bacchus just strolls in here and offers what some might call some well-considered articulate “facts” and just detracts from the whole sense of hysteria and indignant outrage that “you lot” are trying to whip up here like a pack of frenzied meerkats!

    Although to be honest, I’ve never actually witnessed any frenzied meerkats. Do the meerkats get the frenzies?

  21. JAWS permalink
    April 4, 2012 1:02 pm

    “Do the meerkats get the frenzies?”

    Yep

  22. April 4, 2012 1:04 pm

    I forgot to add the caption to the Craig Thomson pic above…

  23. armchair opinionator permalink
    April 4, 2012 1:07 pm

    Will those who have been so critical of Kathy Jackson now have the character to retract?

    I didn’t see Jackson on the show you mentioned tom, I still believe that it is all a big fight for power and control of that union by these two factions. I think Kathy went public because of her own ambitions rather than any concern for the good of the membership and the union movement. She is deeply involved in the mud, her professional and personal life is heavily conflicted by her relationship choices. She was married to Jeff Jackson. Her partner is Michael Lawler, a vice-president of the Australian Industrial Relations Commission. It all seems very incestuous.

    If anything her actions have wrecked the union. I wouldn’t be paying them any fees if I was one of their health workers. Jackson has a similar strategy to Abbott, she will blow the joint apart to get what she wants.

    Jackson has been in the HSU for years.The union members deserves better and the HSU should be cleansed of the jacksons as well as the thomsons. Let a clean-skin in and start afresh.

    I think it is time for the unions and Labor to go their separate ways. Labor is over represented by right wing union dominance and there are too many other workers missing out on the prosperity.

    All in all, the voting public is being badly served by both Labor and Liberal.

    …Stealing from the union is morally more serious than fiddling the expense account. It’s more like a manager of “Feed the Starving Children Charity” using the contributions to support a couple of mistresses…

    I disagree, stealing is stealing, there is no moral difference between the amount, where the money comes from and the purpose of the business operations. Why is stealing from shareholders a lesser crime than stealing from union members? Why are they putting aboriginal kids in jail for stealing a freddo frog!

  24. Tom of Melbourne permalink
    April 4, 2012 1:20 pm

    No Bacchus, I’m not going to rake over too much old ground, though I’ve been criticised in very insulting terms for saying that Thomson had a case to answer.

    Clearly he does. Even the ACTU believes there is a case to answer concerning union activities while he was head of the union.

    The parallel (with the action that would be taken against a manager who similarly misused company funds) is reasonable. No leader of an ethical company would remain in their position in similar circumstances.

    The innuendo about Jackson’s personal motivation and her relationship with a FWA member is low and outrageous. The slight against VP Lawler is shocking.

  25. JAWS permalink
    April 4, 2012 1:26 pm

    “Craig Thompson is not accused of any wrondoing against his current employer. Who’s going to sack him & what for? The HSU certainly can’t sack him – he doesn’t work for them!”

    So let me get this right………………..

    If you found out one of your new employees had been reported to the DPP/Police/Whoever on suspicion of fraud/theft/improper use of monies/embezzlement by his previous employer you’d just “sail along” as though nothing had happened ?

  26. Tom of Melbourne permalink
    April 4, 2012 1:31 pm

    So the Honorary Treasurer stealing from ‘The Poor Children’s Education and Food Fund and Charity’ is the same as a middle manager having his hand in the till at ‘MegaCarbon Power Corp Conglomerate’?

  27. Bacchus permalink
    April 4, 2012 1:43 pm

    Yes and no “Jaws”. I’d keep a bloody close eye on him and wait for the DPP/Police to do their stuff. To do otherwise may possibly lead me to a large payout for unfair dismissal, if it turned out that the charges were all a beatup by other employees of his former firm who were out to get him…

  28. Bacchus permalink
    April 4, 2012 1:44 pm

    Clearly he does.

    This is not at all clear at this stage – you repeatedly saying so doesn’t make it true 🙄

  29. Bacchus permalink
    April 4, 2012 1:46 pm

    No leader of an ethical company would remain in their position in similar circumstances.

    No, and he’s not. He’s in a totally different position…

  30. April 4, 2012 1:46 pm

    “I’d keep a bloody close eye on him and wait for the DPP/Police to do their stuff. To do otherwise may possibly lead me to a large payout for unfair dismissal”

    In the private sector the employee concerned would more than likely be suspended on full pay until the matter had been resolved.

    The employee would be asked to explain the discrepancies in his credit card statements. If he was unable to provide a satisfactory explanation he would be sacked. End of story.

  31. April 4, 2012 1:48 pm

    “He’s in a totally different position”

    Yes – one that should be held to a higher standard of ethics and integrity than in the private sector.

  32. Bacchus permalink
    April 4, 2012 1:50 pm

    True reb, while he remains in the employ of the firm where the accusations originated. Once he’s employed elsewhere, the situation changes dramatically. The new employer would need to be very careful what action they took.

    The second part is that there is no mechanism for an MP to be “suspended on full pay until the matter had been resolved”. The analogy falls down there as well…

  33. Bacchus permalink
    April 4, 2012 1:55 pm

    So all we would need to do to have just about any MP “stood down pending investigations” is to get some semi-believable accusations from anyone with a beef with the parliamentarian to stand up. With politics being the honourable and ethical profession it is, we could end up with no-one sitting in the parliament 😉

    Somehow, I prefer innocent until proven guilty over trial by media / kangaroo court with Judge and executioner ToM presiding and “Jaws” prosecuting…

  34. April 4, 2012 1:59 pm

    “I prefer innocent until proven guilty over trial by media / kangaroo court with Judge and executioner ToM presiding and “Jaws” prosecuting…”

    Oh, that’s just common sense talk… Where’s the fun, outrage and hysteria in that!!

  35. Tom R permalink
    April 4, 2012 1:59 pm

    The innuendo about Jackson’s personal motivation and her relationship with a FWA member is low and outrageous. The slight against VP Lawler is shocking.

    This, from the one who says “there is sufficient now to say Thomson has “a case to answer””

    ROFL

  36. TB Queensland permalink
    April 4, 2012 2:00 pm

    Wake me when you reach all reach agreement will you …. and decide to discuss something new and interesting …

    I’ve just reached a monumental decision … all politicians are pretty much the same … useless and certainly overpaid …

    … and simply discussing whose “favourite” side in politics is best or which politician is worse than the other is, in 2012 … a waste of time … with apologies a waste of my time …

    ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ

  37. el gordo permalink
    April 4, 2012 2:34 pm

    TB has a point.

  38. Tom of Melbourne permalink
    April 4, 2012 2:50 pm

    Bacchus, I don’t think I’ve ever said Thomson can be expelled from parliament. There is no mechanism.

    Parliament has a lower threshold for ethical behaviour than most businesses.

    If Thomson held a position of trust with a company, he’d have to answer the allegations, even if they related to a previous employer. If he declined to answer the issues, or did not address them to the satisfaction of his employer, he could/would be dismissed.

    The point is – parliament has lower standards than most employers.

    The ACTU is sufficiently concerned to take action. I suppose it’s an organisation full of ‘trolls’.
    ==========
    Tom R the partisan innuendo is quite outrageous.

    What exactly do you allege about Jackson and Lawler?

  39. shaneinqld permalink
    April 4, 2012 2:51 pm

    Does anyone in Australia honestly think that Craig Thompson would recieve a fair trial in this country ?

    I certainly do not anymore.

    He has been ridiculed, vilified, accused, tried, found guilty and sentenced by the opposition, the media and sites such as this on the internet.

    While in the real world he is yet to have charges laid against him.

    Problem is, so many cannot separate the real world from the make believe world of media and the internet.

    The other problem is that Tony Abbott wants the process to operate like business.

    What, like the Murdochrocy which simply throws enough money at any victim of phone tapping sufficient cash to avoid a trial and the truth becoming public.

    What, like the Murdochrocy which offloads companies to avoid action.

    What, like the Murdochrocy which shreads all evidence shuts down a paper in an attempt to isolate blame to a few employees.

    What like the Murdochrocy which claims that governments from the top job accept responsibility yet the top at News Limited refuse to accept responsibility.

    Businesses do absolutely everything within their power to halt and bury any accusations or even real charges, by dragging cases on for years and years through delaying tactics and as soon as this ends an out of court settlement is quickly negotiated so that nothing becomes public.

    I suggest that under the business standards I have seen on many an occasion, Craig Thompson offer to pay $X to the Union as an ex gratia payment while refusing and denying any liability and on condition that silence forms part of the payment.

    That way the allegations would be dealt with under business rules as per Tony Abbotts request. Deception, Lies, Manipulation, Cash and Stalling tactics galore.

  40. Tom of Melbourne permalink
    April 4, 2012 2:52 pm

    Bacchus, I don’t think I’ve ever said Thomson can be expelled from parliament. There is no mechanism.

    Parliament has a lower threshold for ethical behaviour than most businesses.

    If Thomson held a position of trust with a company, he’d have to answer the allegations, even if they related to a previous employer. If he declined to answer the issues, or did not address them to the satisfaction of his employer, he could/would be dismissed.

    The point is – parliament has lower standards than most employers.

    The ACTU is sufficiently concerned to take action. I suppose it’s an organisation full of Liberal supporters.
    ==========
    Tom R the partisan innuendo is quite outrageous.

    What exactly do yon allege about Jackson and Lawler?

  41. Tom R permalink
    April 4, 2012 3:07 pm

    What exactly do yon allege about Jackson and Lawler?

    I wasn’t alleging anything. I was hypothesising.

    What are you alleging about Thomson. What ‘case’ does he have to answer?

  42. Tom of Melbourne permalink
    April 4, 2012 3:16 pm

    Thomson isn’t exactly Allan Bond or Brian Bourke. Both of whom got fair trials despite all the press coverage, speculation and the public findings of independent inquiries.

    Thomson should be no different.

  43. TB Queensland permalink
    April 4, 2012 3:17 pm

    As a suggestion for the BlogMasta …

    … what about looking at the positives of our pollies and discussing the “ideal” front bench …

    … from all political parties … to run Australia … not their own agendas …

    My first couple:

    PM – Malcolm Turnbull

    Foreign Minister – Kevin Rudd

  44. Splatterbottom permalink
    April 4, 2012 3:18 pm

    This is a government built on lies which is precisely why Craig Thomson fits right in. No wonder the Liar-In-Chief has complete confidence in him.

    The real issue is that Thomson is merely one of the government’s minor travails. He stinks to high heaven, but the smell just blends right in with the entrenched stench steaming from the rancid bucket of shit that is this rotten incompetent government. Sadly, all the poor dumb fuckers can do is blame Tony Abbott. Every fucking time a government pollie gets a hard question they start their reply with an attack on Abbott. I can’t even listen to them any more without feeling sick. They have no decency and no shame. This is what post-modern politics looks like – truth is not relevant, but only power and its exercise.

    I get that Abbott and Hockey and the rest of them are as bereft of coherent policies and common sense as the government, that they too are addicted to thought-bubble polices in their desperate search for something, anything that might win them an election. But what I would really like to hear from the government is straight answers to hard questions. The trouble is I feel like I need a shower each time a government hack opens his or her mouth and starts spraying me with their bullshit answers.

  45. Tom of Melbourne permalink
    April 4, 2012 3:23 pm

    I’m saying-
    *Thomson stated he would make a ‘comprehensive statement’. He didn’t put conditions on that. He made the commitment about a year ago.
    *His credit card was used for prostitutes. He has offered no reasonable explanation. Labour law firm Slater and Gordon didn’t think much of his answers.
    *Cash was withdrawn for personal expenses. He’s provided no explanation. Etc, etc.

    The public is entitled to his explanation, and he committed to providing one.

    It’s a case to answer.

  46. TB Queensland permalink
    April 4, 2012 3:30 pm

    G’day bumbbomb, how’s ya day been? 😀

  47. Tom R permalink
    April 4, 2012 3:37 pm

    DPP Chris Craigie has released a statement saying Fair Work Australia’s report was not a criminal investigation or a brief of evidence.

    “The CDPP is not an investigation agency,” he said.

    http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-04-04/dpp-says-cannot-investigate-fair-work-report/3932868

    Why don’t they just get brandis to lay the charges? 😯

  48. April 4, 2012 3:37 pm

    TB..eww, Malcolm Turnbull. Although he’s the best that the Libs have on offer, he’s not much more than a show pony. He’s rapidly turning himself into a Costello but without the nicer brother.

    My choice, completely imaginary: Bring back Faulkner for PM, and I agree Rudd for Foreign Minister.

  49. JAWS permalink
    April 4, 2012 3:41 pm

    “………….Craig Thompson offer to pay $X to the Union as an ex gratia payment while refusing and denying any liability and on condition that silence forms part of the payment.”

    20 years ago I was confronted with a similar scenario. My first week on the job required me to authorize payment of a list of 40 employees (not all fulltime) via a cash cheque which was cashed at the local bank every fortnight. When I asked why the list was not printed using the payroll software I was told by the payroll woman that there had always been a problem with the software so she typed up the list manually. The fact that she gave me only 15 minutes to authorize it before the bank shut made me very uneasy but I did.

    I then checked the software and it worked fine for me. So I demanded she give me the list with 2 hours to spare the following fortnight which she did.

    This time I had the time to add up her list. It didn’t add to the amount of the cheque. She’d been getting cheques cashed for $12,000 for a payroll that might total just $11,500 and pocketing the diff.

    Then we suspended her without pay, checked her previous payrolls and she’d taken the joint for $10,000 already.

    Did we prosecute ?

    You bet we did. The cops were called and in the end she got a suspended sentence and a criminal record.

    Why was that important. ?

    Well because any future employer would even today know what happened years ago and would tread warily.

    I would not wish her upon anyone

    You cannot advocate criminality being paid off

  50. JAWS permalink
    April 4, 2012 3:43 pm

    “……………..and “Jaws” prosecuting…”

    I prefer to see blood

    Guillotine operator thanks 🙂

  51. April 4, 2012 3:45 pm

    “What ‘case’ does he have to answer?”

    *groan*

    His credit card statements for starters, and then how phone calls were made to the brothel that featured on his credit card statements from his mobile phone…

    You know, just some sort of mildly plausible explanation might just be helpful…

    So far we just have:

    Someone must have stolen my wallet/mobile phone/drivers’ licence..

    Phoned the brothel using my mobile phone…

    Paid for the services of prostitutes on numerous occasions using my credit card…

    Made cash withdrawals on my credit card in $10,000 amounts over time to the combined tune of some $100,00 with corresponding paperwork conveniently disappearing…

    Used my drivers’ licence as photo id verification on site at the brothel…

    And that the person must’ve been someone similar in appearance to me to the satisfaction of the brothel operators…

    And then finally put everything back where it was in the first place so I didn’t know it was ever stolen…

    And when all this appeared on my credit card, I authorised it all as “work related expenses” (somehow by mistake presumably)…

  52. April 4, 2012 3:46 pm

    “Bring back Faulkner for PM”

    Nah, it’s Tanner Time…!

    Bring back Lindsay!

  53. Splatterbottom permalink
    April 4, 2012 3:50 pm

    Bring back Tanner – he was one of the best from any party.

  54. April 4, 2012 3:52 pm

    Reb, it’s the glasses..give me Faulkner any time..

  55. el gordo permalink
    April 4, 2012 3:54 pm

    Lindsay should be found a seat in the senate.

    Smith for PM.

  56. JAWS permalink
    April 4, 2012 3:57 pm

    “While in the real world he is yet to have charges laid against him”

    In the real “Real World” things would have moved along at a faster pace

  57. April 4, 2012 3:59 pm

    You cannot advocate criminality being paid off

    Rupert Murdoch is doing exactly this with each and every single person whose phone has been hacked before it goes to court to avoid publicity and the full details being published.

    Happens regualrly in the so called honest business world.

  58. April 4, 2012 4:01 pm

    In the real “Real World” things would have moved along at a faster pace

    I suggest you have a look at the length of court cases and how long they have been draggin on , especially if they have anything to do with large companies.

    Many are over 5 years old and still not in court.

    Delaying tactics are endemic.

  59. TB Queensland permalink
    April 4, 2012 4:10 pm

    You cannot advocate criminality being paid off

    Nor condoned! I’ve terminated employment for people simply clocking off or on for someone else … in my book its stealing – HOWEVER (like Jaws) … I always had to have irrefutable evidence or seen it happen for myself … as Baccy mentioned earlier … wrongful dismissal is something to avoid …

    I remember when I was a young supervisor our company Social Club being robbed blind by the Treasurer … well respected employee … management chose to terminate … didn’t even get the money back … we found out about six months later he had been arrested and stuck in jail for a few weeks … doing the same thing …

    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    Nah, it’s Tanner Time…!

    Bring back Lindsay!

    Yep a great pollie …

    If we are going outside present incumbenst does that mean that there ain’t much to choose from?

    If we are … Treasurer would be PJK by a mile!

  60. JAWS permalink
    April 4, 2012 4:10 pm

    “Delaying tactics are endemic.”

    Not in Criminal Cases.

  61. JAWS permalink
    April 4, 2012 4:12 pm

    “Rupert Murdoch is doing exactly this with each and every single person whose phone has been hacked……..”

    Essentially he’s settling a Civil action out of Court.

    The Crown will still prosecute if need be

  62. JAWS permalink
    April 4, 2012 4:14 pm

    “I remember when I was a young supervisor our company Social Club……”

    TB at a Social Club function…………

  63. April 4, 2012 4:20 pm

    The Crown will still prosecute if need be

    Not if they cannot have witnesses who have accepted an out of court payment prior to trial. What would be the need.

    Delaying tactics are also used in criminal cases just as much as civil cases.

  64. April 4, 2012 4:22 pm

    TB

    The local sports club near where I live, had to close because the manager had embezzled all their funds. It remains closed after 1 year but I have seen some action so I think they have been fund raising and such to try and get the funds to re open the club.

    The golf club in my home town almost went under as well from the manager embezzling the clubs money.

  65. April 4, 2012 4:26 pm

    Thomson isn’t exactly Allan Bond or Brian Bourke. Both of whom got fair trials despite all the press coverage, speculation and the public findings of independent inquiries.

    1) We did not have the internet like it is today.
    2) We did not have communication like it is today
    3) We did not have the concentration of media that we have today

    Completely different style of media and public communication than in those days and it has definately changed for the worse when it comes to reporting before a court decision rather than after.

  66. el gordo permalink
    April 4, 2012 4:27 pm

    At the next election half the senate seats are up for grabs and Labor will be dudded.

    To minimise the damage they could retire a few now and install Keating, Tanner, Fawlkner etc.

    Don’t know if its permitted.

  67. el gordo permalink
    April 4, 2012 4:34 pm

    Faulkner is already a senator…silly me.

  68. JAWS permalink
    April 4, 2012 4:49 pm

    “Not if they cannot have witnesses who have accepted an out of court payment prior to trial. What would be the need.”

    If an individual or corporation has breached a “Listening Devices Act” and the Crown finds out about it charges would be laid and a non too subtle obstruction of justice charge threatened upon the originally aggrieved party I’d imagine.

    To use an extreme if I paid a hitman’s assistant to keep quiet about a murder you don’t think the Crown would go after the him/her as well ?

  69. April 4, 2012 5:01 pm

    If an individual or corporation has breached a “Listening Devices Act” and the Crown finds out about it charges would be laid and a non too subtle obstruction of justice charge threatened upon the originally aggrieved party I’d imagine.

    The key words in your sentence are ” I’d imagine”

    Many people have been paid a total of millions of pounds by News Limited for Phone Hacking. Yet neither the company, nor its CEO have been charged and the payments require confidentaility clauses and no admission of guilt.

    To use an extreme if I paid a hitman’s assistant to keep quiet about a murder you don’t think the Crown would go after the him/her as well ?

    The payments are being made to the alleged victims themselves by Murdoch. To make your extreme case fit the scenario you would need to be paying the victim and in your case the victim is dead.

  70. JAWS permalink
    April 4, 2012 5:38 pm

    “…………in your case the victim is dead.”

    OK………………change it to someone else being paid off after witnessing a serious assault

  71. JAWS permalink
    April 4, 2012 5:43 pm

    Looks like the delaying tactics continue. The DPP have advised they cannot form an opinion on the evidence because of the manner in which thje FWA Report has beeeen presented to them.

    How convenient……………………!

    It wont surprise if the next opinion poll goes lower than the current 27% or whatever at this rate. This is truly the most corrupt government this nation has ever seen and history will judge it as such.

    If the ALP sticks with Gillard they will also be lucky to have a recognized party after the next election.

  72. April 4, 2012 5:47 pm

    OK………………change it to someone else being paid off after witnessing a serious assault

    Witnesses are not being paid off actual victims are being paid off and there is a major difference. Without a victim there is no case.

  73. JAWS permalink
    April 4, 2012 5:50 pm

    “Yet neither the company, nor its CEO have been charged and the payments require confidentaility clauses and no admission of guilt.”

    Not yet.

    The evidence of wrong doing only came to light in the second half of last year. And the enquiries continue.

    Besides some former employees have already gone to jail and Brooks has ben charged.

    Who knows what will happen to Murdoch Jr

  74. JAWS permalink
    April 4, 2012 5:52 pm

    “Not if they cannot have witnesses who have accepted an out of court payment prior to trial. ”

    You called them “witnesses”

  75. TB Queensland permalink
    April 4, 2012 5:55 pm

    Hohohohohohoho … this’ll make Yom, bombum et al … throw a hissy fit!

    The DPP today said it couldn’t advise whether the report pointed to criminal activity because it wasn’t a brief of evidence.

    Mmmmm … evidence, hey?

    http://www.news.com.au/business/thomson-agrees-hes-been-named-in-report-but-no-idea-of-the-outcome/story-e6frfm1i-1226318393769

  76. April 4, 2012 5:57 pm

    I meant the witness being the victim as per my first initial comment.

  77. JAWS permalink
    April 4, 2012 6:01 pm

    “…..Mmmmm … evidence, hey?”

    No……………it means its not a proper brief as they would normally rely upon to make a decision.

    As I said.,……………………..How convenient……………………Yet more delays.

    As if the Government did not already realise this.

  78. TB Queensland permalink
    April 4, 2012 6:05 pm

    Jaws …

    The DPP requires a brief of evidence – it don’t go looking for it!

    “how convenient” … so now the DPP is part of the conspiracy … FMD!

  79. JAWS permalink
    April 4, 2012 6:06 pm

    OK……………let me use another extreme example

    A pedophile goes to the back streets of Kings Cross and finds a 16 year old and pays her for sex and for silence.

    You believe the Crown would do nothing if it had evidence (perhaps another witness) even if the victim wont testify.

    Anyway enough………..neither of us are lawyers.

    You can believe what you like.

    I just dont believe a paid off victim/witness would matter to the Crown if other evidence is available.

  80. JAWS permalink
    April 4, 2012 6:08 pm

    “The DPP requires a brief of evidence – it don’t go looking for it!”

    I agree

    I did not say the DPP was part of a conspiracy so stop verballing.

    The Att. General Dept and FWA would have realised it

  81. armchair opinionator permalink
    April 4, 2012 6:35 pm

    I suggest you have a look at the length of court cases and how long they have been draggin on , especially if they have anything to do with large companies. Many are over 5 years old and still not in court. Delaying tactics are endemic…

    I know, I’m still waiting for this guy and his mates to front a court. Whatever happened?

  82. el gordo permalink
    April 4, 2012 6:40 pm

    Our customary legal advisor (pro bono) should be here soon to offer a definitive answer.

  83. Tom of Melbourne permalink
    April 4, 2012 6:52 pm

    I continue to be amazed that people still find ways to defend Thomson, and even somehow transfer the issue to Kathy Jackson, others even blame Abbott, and the media.

    It’s strange, though the contortions of logic can provide entertainment.

    The ACTU thinks there is something very wrong. The current leadership of the HSU talk about how they’ve changed their governance procedures to ensure that “this can never happen again”. There’s 180 instances of illegality!

    How is it that Bacchus, Shane and Tom R (and others) still argue about the issue?

    Strange indeed.

  84. TB Queensland permalink
    April 4, 2012 6:56 pm

    All I can say YoM, is, gawd forbid you ever get a position on a jury … with your understanding of how the legal system operates in your country … 🙄

    Its abit like our political system … not perfect but it works … although these days I think one thing Howard may have done right is keep weapons away from some of the vitriolic right wing posters I come across on blogs …

  85. Bacchus permalink
    April 4, 2012 6:59 pm

    Well Jaws, the police would have absolutely no interest in your “pedophile”. It’s quite legal to have whatever sexual dalliance he likes with your 16 year old girl, as long as it’s with her consent.

    http://www.aifs.gov.au/nch/pubs/sheets/rs16/rs16.html

  86. Bacchus permalink
    April 4, 2012 7:07 pm

    The difference ToM is that none of us are are arguing that Mr Thompson is innocent or has no case to answer. Fact is we don’t know and neither do you.

    You can jump up and down all you like, bleating the coalition talking points ad nauseam – it makes not one iota of difference. The man has every right to sit in parliament until such time as he’s convicted of an offence that carries a sentence of a year or more in jail.

    The ACTU certainly thinks there is something very much amiss with the HSU – that doesn’t automatically extrapolate out to Mr Thompson being guilty of anything. He may well be, but your advocacy of coalition wishes doesn’t make it so…

    Sorry, but this isn’t going to get Mr Abbott into the lodge.

  87. Tom of Melbourne permalink
    April 4, 2012 7:15 pm

    Bacchus, my basic point has never been that he’s simply guilty. It looks like he is though.

    My point is that he does have a case to answer, and he confirmed this by saying he would make a “comprehensive statement”. If he considered that he had nothing to answer for, why would he have made this commitment?

    He made the unconditional commitment about a year ago. He’s not met it.

    Slater & Gordon were critical of his explanation, hardly an organisation hell bent on undermining confidence in unions.

    The ACTU know something reeks, without the FWA report. The current leadership have decided that the situation under Thomson was so wanting of proper governance, that they’ve vowed that “it cannot happen again”.

    But somehow you’re still pleading blissful ignorance.

  88. TB Queensland permalink
    April 4, 2012 7:20 pm

    Baccy, I think you’ve got YoM all wrong … he is not a supporter of the Liberal party … he just wants to to see a lynching justice done …

    YoM, has no desire to see the present government lose any member just so that the Opposition can call for a dissolution of Parliament and an election … BEFORE THE NEW LAWS TAKE EFFECT AND MANY PEOPLE START SAYING … hey, what was with the BS about the Carbon Tax and this new NBN is really great and no more expensive … and WE own it AND it will make make money for US … and what about thebenefits we are getting from this new MRRT … and the dollar has gone down and the tourism and exporting businesses are moving and the manufacturing is picking up … WoW!

    A lot can WILL happen in the next 12 months …

    Whose running scared … all the shrill people!

  89. Bacchus permalink
    April 4, 2012 7:23 pm

    Not blissful ignorance ToM – just lacking all the facts. There’s too much other shit that has happened and is still happening in that union to just accept at face value what one faction puts into the public domain – this war has been going on for about a decade. I don’t trust any of them – Thompson, Williamson, Kathy Jackson, Jeff Jackson, David Feeney – any of them.

    It is only of such great interest to many of the public because one of the players holds a set in a delicately balanced parliament – otherwise you’d probably hear only snippets of it and most like hardly give it a thought or make a comment yourself…

  90. Bacchus permalink
    April 4, 2012 7:24 pm

    oops – stuffed up the bold close tag 😳

    Do we have Kamahl on this site to help with such things?

  91. Möbius Ecko permalink
    April 4, 2012 7:29 pm

    “Craig Thomson is creeping closer towards criminal proceedings after it was announced that Fair Work Australia has referred its report into the Health Services Union to the Department of Public Prosecutions.”

    Creeping towards is an understatement.

    The DPP has called for another enquiry because from the small snippet I got the current report does not contain enough evidence to be able to mount prosecutions. Also new claims of Health Union monetary malfeasances have been tabled that need investigating.

    The likely outcome. Probably four years before the first prosecution is mounted, and that won’t be against Thomson.

    Abbott will have well and truly screwed the country as PM by the time Thomson faces the justice he deserves.

  92. Bacchus permalink
    April 4, 2012 7:30 pm

    Yes TB – I think you’ve always seen straight through the ToM “persona” 😉

  93. Tom of Melbourne permalink
    April 4, 2012 8:11 pm

    All the veballing going on here is interesting.

    I’ve tended to steer clear of the argument about criminality. I prefer to discuss the test applied to employment and civil law – the balance of probability. It seems that some simply choose to ignore this.

    on the balance of probability, I don’t believe Thomson’s denials stack up. That’s why he has a case to answer. that’s why he promised a comprehensive statement, but has failed to deliver.

  94. TB Queensland permalink
    April 4, 2012 8:41 pm

    .. on the balance of probability, I don’t believe Thomson’s denials stack up.

    But, ToM … the balance of probability is based upon the evidence presented and defended …

    … and you don’t have any … you really don’t get it …

  95. armchair opinionator permalink
    April 4, 2012 8:49 pm

    “…The difference ToM is that none of us are are arguing that Mr Thompson is innocent or has no case to answer. Fact is we don’t know and neither do you…”

    Exactly.

    “…You can jump up and down all you like, bleating the coalition talking points ad nauseam – it makes not one iota of difference…”

    It does to me, if I wanted to see the talking points I would go to the Liberal Party website.

    Now how about the Murdoch scandal? It’s news all over the world but here in Australia it’s sssshhh, don’t mention Rupert and James Murdoch or NewsLtd!
    I went the Austrtalian website, if it’s in there, it’s well and truly buried, but the Craig Thomson non event is splashed all over the place.

  96. el gordo permalink
    April 4, 2012 8:55 pm

    The upshot is that no charges have been laid and the police are not involved, so Thomson may not have a case to answer.

    ‘The Australian Government Solicitor says this: ”In our view, there is no general, positive duty on the General Manager (of Fair Work Australia) or on Australian Public Service Employees to report to police potentially criminal behaviour.”

    Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/thomson-and-the-legal-merrygoround-20120404-1wcse.html#ixzz1r4GWbBE0

  97. Tom of Melbourne permalink
    April 4, 2012 8:57 pm

    Bacchus, Tom R & Shane seem think the public isn’t entitled to form a view about the integrity of politicians, or about the credibility of their explanations.

    How long has this been the case? The public always forms views about the veracity of politicians.

    Thomson admits he has a case to answer and he’s previously committed to answering it. It’s just that he’s now decided to break his commitment.

    He lacks plausibility, and in any other occupation, he’d be unemployed.

  98. JAWS permalink
    April 4, 2012 10:26 pm

    Thanks Bacchus,

    I knew someone from your “side” would fall headlong into the ” rat trap”..
    That’s why I stated 16 not 15 as it might be above the age of consent but not
    for an act of prostitution.

    Gotcha

    And before you ask how I know this. One of my brother in laws works as a high ranking cop at Sydney hq at darlinghurst/east sydney

    I’d say it’s the same in hillbilly qld. 🙂

  99. JAWS permalink
    April 4, 2012 10:28 pm

    Kamahl could you delete the 10:15pm comment

  100. JAWS permalink
    April 4, 2012 10:32 pm

    I see that Bacchus is experiencing annoyance in relation to his avatar as well

  101. Bacchus permalink
    April 4, 2012 10:36 pm

    Great irrelevant “gotcha” Jaws – stroke your little ego somewhat did it? 🙄

  102. Bacchus permalink
    April 4, 2012 10:38 pm

    Yes Jaws – WordPress has p!$$ed me off no end with their “google-like” tracking of WordPress AND Gravatar users 👿

  103. JAWS permalink
    April 4, 2012 11:08 pm

    I think most blogs and matches between left and right at this time of night are about gotchas bacchus. Especially after a few pinots

    Cheers Bacchus

    Yeah WordPress is a pain

  104. Meta permalink
    April 5, 2012 3:15 am

    Yes, what passes, for some, as ‘evidence’, or a ‘case to answer’, or ‘due process’ remains unknown to an actual legal (discourse) community, excepting the esteemed Brandis’s public pleadings and self-serving, Party-political advices as would-be first law officer of the Crown; which leaves only the ‘ethics’, narrowly or broadly construed, as a res ipsa loquitur thang, I guess.

    Oh, and of course, matters of law, and of (evidenced) fact, like matters of ethics, automatically devolve into a Left-Right spectral, at any time, when the sobriety of (pre)judgement is called into attentive question.

  105. Meta permalink
    April 5, 2012 6:01 am

    More…

    GEORGE BRANDIS: Well, you see this is [a not inconsiderable part of the] the problem, Tony, with the report being concealed [as an usual mechanism of conference, despite the notoriety-from-nowhere, and per received legal advice, and per relevant jurisdictions and their precise constitutions and functions, operating at arm’s length]. We don’t know what precisely is in the report, but I think it is a fair surmise, but only a surmise, that the report states [legally untested] conclusions [for certain purposes]. It would discuss the original documents and it would state [one party’s initial, not definitive] conclusions. But a prosecutor doesn’t act on secondary evidence. The prosecutor acts on primary source material [as do all parties, some of whom remain absented from discussion and who may also have an interest in such assemblages, and in contesting them, in due course; not including sundry inter-State police whose investigative and/or (re)collective evidentiary capacities are not necessarily contextually cross-compatible with those of the originating jurisdiction of the FWA]. And for the reasons I explained a moment ago, that primary source material would exist, it would be in the hands of Fair Work Australia and it’s merely a matter of assembling it [in consultation with the CDPP, as the CDPP.has explained, if that’s what the CDPP (and FWA) intend to do, having made (con)ference with/to/on the ‘concealed’ report and its ‘conclusions’, and the relevant standards of CDPP case-to-answer development, if any].

    TONY ABBOTT: The report is not out, it should be out. I think the Prime Minister should be demanding that the thing come out. Certainly the Coalition is going to move to get the thing out as soon as possible because the public deserve to know whether a member of the Gillard Government has been referred to the Director of Public Prosecutions for possible criminal charge.

    ALEXANDRA KIRK: But given the Director of Public Prosecutions will now look into any possible criminal offences, aren’t you wanting to play judge and jury?

  106. Tom R permalink
    April 5, 2012 6:33 am

    Bacchus, Tom R & Shane seem think the public isn’t entitled to form a view about the integrity of politicians, or about the credibility of their explanations.

    I don’t have a problem with forming a view. I just prefer to have the details before that view is formed. Not everyone is contrained by these details, I grant

    So far, the report has not found anything that would promt anyone to say “there is sufficient now to say Thomson has “a case to answer””, yet they do.

    It may be that Thomson does in fact have a ‘case to answer’.

    It may not.

    Just because you either don’t like what he has said so far, or that the report is taking too long, doesn’t change the fact that, at the present time, we just don’t know.

    But hey, find him guilty, feel free. Just don’t get so upset when you are called out about the hypocrisy of your stance.

  107. el gordo permalink
    April 5, 2012 7:56 am

    ‘The move means that FWA, which under Ms O’Neill has refused to co-operate with NSW and Victorian police investigating Mr Thomson, has achieved no result in terms of advancing any possible criminal prosecution, despite years of work and millions of dollars of public expenditure.’

    From the Oz.

  108. Tom R permalink
    April 5, 2012 8:21 am

    has achieved no result in terms of advancing any possible criminal prosecution

    If at first you don’t succeed, try, try again 😉

  109. Tom of Melbourne permalink
    April 5, 2012 8:50 am

    The great news is that because there is no possibility that the report of FWA on Thomson can be used for a criminal prosecution, there is no longer any reason to argue that it cannot be released to the public.
    ——————————
    What a hopeless debacle. Is the situation incompetence or just another example of political interference and duplicity?

    FWA has refused to –
    • Cooperate with police enquiries on “legal advice”
    • Release the report to the parliament on “legal advice”

    But they didn’t get “legal advice” on whether the DPP would be able to use the report!!!??
    ———————–
    That’s what happens when you let ALP/union hacks run a public institution.

  110. JAWS permalink
    April 5, 2012 8:52 am

    How the Real World operates………………….a month long investigation………..

    http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/marketing-employee-charged-over-300k-fraud-20120405-1wdo8.html

  111. el gordo permalink
    April 5, 2012 9:22 am

    Anyway, it appears Temby is going after Williamson who ‘received more than $400,000 from the HSU for ”secretarial services”.

    ‘The Herald revealed previously Mr Williamson’s company United Edge received an estimated $1 million a year for providing IT services to the union.

    ‘Mr Thomson is not believed to be in the firing line of Mr Temby’s findings.’

    Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/political-news/mp-may-be-spared-but-heat-on-union-20120404-1wd9k.html#ixzz1r7IhIF9a

  112. JAWS permalink
    April 5, 2012 9:30 am

    Lord knows what’s going on in the Union controlled Super Funds

  113. April 5, 2012 9:59 am

    HSU Investigation deemed useless…

    “Criminal charges against embattled Labor MP Craig Thomson are now unlikely, after a three-year investigation into the Health Services Union was deemed useless as a brief of evidence by the federal public prosecutor…”

    http://www.crikey.com.au/2012/04/05/hsu-investigation-deemed-useless/

  114. Tom of Melbourne permalink
    April 5, 2012 10:04 am

    It’s incompetent or corrupt. One or the other, there’s no third option..

    In the circumstances it’s quite difficult to maintain the new level of polite discourse we’re having here. Particularly when reviewing some comments in the blogosphere.

  115. JAWS permalink
    April 5, 2012 10:09 am

    “HSU Investigation deemed useless…”

    Which was the ultimate aim in the first place

  116. JAWS permalink
    April 5, 2012 10:10 am

    “…………it’s quite difficult to maintain the new level of polite discourse we’re having here”

    LOL

    Yes……….its quite scary here these days

  117. TB Queensland permalink
    April 5, 2012 10:21 am

    In the circumstances it’s quite difficult to maintain the new level of polite discourse we’re having here.

    Keep up the good work … ToM … IATW/Ratarse/Jaws

    Welcome, Meta … nice to see another unbiased, level headed, voice of reason at, TFR!

  118. JAWS permalink
    April 5, 2012 10:29 am

    I’m just going to have to vent all my angst towards telephone cold callers from the subcontinent in future

  119. el gordo permalink
    April 5, 2012 10:31 am

    ‘…nice to see another unbiased, level headed, voice of reason at, TFR!’

    😉

  120. Tom R permalink
    April 5, 2012 10:33 am

    Keep up the good work … ToM

    What do they say about when you are in a hole?

  121. Splatterbottom permalink
    April 5, 2012 10:40 am

    The cover-up (or in this case the radically protracted and “accidentally” incompetent investigation) of this Unionland shemozzle is exactly what you expect under a Labor government.

    They are rubbing our noses in their sleazy corruption and the Australian public will not soon forgive them. Now I know how the Italians must feel having Berlusconi as leader.

    It wouldn’t matter if Thomson was a pedophile (as so many Labor sleazebags have turned out to be) Gillard would still have full confidence in him.

    This is a truly rotten government, hanging by a thread, spun by grub.

    The Thomson affair defines this Labor government – a stinking cesspit of power-mad moral cretins.

    Thomson may be one rotten egg but the entire caucus now resides in that devil’s rectum.

  122. Tom of Melbourne permalink
    April 5, 2012 10:54 am

    So Tom R, what is it, incompetence or political duplicity?

    Clearly FWA have had legal advice throughout this investigation, but they didn’t get legal advice about what action to take to have the report findings capable of reaching a conclusion.

    That’s what you get when you have union/ALP hacks running an investigation into unions.

  123. TB Queensland permalink
    April 5, 2012 11:06 am

    The cover-up (or in this case the radically protracted and “accidentally” incompetent investigation) of this Unionland shemozzle is exactly what you expect under a Labor government….

    … That’s what you get when you have union/ALP hacks running an investigation into unions.

    Jeese, they must have an awful lot of power, bumbomb!

    Federal police, SA police, NSW police, Fair Work Australia, Department of Public Prosecutions … the conspiracy list grows n’ grows …

    In the real world its called due process … bloody slow too … an accident claim against the ADF/Comcare via the Administrative Appeals Tribunal took over four years (12 months of arbitration meetings) … before the government (Howard’s) conceded … 20 minutes before the Tribunal sat …

  124. JAWS permalink
    April 5, 2012 11:11 am

    “……..Thomson may be one rotten egg but the entire caucus now resides in that devil’s rectum.”

    LOL

    That is truly Shakespearian Splatter.

  125. Tom R permalink
    April 5, 2012 11:11 am

    So Tom R, what is it, incompetence or political duplicity?

    Or perhaps there are other possibilities? Ones that, upon inspection, appear to be obvious, although not advantageous to the ever sinking mud-pit

    http://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollbludger/2012/04/01/nielsen-57-43-to-coalition-2/comment-page-71/#comment-1209801

    http://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollbludger/2012/04/01/nielsen-57-43-to-coalition-2/comment-page-71/#comment-1209840

  126. Tom R permalink
    April 5, 2012 11:12 am

    That is truly Shakespearian Splatter.

    Hmmm, I would have gone with Orwellian personally 😉

  127. JAWS permalink
    April 5, 2012 11:14 am

    “ederal police, SA police, NSW police, Fair Work Australia, Department of Public Prosecutions … the conspiracy list grows n’ grows … ”

    TB

    With the exception of FWA I don’t think anyone here is claiming conspiracy within those bodies simply because both FWA and the Union wont cooperate with them in the first place

  128. Splatterbottom permalink
    April 5, 2012 11:25 am

    TomR, Orwellian is when people go around pretending that the Liar-In-Chief’s lies are not really lies at all. You’d be right at home in the Ministry of Truth.

    The bottom line is that Labor has dived head first into the Thomson sewer. They are frolicking about in the filth, feasting on feces and all the while doing the maypole dance around their brothel-creeping hero who keeps them in power. The saddest thing of all is that their mindless supporters are still desperately telling all who will listen that the government smells like roses. But now no one is listening. The stench is too overpowering.

  129. Tom R permalink
    April 5, 2012 11:30 am

    yea splatter. I guess this is Shakesperian then 😉

    But one inquiry was glaringly absent. That is the Royal Commission into the Building and Construction Industry (2001-2003) under Terence Cole, set up following an Employment Advocate report ordered by Workplace Relations Minister Tony Abbott.

    In March 2003 there was debate over making public the royal commission’s recommendations for criminal prosecutions.

    Tony Abbott forcefully insisted the recommendations be kept secret.

    “If we were to publicly table a document which names people and recommends various prosecution actions, then we would obviously be creating a media firestorm,” Mr Abbott said at the time.

    “It may well be that not all of those prosecutions go ahead, certainly I think people deserve their day in court.”

    A sound argument, but not one Mr Abbott favours at the moment.

    http://www.thepunch.com.au/articles/keep-recommendations-secret-said-tony-abbott/

  130. Tom of Melbourne permalink
    April 5, 2012 11:44 am

    Quick look over there!!!!

    • At that pathetc woman caught shoplifing
    • At Kathy Jackson, who is speaking out against the FWA incompetence and union corruption (she must have another motive)
    • At Abbott. He’s on the nose. We don’t stink quite so much by comparison.
    • At the media. What right do they have reporting on all this?

    Right.

  131. Tom R permalink
    April 5, 2012 12:04 pm

    Quick look over there!

    yea, at only two possibilities ROFL

  132. armchair opinionator permalink
    April 5, 2012 12:07 pm

    TomM
    You still haven’t explained how you can hold two opposing and hypocritical views. Kathy Jackson according to you is a saint because she’s throwing a bomb into a union and any conflicts of interest in her professional and personal life (fiance Michael Lawler is a family friend of and appointed to the position by Tony Abbott). However, Julia Gillard was despicable because she, according to you, was guilty by association of assisting her union boyfriend defraud funds and gain benefit from the crime, or something.

    All based on no evidence at all.

  133. Tom R permalink
    April 5, 2012 12:10 pm

    But Gillard is the big red meanie who took his lunch money AO. He doesn’t NEED any other evidence than that!

  134. Tom of Melbourne permalink
    April 5, 2012 12:47 pm

    AO, I haven’t been critical of Gillard because of her personal relationship. It was that she clouded her personal affairs with her duties as a solicitor to the union.

    By having a lover who was also her client, she drew up the legal documentation that was used fraudulently. Did she show due diligence to her client by ensuring governance processes were in place?

    I’ve also been critical that she argued that she was “young & naive”, when she was actually in her mid 30s, and a partner.

  135. Tom of Melbourne permalink
    April 5, 2012 12:48 pm

    On the basis of Tom R’s alternative explanation we’re to presume that 10 (10!!) years ago Thomson’s opponents in the union started to implement an elaborate conspiracy to set him up! They started to put expenses for prostitutes etc on his credit card, which he then approved.

    If that’s the best alternative explanation Tom, that’s surprisingly stupid.

  136. Tom R permalink
    April 5, 2012 12:55 pm

    😯

    The unhinging continues yomm

    where did I say anything like that

    https://farnhamreport.wordpress.com/2012/04/04/craig-thomson-the-gift-that-keeps-on-giving-edition-6-volume-12-chapter-5/#comment-594

  137. armchair opinionator permalink
    April 5, 2012 1:06 pm

    …Tony Abbott forcefully insisted the recommendations be kept secret.
    “If we were to publicly table a document which names people and recommends various prosecution actions, then we would obviously be creating a media firestorm,” Mr Abbott said at the time.

    Another example of the hypocrisy of Tony Abbott. It’s all OK when he wants an outcome but not OK when he wants to hide his own agenda. Now he wants a media firestorm.

    On the basis of Tom R’s alternative explanation we’re to presume that 10 (10!!) years ago Thomson’s opponents in the union started to implement an elaborate conspiracy to set him up!

    Who knows? Kathy Jackson and her then husband were also around at the time and apparently the bunfights started happening as soon as they arrived. Jackson’s husband was allegedly using the credit card too.

    http://www.cleanuphsueast.com/is-kathy-jackson-a-hero.html

    [kathy jackson] “…My response to any suggestion that I am playing the role of some sort of hero would not be complete without acknowledging that I am no saint. I acknowledge that I have played internal union and ALP politics for 20 years – and played it hard according to the grubby rule book of those environments…”

    Now, I’m not saying that Kathy Jackson does have a conflict of interest and is not acting appropriately, but where does the truth lie? We can’t just assign motivations and guilt to one person and not of the other when there is a massive fight for control of the organisation and huge stakes at play. That is why I say that the HSU is better off without any of them, they all have too much history, Kathy Jackson included. Her new relationship is with someone from the investigating agency and accusations in the media of interference in the process by Michael Lawler certainly doesn’t help, it gets very complicated. Is she subservient to the men in her life, doing their bidding?
    Jackson’s previous marriage was to one of the men involved in the accusations, so was she living off the proceeds of fraud?. Why don’t they report the Abbott and Lawler connection?
    Could Tony Abbott be using the old catholic school network to get an outcome of an easy election for himself ? He is not averse to grubby deal politics and behind the scenes manipulations and manoeuvrings himself.

    Not easy is it? That’s why we need to have patience and wait for the due process.

  138. Splatterbottom permalink
    April 5, 2012 1:59 pm

    Abott Abott Abbot. Abott Abott Abbot. Abott Abott Abbot. Abott Abott Abbot.

    Craig who? Nothing to see here. Move on. It’s all the media’s fault.

    Abott Abott Abbot. Abott Abott Abbot. Abott Abott Abbot. Abott Abott Abbot. Abott Abott Abbot. Abott Abott Abbot. Abott Abott Abbot.Abott Abott Abbot.Abott Abott Abbot.Abott Abott Abbot.Abott Abott Abbot.Abott Abott Abbot.Abott Abott Abbot.Abott Abott Abbot.Abott Abott Abbot.Abott Abott Abbot.Abott Abott Abbot.Abott Abott Abbot.Abott Abott Abbot.Abott Abott Abbot.

  139. April 5, 2012 2:22 pm

    Thomson case “far from over”…

    http://www.abc.net.au/worldtoday/content/2012/s3471639.htm

  140. Tom R permalink
    April 5, 2012 2:28 pm

    But he says Victoria Police is still investigating activities at the union during Mr Thomson’s tenure, and may still refer evidence to the state director of public prosecutions

    Fingers crossed boys and girls

  141. Tom of Melbourne permalink
    April 5, 2012 4:09 pm

    So where does this leave all those people who argued that we shouldn’t form a judgment about the character of Thomson until the FWA had completed its investigation?

    Can we form a judgment yet?

    Is it still “trolling” to form a judgement about his character?

    Are we ever able to now form a judgement now that the case is unlikely to proceed?

    What’s the alternative explanation to the use of his credit card on prostitutes, and his approval of the expense?

  142. April 5, 2012 4:27 pm

    The ACTU has clearly formed its judgement. I guess they must be trolls too.

  143. Neil of Sydney permalink
    April 5, 2012 4:31 pm

    What’s the alternative explanation to the use of his credit card on prostitutes, and his approval of the expense?”

    Someone was impersonating Thomson. Its obvious.

  144. Splatterbottom permalink
    April 5, 2012 4:38 pm

    And they stole his mobile, driver’s licence, and credit card and then mysteriously returned them in the early hours of the morning without him knowing.

    No grounds for suspicion there especially in the light of the detailed statement Thomo has made.

  145. TB Queensland permalink
    April 5, 2012 4:42 pm

    Someone was impersonating Thomson. Its obvious.

    The Neils have sarcasm amongst them on, Eve of the Druids Feast …

  146. TB Queensland permalink
    April 5, 2012 4:53 pm

    IATW

    TB

    With the exception of FWA I don’t think anyone here is claiming conspiracy within those bodies simply because both FWA and the Union wont cooperate with them in the first place

    I was going to let that ride … and then though I should continue your education in comprehending other people’s posts …

    Yer mate, bumbomb said …

    The cover-up (or in this case the radically protracted and “accidentally” incompetent investigation) of this Unionland shemozzle is exactly what you expect under a Labor government…. bumbomb …

    What has the Labor government got to do with controlling any investigation by any number of statute bodies … ie the one’s I listed?

    The only people actually trying to influence the investigations and outcomes are members of the Federal opposition and shrill right wing supporters who obviously don’t understand the process of accusation, investigation, gathering evidence, analysing evidence, establishing breach of law, charging, discovery, prosecution, defence, decision, sentencing appeal, retribution … (a quite a few steps I left out!)

  147. TB Queensland permalink
    April 5, 2012 4:55 pm

    Has, bumbomb, finally gone mad? Fallen in love with an Abbott? Chanting a mantra?

  148. Neil of Sydney permalink
    April 5, 2012 5:27 pm

    The only people actually trying to influence the investigations and outcomes are members of the Federal opposition and shrill right wing supporters who obviously don’t understand the process of accusation,……..

    Interesting point.

    Do you have any evidence for this statement by yourself

    https://farnhamreport.wordpress.com/2012/03/30/weekend-rostrum/#comment-389

    but not paying for kickbacks (with Australian government complicity) to Saddam Hussein

    Do you have any evidence that Downer and Howard were complicit in the AWB activities or were you making stuff up.

  149. el gordo permalink
    April 5, 2012 5:28 pm

    Yeah….. but because everything has taken so long it has the appearance of a conspiracy… to save Craig at all costs.

  150. JAWS permalink
    April 5, 2012 5:32 pm

    FWA has caved in and will release its full report within 4 to 6 weeks

  151. TB Queensland permalink
    April 5, 2012 5:49 pm

    Do you have any evidence that Downer and Howard were complicit in the AWB activities or were you making stuff up.

    Do you little buggers ever read links?

    Downer was the FM it was his responsibility as chief of DFAT to know what the AWB was doing in Iraq … Howard was the PM and the person who wanted his, Margaret Thatcher, moment as a PM who went to WAR with other people’s kids, fathers/mums, uncles/aunties, brothers and sisters …

    In fact AO, put up a much better link last night and a very informative post too … you should ALL read it …

  152. TB Queensland permalink
    April 5, 2012 5:51 pm

    … but because everything has taken so long it has the appearance of a conspiracy…

    … appearance” ??? Why then Thomson must be guilty … 🙄

    … and it must be the government’s fault … because everything is … 🙄

  153. Neil of Sydney permalink
    April 5, 2012 6:23 pm

    Downer was the FM it was his responsibility as chief of DFAT to know what the AWB was doing in Iraq

    Complicit means to me that Downer knew all about it and then did nothing. All I know is the Federal Police looked into it and laid no charges. Nothing wrong with selling wheat to Iraq. It was legal under the UN OIL-FOR-Food Program.

    You also made the allegation on the other blog that we were trading with the enemy while the IRAQ war was going on.

    Any evidence for that???

  154. Tom of Melbourne permalink
    April 5, 2012 6:32 pm

    Lazy.

    Who exactly is stating that Thomson is ‘guilty’?

    It is simply that Thomson and his apologists are unable to provide any plausible explanation for his actions.

    In the absence of his ‘comprehensive statement’, and any alternative, the reasonable default judgement becomes – he has a case to answer.

    All the ‘…but, but, but…look over there…’ is lame. In must be embarrassing for otherwise intelligent contributors to run the argument.

  155. el gordo permalink
    April 5, 2012 6:56 pm

    ‘appearance” ??? Why then Thomson must be guilty … ‘

    There is a perception that Thomson misused his credit card and the union members should be told the truth.

    Because it’s taking so long to resolve… the incompetence and apparent corrupt practice of Williamson et al…. the electorate wonder if there is political interference in the process.

  156. TB Queensland permalink
    April 5, 2012 7:06 pm

    In the absence of his ‘comprehensive statement’, and any alternative, the reasonable default judgement becomes – he has a case to answer. </i.

    "default judgement" — WTF is a default judgement …?

    the electorate wonder if there is political interference in the process.

    “the electorate” now?

    Look, we all know why this is such a big deal for the Liberals and its Lackeys … get Thomson out of Parliament and get to an election before the ELECTORATE start to realise that Labor is actually DOING stuff …

    We know the game but we also know due process … some of us have personal experience of how frustrating the legal profession and the “justice” system can be … BUT …

    … even if I “feel” Thomson is guilty* it has be proven …

    * as I’ve said before I do!

  157. el gordo permalink
    April 5, 2012 7:47 pm

    “the electorate” now?’

    Yes, I could have said ‘people’.

    ‘…before the ELECTORATE start to realise that Labor is actually DOING stuff …’

    Perhaps they are not communicating their successes, or maybe they don’t have any to trumpet about.

  158. Splatterbottom permalink
    April 5, 2012 8:33 pm

    TB: “What has the Labor government got to do with controlling any investigation by any number of statute bodies … ie the one’s I listed?

    The only people actually trying to influence the investigations and outcomes are members of the Federal opposition and shrill right wing supporters who obviously don’t understand the process of accusation, investigation, gathering evidence, analysing evidence, establishing breach of law, charging, discovery, prosecution, defence, decision, sentencing appeal, retribution … (a quite a few steps I left out!)

    This is Unionland.

    The ALP is controlled by the Unions. Caucus is the means by which union hacks get their pay-off.

    Labor is the most unforgiving revenge machine in this country. No doubt you will remember when some honest Botany councilors stood up to Laurie Brereton. The ALP destroyed their lives and their careers. Please answer me on this TB if you think Labor has one shred of decency about them. These people, honest decent citizens, were hounded from public life. The Lord Mayor ended up in caravan park on the NSW North Coast. All because they committed the abominable crime of exposing Labor corruption.

    That lesson has been well and truly learned. Little wonder Thomson’s case is being treated like a hot potato. Who is going to risk their career, their good name or their pension entitlements to cross the most disgustingly depraved vindictive hit squad in the country?

    And what did Labor do about this tainted fuckwit, Brereton? They made him a Federal minister. That’s right – in ALP/Unionland the grubs get the plum jobs and the honest people get shafted. That is precisely the lesson of Botany Council and precisely the lesson the ALP wanted people to understand.

    I am not calling conspiracy here. It is a little more sophisticated than that. It is the way Labor settles its scores.

    The bottom line is that Thomson will not be charged or forced to step down before the next election. The ONLY reason this is the case is because Labor are rotten to the core. We’ve seen it all before. People’s lives have been destroyed because they dared to cross Labor.

    The Australian people are a little bit smarter than this. The Federal ALP will be destroyed at the next election. It doesn’t matter how bad Tony Abbott is. He cannot be more rotten than the current government.

    Each and every Labor politician is Craig Thomson. Each of them is as rotten as he is because each of them is holding on to government by his coatstrings. It would take only one of them to say “enough” and cross the floor, but those corrupt morons prefer to hold on to power than to behave decently.

    So, TB, no I don’t think there is a conspiracy. I do think there is enormous pressure on anyone willing to take steps against Thomson which will lead to the fall of this government.

    I have never seen anything this rotten, this corrosive of decency, in Australian politics in my life. Not even John Howard bailing out his brother. It doesn’t come close.

  159. Tom of Melbourne permalink
    April 5, 2012 9:19 pm

    The Thomson apologists are flummoxed.

    What’s their point-
    *that he didn’t do it?
    *that we shouldn’t make any judgements about his behaviour?
    *that FWA is focussed on the public interest?

    Flaying around.

  160. Bacchus permalink
    April 5, 2012 9:44 pm

    Talk about verballing and misrepresentation – the Liberals’ master is holding court 🙄

  161. Tom of Melbourne permalink
    April 5, 2012 9:51 pm

    So Bacchus, is the public entitled to make any judgement about this issue yet?

    Or do you think the electorate is required to continue to withhold judgement about plausibility and integrity until this case finally collapses under the weight of institutional incompetence?

  162. Bacchus permalink
    April 5, 2012 9:58 pm

    “The public” has always been entitled to make whatever judgement they want ToM. That they (especially the right whingers whose only real interest in this is in bringing down the government) do so without being fully cognisant of the facts is more at issue here 🙄

  163. Bacchus permalink
    April 5, 2012 10:01 pm

    “Facts” have never stood in the way of “public judgement” before. It doesn’t mean that it carries any weight or has any veracity whatsoever – think Azaria Chamberlain for a start…

  164. Tom of Melbourne permalink
    April 5, 2012 10:12 pm

    So as a matter of interest, how can ‘the public’ obtain the facts given that-
    *Thomson unconditionally committed to make a ‘comprehensive statement’ a year ago, but hasn’t.
    *FWA has taken 3 years to produce a report, that it is reluctant to release.
    *The government has passed up numerous opportunities to have Thomson make an explanation in parliament.
    *The DPP advises that the report does not constitute a brief, and therefore it cannot act.

    It seems that the missing ingredient to allow ‘the public’ to make a judgement is the willingness of Thomson and the government to provide some information. In the circumstances ‘the public’ can simply make its judgement on the basis of the most plausible explanation.

  165. Bacchus permalink
    April 5, 2012 10:26 pm

    ‘The public’ can do nothing to obtain the facts – we’re just mushrooms, as has always been the case. There have been many many ‘scandals’ in unions, businesses large and small, and politics, where ‘the public’ has never been privy to the inside facts. The only difference here is the interest purely because of the precarious position of a minority government – nothing more, nothing less. It’s all about Tony and his birthright…

  166. Tom of Melbourne permalink
    April 5, 2012 10:41 pm

    Really? It’s about Abbott?

    I’d suggest that it is about integrity. Even ALP polling shows a deeply disillusioned public, tired of political dishonesty and spin.

    The interest in Thomson is further evidence. People hate the double speak, the withholding of information.

    If there is speculation about ‘the facts’ on Thomson, it is entirely the making of the government, and Thomson.

    It has nothing to do with Abbott, other than he seeking political advantage out of the stench.

  167. Bacchus permalink
    April 5, 2012 10:47 pm

    BS ToM. If the government had a 10 seat majority, we would be hearing very little about this from the Ltd News media, from Tony Abbott or George Brandis or from you…

  168. Tom of Melbourne permalink
    April 5, 2012 10:56 pm

    Now that is genuine speculation.

    Duplicitous behavior by politicians is always a political discussion point.

    Surely the ACTU isn’t simply falling into line with the Liberal strategy by suspending the HSU?

    ‘Zero tolerance of union corruption’

    The contortions to find an excuse for Thomson are entertaining.

  169. Bacchus permalink
    April 5, 2012 11:11 pm

    As are the extrapolations of tenuously related events by the right whingers 😉

    You really do like to totally ignore the entire history of the HSU factional wars and alleged impropriety in favour of only the Thompson allegations don’t you ToM. Why is that?

  170. Tom of Melbourne permalink
    April 5, 2012 11:25 pm

    No, I’m entirely open to a plausible explanation as to how-
    *Thomson’s credit card was used to pay for prostitutes.
    *His signature appeared on the receipts.
    *He approved the expenses.

    Not to mention dubious contracts, associated credit cards and cash withdrawals.

    If only Thomson would make the ‘comprehensive statement’ he promised, I’m sure we would put all this behind us.

    But he hasn’t.
    =======
    Good night.

  171. armchair opinionator permalink
    April 6, 2012 12:43 am

    If only Thomson would make the ‘comprehensive statement’ he promised, I’m sure we would put all this behind us.

    The rest of us aren’t being eaten up by it. Seems to be much more than the allegations of personal wrongdoing by Craig Thomson here that has got some people all bent out of shape. The GFC, personal greed, lack of morals and illegal practices of banking grubs hurt the entire world and the suffering of millions of real people hasn’t bothered any of you, but Craig Thomson is what sets you lot on fire?

    We can wait for an outcome, as we’ve waited in scandals past and will continue to wait for scandals in the future. It happens on both sides of politics – why is this one any different?

    I have never seen anything this rotten, this corrosive of decency, in Australian politics in my life. Not even John Howard bailing out his brother. It doesn’t come close.

    It does to me, I find any corruption and inappropriate use of taxpayer’s funds to be deplorable.

    So, TB, no I don’t think there is a conspiracy. I do think there is enormous pressure on anyone willing to take steps against Thomson which will lead to the fall of this government.

    Of course there is, a decision which could bring down a democratically elected government should be treated with the utmost gravity. Only something like waging war on another country should be treated as more serious.

    Are you saying that an independent body, is not independent in Australia? If so, there is nothing in this country that can curtail the power of the politicians. It’s why we need a Bill of Rights.

    It doesn’t matter how bad Tony Abbott is. He cannot be more rotten than the current government.

    That’s a matter of opinion too. To be honest, I can’t think of a more rotten character to grace the parliament than Tony Abbott, I can’t stand the man. Not that I think Craig Thomson is any better, but he will have to pay his dues one day, Tony Abbott will get away with his deceptions.

    Each and every Labor politician is Craig Thomson. Each of them is as rotten as he is because each of them is holding on to government by his coatstrings. It would take only one of them to say “enough” and cross the floor, but those corrupt morons prefer to hold on to power than to behave decently.

    And Abbott & Co. would be doing exactly the same if he was in government. Surely you realise that don’t you?

  172. el gordo permalink
    April 6, 2012 7:10 am

    ‘…a decision which could bring down a democratically elected government should be treated with the utmost gravity. Only something like waging war on another country should be treated as more serious.’

    The Whitlam government was sacked by the queen’s representative because someone at ALP headquarters had the brilliant idea of buying back the farm with middle east money.

  173. Meta permalink
    April 6, 2012 7:51 am

    (A conviction politician’s NLP guilt afore trial and (un)crossed bridges; always a good look for iffy-appropriate ‘justice’, clearly.)

  174. April 6, 2012 8:52 am

    It’s kinda scary Meta

    but rather than another inquiry, what we need now is justice.

    Someone get tabot a posse, action man wants a hangin’

    It still hasn’t clicked with most of our media that, apparently, the FWA have produced precisely the type of document they would have been expected to have produced. As I mentioned to crabb, I think that this is proof positive that journalism courses have been available from the University of East Bumcrack for a time now.

    http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-04-05/crabb-australia-network-tender-troubles/3935536

    (apparently, she thinks its all one big conspiracy. She really needs to tighten her tin foil hat)

    I’m sure we would put all this behind us.

    I’m thinking of the Eagles last live album now

  175. April 6, 2012 8:57 am

    Thanks to Min

    Abbott’s own act to blame for the lack of criminal charges

    Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/politics/abbotts-own-act-to-blame-for-the-lack-of-criminal-charges-20120405-1wfkr.html#ixzz1rD3VJxwf

  176. Tom of Melbourne permalink
    April 6, 2012 9:48 am

    Why oh why doesn’t Craig just make his promised ‘comprehensive statement’?

    Then all this would go away.

  177. Bacchus permalink
    April 6, 2012 9:56 am

    LOL – don’t you just love how ToM immediately reinforced the point made?

    Bacchus – “You really do like to totally ignore the entire history of the HSU factional wars…

    ToM – “No, I’m entirely open to a plausible explanation as to how- [now let’s talk exclusively about Thompson]

    😆 😆 Classic ToM 😆 😆

  178. Neil of Sydney permalink
    April 6, 2012 10:12 am

    Why did it take so long if there is no conspiracy??

  179. TB Queensland permalink
    April 6, 2012 10:23 am

    Yet O’Neill said yesterday she feared releasing this report could prejudice her own decision-making as she mulls whether to take the 105 breaches to the Federal Court.

    From TomR’s link … (O’Neill, is Gen. Mgr. of FWA) …

    So, FWA, is considering civil action on the breaches … interesting …

    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    Why did it take so long if there is no conspiracy??

    The Neills, read the posts above …

    … I suggest you print them out and then you can all read them at once and compare notes … then come back and post your conclusions …

  180. el gordo permalink
    April 6, 2012 10:27 am

    As a starting point I’m assuming there is no conspiracy, yet there is this nagging doubt.

    Craig and Julia had a heart to heart discussion when this first blew up, after which she gave him her full support.

    I can’t imagine why she would do that unless Craig convinced her of his innocense or there is a political conspiracy.

  181. Neil of Sydney permalink
    April 6, 2012 10:41 am

    Dear Mr TB

    I am still waiting for an answer to my questions. You do like to preach a man is innocent until proven guilty except when a Coalition politician is involved. You made this statement

    “TB Queensland PERMALINK
    February 14, 2012 7:31 pm
    The outrage around AWB was laughable.
    We had troops fighting a Howard manipulated war (ask Wilkie!) and we were selling food to the fucking enemy! And it was “laughable”!
    21 Australians died in the Iraq conflict … God, forgive your, God, doesn’t call on you or yours …”

    Were we selling food to the enemy while the IRAQ war was going on??

    Did 21 Australians die in the Iraq conflict?? I thought all our war deaths were in Afghanistan.

  182. armchair opinionator permalink
    April 6, 2012 11:42 am

    The Whitlam government was sacked by the queen’s representative because someone at ALP headquarters had the brilliant idea of buying back the farm with middle east money…

    And as we all know, the Liberal/National Coalition was doing what they always do when in Opposition – blocking. They were blocking supply bills. So typical of the way they play their dirty politics, I can’t recall Labor has ever done anything as low as that.

    Were we selling food to the enemy while the IRAQ war was going on??

    neil, you only have to read wiki, especially under the headings Level of Knowledge and Litigation to know that AWB was acting illegally, with the full knowledge of the Howard Government and that political pressure was applied to the DPP to ensure that the charges were dropped. Some civil actions have been instigated and are still ongoing [talk about slow progress].

    Getting tired of you always pretending that AWB was innocent simply because Howard ensured in his terms of reference that Cole could bring no findings against a government member.

    “…But ASIC in early June told the court, AWB and the former executives that it would not deliver a criminal brief to the Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions and therefore would not pursue criminal charges.

    ASIC’s decision to discontinue the criminal aspect of its investigations came nine months after federal police abandoned investigations into AWB’s dealings with Iraq.
    The Cole inquiry of 2006 found AWB, by disguising side payments to Iraq as ”trucking fees” and claiming reimbursement from the UN oil-for-food program, had systematically routed UN economic sanctions against Saddam Hussein’s regime…

    Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/business/court-lifts-stay-order-on-awb-civil-actions-20100802-113e5.html#ixzz1rDi5Hw00

    Gee, what does all that judicial non-action remind you of? Seems like there is a precedent for what is taking place re Craig Thomson [doesn’t make it right, but don’t make out Gillard Labor is the first to protect itself].

  183. Neil of Sydney permalink
    April 6, 2012 11:56 am

    Yeah but TB said we were trading with the enemy while the IRAQ war was going on. Is this true??

    Are the Americans that stupid (and our own military) that they would not cancel the UN OIL-FOR-Food program before the war started?? I do not believe it.

    The Federal police looked into AWB and no charges were laid.

    I suspect you are just using AWB for political purposes. You do not care if any wrong doing was done. You think you MAY have caught out the Howard govt doing something wrong.

    That is all you care about.

  184. TB Queensland permalink
    April 6, 2012 12:27 pm

    The Neills – now why would I say that 21 soldiers died in Iraq? When there was two?

    … and this sounds suspiciously unlike me …

    21 Australians died in the Iraq conflict … God, forgive your, God, doesn’t call on you or yours …”

    … are we being a little creative here?

    BTW no link exists to this Permalink …

    Now for the last time …

    The AWB Oil-for-Wheat Scandal (also known just as the AWB Scandal) refers to the payment of kickbacks to the regime of Saddam Hussein in contravention of the United Nations Oil-for-Food Humanitarian Program …

    … Under Australian legislation, all shipments to Iraq were banned unless the Foreign Minister (at the time, the Alexander Downer) was “satisfied that permitting the exportation will not infringe the international obligations of Australia”.[6] The UN Enquiry did not comment on whether the Australian Government should have known about the actions of the AWB. Through the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, the Government knew that AWB had entered into an arrangement with Alia. The Cole Inquiry found in “secret evidence” that the ownership of Alia was known since 1998 in the departments of Foreign Affairs, Defence and Prime Minister and Cabinet, as indicated by an intelligence report from a “foreign agency” …[6]

    … The Cole Inquiry delved in much greater detail into the breaches by AWB. Mark Emons, the manager of AWB’s Middle East operations, told the inquiry that he, and Dominic Hogan from AWB’s Cairo office, at the very first meeting at which the prospect of certain arrangements were broached in 1999 “knew what Iraq was asking was outside the sanctions”.[6] Furthermore, it found that AWB attempted to hide and distance itself from the payments to Alia, using counter-parties and intermediaries to get the money to Alia, who in turn passed it onto the regime. The final report states that there was “no sensible basis for making these payments…at a cost to AWB, except to disguise AWB’s making of payments to Alia”.[16] …

    … The Howard Government supported the disarmament of Iraq during the Iraq disarmament crisis. Australia later provided one of the four most substantial combat force contingents during the 2003 invasion of Iraq, under the operational codename Operation Falconer …

    Under the name Operation Catalyst, Australian combat troops were redeployed to Iraq in 2005, however, and assumed responsibility for supporting Iraqi security forces in one of Iraq’s southern provinces. These troops began withdrawing from Iraq on 1 June 2008 and were completely withdrawn by 28 July 2009.[2]

    … In the mid-2000s, it was found to have been, through middlemen, paying kickbacks to the regime of Saddam Hussein, in exchange for lucrative wheat contracts. This was in direct contradiction of United Nations Sanctions, and of Australian law.

    As a result of these bribes, AWB was able to secure 90% of the Iraqi wheat market, before being discovered in 2005.

    My bold …

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AWB_Oil-for-Wheat_Scandal

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_contribution_to_the_2003_invasion_of_Iraq

    And if that’s not enough then I suggest you ask your school teachers …

  185. armchair opinionator permalink
    April 6, 2012 12:37 pm

    Yeah but TB said we were trading with the enemy while the IRAQ war was going on. Is this true??

    http://www.wsws.org/articles/2006/feb2006/awb-f28.shtml

    Throughout the 1990s, Australian naval ships, aircraft and troops helped enforce the sanctions that caused widespread starvation in Iraq, leading to an estimated two million deaths. After 1996, once these sanctions were modified to permit profitable “oil-for-food” deals, the Howard government was among the first in line to collaborate with the Baghdad regime, via the AWB, even as it prepared to go to war against Iraq. Having joined the invasion, Howard and co did not skip a beat—their immediate concern was to secure the contracts that AWB had signed with the ousted regime.

    AWB knew Iraq war plans ‘a year before’

    The Federal police looked into AWB and no charges were laid.

    Wasn’t that the last thing the Howard stooge Keelty did just before resigning from office?

    I see no point in going around this merry-go-round with you neil, you will only accept what fits with your political ideology and there is simply no point. The facts are ignored or re-interpreted to suit anyway.

  186. Neil of Sydney permalink
    April 6, 2012 1:18 pm

    “BTW no link exists to this Permalink …”

    Really???

    http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:w5tM9ebP6xMJ:guttertrash.wordpress.com/2012/02/14/julia-gillard-and-kevin-rudd-the-comeback-kid-and-the-goodbye-girl/+http://guttertrash.wordpress.com/2012/02/14/julia-gillard-and-kevin-rudd-the-comeback-kid-and-the-goodbye-girl/%23comment-92038&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk

    You cannot hide on the internet

    “TB Queensland PERMALINK
    February 14, 2012 7:31 pm
    The outrage around AWB was laughable.
    We had troops fighting a Howard manipulated war (ask Wilkie!) and we were selling food to the fucking enemy! And it was “laughable”!
    21 Australians died in the Iraq conflict … God, forgive your, God, doesn’t call on you or yours …”

    And I am sure the UN Oil-for-Food program was stopped before the Iraq war started. Our military are not that stupid (I hope).

  187. Neil of Sydney permalink
    April 6, 2012 1:31 pm

    “After 1996, once these sanctions were modified to permit profitable “oil-for-food” deals, the Howard government was among the first in line to collaborate with the Baghdad regime, via the AWB”

    What a load of crap!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    The UN Oil-For-Food program started in 1995 before the Howard govt was even elected.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil-for-Food_Programme

    “The Oil-for-Food Programme (OFF), established by the United Nations in 1995 (under UN Security Council Resolution 986)[1] was established with the stated intent to allow Iraq to sell oil on the world market in exchange for food, medicine, and other humanitarian needs for ordinary Iraqi citizens without allowing Iraq to boost its military capabilities.”

  188. Meta permalink
    April 6, 2012 1:53 pm

    (Our military went into Iraq before any declaration of war, err use of force, and before a time-limit on an ultimatum was up, and some of them (the one’s illegally violating sovereignty in the field, not the ones playing supporting actor roles) received a special medal for services to fait accompli avoidance of having an illegal, preemptive war shot down by the UN Security Council; and we know this and other things from being the only country in the C-o-W to have conveniently omitted conducting a full inquiry into the O.I.L. clusterf*ck, including the activities of its champeening politicians. So, it’s probably also just as well that we didn’t have a full inquiry into the AWB affair, including closer inspection of its most able enablers and most responsible senior public servants, because whoever controls the terms of reference controls the blowback. Ditto, Abbott and his recent exemplary express reluctance for a full or any inquiry into affairs surrounding prosecution of the Thomson affair, despite his many, many hyperactive intercessions and obvious close involvements with it. Or, something stirring like that.)

  189. Bacchus permalink
    April 6, 2012 1:57 pm

    This is one half of the picture. The other half relates to the implementation of the Oil-for-Food Program by the United Nations. Such a program, designed to ease the impact on ordinary Iraqis of sanctions against the Iraqi government, had been proposed by the UN for some time before it was accepted by Iraq.In April 1996 the Iraqi government agreed to the Distribution Plan for Iraq and signed a Memorandum of Understanding with the UN, thereby giving effect to a program which allowed Iraq to sell oil and use the proceeds for much-needed humanitarian imports. As we now know, as the program proceeded the Iraqis devised a number of schemes to limit its effectiveness as a mechanism for denying Saddam’s regime access to hard currency. AWB negotiated its first wheat sale to Iraq under Oil-for-Food in December 1996. Evidence before the Cole Inquiry shows that by mid to late 1999, AWB was complying with Iraq’s schemes to bypass elements of the sanctions regime.

    http://arts.anu.edu.au/democraticaudit/papers/20070213_botterill_awb.pdf

  190. Neil of Sydney permalink
    April 6, 2012 2:09 pm

    I am not sure what your points are.

    TB said we were selling wheat to the enemy while the war was going on and that 21 Australians died in the Iraq conflict.

    Just say you people are right about AWB.

    You people are claiming that Howard/Downer knew about it and then did nothing.

    I do not believe that. Now Howard/Downer may have been unknowing.

    Furthermore I do not know enough to argue (queue further abuse).

    But i do know that we were not selling wheat when the war started and I do know that 21 Aussies did not die in Iraq.

    So why should I believe anything you people say when TB tells me bullshit???

  191. Tom of Melbourne permalink
    April 6, 2012 2:21 pm

    ”LOOL OVER THERE!!!!

    Howard did something 10 years ago!!

  192. Bacchus permalink
    April 6, 2012 2:34 pm

    Raised on this thread by your mate Neil ToM 😉

  193. Neil of Sydney permalink
    April 6, 2012 2:41 pm

    Tom

    I brought AWB up. The tenuous link is that they say a man is innocent until proven guilty unless that man is from the Howard government.

    They are quick to say that Thomson is innocent until proven guilty but spray the Howard govt with all types of innuendo.

    TB said (and I have the link) that 21 Aussies died in Iraq and we were selling wheat while the war was going on.

    It would be interesting if Thomson was a Coalition MP what Labor supporters would be saying.

  194. TB Queensland permalink
    April 6, 2012 3:04 pm

    Really???

    Well, I must apologise, The Neils, one of you must know how to RESEARCH so how come you don’t do it!

    Or use links in your posts ..?

    21 military deaths was obviously a typo … BUT we were selling wheat to Iraq during military operations … and selling it ILLEGALLY …

    You people are claiming that Howard/Downer knew about it and then did nothing.

    They did … both were responsible ministers … one the Prime Minister … and BOTH had responsibility for the conduct of the AWB’s actions in selling Australian wheat to Iraq … under UN and Australian law …

    So why should I believe anything you people say when TB tells me bullshit???

    Personally I don’t care what any of, The Neils, believe … however you will take notice that I have apologised for my “mistake” …

    Something that I doubt I’ll ever see from The Neils …

    And you have just blown your sham of ignorant naievity too BTW …

    A well constructed ambush, congratulations … expect no quarter in future … (Blogmasta willing) …

  195. Neil of Sydney permalink
    April 6, 2012 3:14 pm

    “BUT we were selling wheat to Iraq during military operations … and selling it ILLEGALLY …”

    Do you have any evidence for this???? I believe the Oil-For-Food program was stopped before the war started.

    Are you really serious that the US military would not cancel the Oil-For-Food program before the war started??? Is the US Army that stupid??? I guess it is possible but I find it hard to believe.

    We were legally selling wheat to Iraq under UN resolution 986. I find it hard to believe that something as well know as the OIl-For-Food program was not the first thing cancelled before the war started.

    But anything is possible I guess.

  196. Tom R permalink
    April 6, 2012 3:17 pm

    LOOL OVER THERE!!!!
    Howard did something 10 years ago!!

    Thomson (apparently) did something 6(?) years ago!!

    which is currently being investigated, although, some have declared already that he has ‘a case to answer’. I would have thought the results of the investigation would reveal if he has a case to answer or not.

    Of course, if the investigation find that he does not have a case to answer, I guess that means he will need to explain why he has no case to answer 😯

  197. Tom R permalink
    April 6, 2012 3:18 pm

    Abbott spending three years waiting for the FWA to do something that he, as Minister, legislated that it couldn’t do.

    http://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollbludger/2012/04/05/morgan-face-to-face-57-5-42-5-to-coalition/comment-page-11/#comment-1210992

  198. Tom of Melbourne permalink
    April 6, 2012 3:39 pm

    Thomson agrees that there is a case to answer. That’s why he committed to a ‘comprehensive statement’.

    The union lawyers, Slater and Gordon, concluded his answers were inadequate, following their review.

    The ACTU has suspended the union because they have ‘zero tolerance of corruption’.

    But somehow it’s all just scuttlebutt according to some in the blogosphere.

    Strange values.

  199. Neil of Sydney permalink
    April 6, 2012 3:44 pm

    “however you will take notice that I have apologised for my “mistake” …”

    Well I think you have one more mistake to apologise for.

    I do not think the UN OIl-For-Food program was running while the Iraq war was on.

    Surely the US Army is not that stupid.

  200. el gordo permalink
    April 6, 2012 3:54 pm

    On the surface it looks silly, exchanging food for oil with an enemy, but the west had little choice with so many mouths to feed.

  201. April 6, 2012 4:01 pm

    ToM, get with the agenda. Reading Tom R’s links is a good start.

  202. April 6, 2012 4:03 pm

    El gordo..umm err…food for oil. I think that you might have lost the plot with that one. It’s the East which has the oil and the West which has the food.

  203. Neil of Sydney permalink
    April 6, 2012 4:04 pm

    “On the surface it looks silly, exchanging food for oil with an enemy”

    It was obviously humiliating for IRAQ. But it was legal under UN resolution 986. Whether it was right or wrong is another question.

    But TB says we were trading with the enemy while the war was going on.

    I think we need another apology.

  204. Tom of Melbourne permalink
    April 6, 2012 4:13 pm

    Min, my mobile doesn’t work well with links (or spelling for that matter).

    Anyway, I think if someone has a view, they should express it. Not take the easy way of saying – ‘read this link and you’ll understand what I mean’.

  205. Tom R permalink
    April 6, 2012 4:13 pm

    The “comprehensive statement” was to defend allegations, not to say that he has a ‘case to answer’.

    allegations != case to answer

    Nice try though yomm 😉

  206. Tom R permalink
    April 6, 2012 4:17 pm

    they should express it.

    😯

  207. Tom R permalink
    April 6, 2012 4:25 pm

    Min, yomm doesn’t do links.

    I think this may be because he has found in the past that they often provide facts that expose his ‘views’ as quite ridiculous, and seemingly based in personal enmity rather than cognitive reasoning.

    I’ll put a link up soon to explain what I mean 😉

  208. TB Queensland permalink
    April 6, 2012 4:36 pm

    The Oil-for-Food Programme (OFF), established by the United Nations in 1995 (under UN Security Council Resolution 986)[1] was established with the stated intent to allow Iraq to sell oil on the world market in exchange for food, medicine, and other humanitarian needs for ordinary Iraqi citizens without allowing Iraq to boost its military capabilities.

    The programme was introduced by United States President Bill Clinton’s administration in 1995,[2] as a response to arguments that ordinary Iraqi citizens were inordinately affected by the international economic sanctions aimed at the demilitarisation of Saddam Hussein’s Iraq, imposed in the wake of the first Gulf War. The sanctions were discontinued on November 21, 2003 after the U.S. invasion of Iraq, and the humanitarian functions turned over to the Coalition Provisional Authority.[3]

    The programme was de jure terminated in 2003 and de facto terminated in 2010. As the programme ended, there were revelations of corruption involving the funds.

    A report by UN investigator Paul Volcker, released in October 2005, found that the Australian Wheat Board, later AWB Limited, was the biggest single source of kickbacks. In exchange for trouble-free disembarkation of wheat purchased under the Oil-for-Food Programme, the Australian Wheat Board paid ‘trucking charges’ totalling $AU300 million to Alia

    On 22 May 2003, UN Security Council Resolution 1483 granted authority to the Coalition Provisional Authority to use Iraq’s oil revenue. The programme’s remaining funds of $10 billion were transferred over a 6 month winding-up period to the Development Fund for Iraq under the Coalition Provisional Authority’s control; this represented 14% of the programme’s total income over 5 years

    Splitting hairs now … Neils …

  209. Tom of Melbourne permalink
    April 6, 2012 4:49 pm

    I’m on the coast, very pleasant too. Warm, nice off shore breeze, good surf.

    I’m quite happy picking away on my mobile while rotating between water and the cafe. But I’m not interested in downloading links.

    If I was interested in the points made on another blog, I’d go there and participate*

    (*subject to application of any ban that may apply**)
    ==========
    If Thomson would make a statement (as he committed) that was plausible, he would provide his supporters with some counter points.

    As it is, he’s damned by the known facts.
    =========
    **humour alert, by the way

  210. April 6, 2012 4:50 pm

    Tom R, I’ve known ToM for heck unto 5 years..yes I’ve worked out that he doesn’t do links, but thank you for the reminder. Some things are beyond expectations 😉

  211. Neil of Sydney permalink
    April 6, 2012 4:56 pm

    Still no evidence that we selling wheat to Iraq while the war was going on.

    You cannot be serious?? Surely the US Army is not that stupid???

    The sanctions were discontinued on November 21, 2003 after the U.S. invasion of Iraq,”

    Yep. I guess they are talking about the sanctions about selling food to Iraq.

    The programme was de jure terminated in 2003

    I think you will find this happened BEFORE the war started.

    You have made the claim that we were selling food while the Iraq war was going on.

    Any Evidence???

    If you think the US Army would invade another country while the Oil-For Food program was running, I think you are mistaken.

  212. Tom R permalink
    April 6, 2012 5:01 pm

    You do understand that Thomson has made statements. They may not be ‘comprehensive’ enough to satisfy your own personal criteria, but they are far more comprehensive than “I do recall”

  213. Meta permalink
    April 6, 2012 5:01 pm

    (“It would be interesting if Thomson was a Coalition MP what Labor supporters would be saying.”

    Jolly interesting mind experiment, Neil; me, on a particularly decisive day, which is every fuckin’ day, I’m capable of saying just about anything, truthy or not, but absolutely fabulous either way, assuming that the average clairaudient is either a C-student from Yale or a time-poor, easily-distracted A-student from the University of East Bumcrack.

    Right now, citing some Vonnegut seems apt for the pupil…

    “They might have felt that taking our country into an endless war was simply something decisive to do. What has allowed so many PPs to rise so high in corporations, and now in government, is that they are so decisive. They are going to do something every fuckin’ day and they are not afraid. Unlike normal people, they are never filled with doubts, for the simple reasons that they don’t give a fuck what happens next….”.

    Next, let’s have the police invade the FWA to find the amassed materials of Thomson’s destruction which we all know they have, if the FWA won’t immediately wheel them out into a public parking lot and destroy him there in full view of the world.

    And, then, liberate our friends, the unionists, and/or effect regime change and install me, me, me, or my favoured nominee, still me, as El Señor Presidente.

    Not necessarily in that order of priority. Well, exactly in that order of priority. But you catch my drift and I catch your vote, one way or another, and I’ll let you know well before or after the election whether I’m cancelling the life of your political literacy prize to lower the up-front price I pay on decisive policy fictions.

    Alternatively, and being somewhat less facetious, (re)combining everything to-date, I tend to think that there’s some merit in, and some scope for, constructive prospective reform(s) to/of relevant legislation(s), even of/to de facto subordinate legislations (eg, (external (controls on) internal controls, like supposed ‘best practices’ emplaced by better-functioning branches of a HSU, now-quarantined until any lesser practices of the past/present have washed of the HSU’s present/future) at a more general mandatory-regulatory level; I’m just not sure that magic-thinking, or a retrospective approach, even by contrived analogy, to remediating perceived or identified gaps in informations, capacities, and accountabilities of/by/to various actors in an established system, possibly amounting to a voidance of, or to an inability to deliver, or simply to undelivery of, acceptable or wanted community standards of behaviour, has validity as the only reasonable tentative judgement to form about (sundry) perceived default(s); especially as the system is still processing throughputs and outcomes, and that other, broader discussion is largely yet to be had.

    Or, somethings like that. )

  214. Tom R permalink
    April 6, 2012 5:18 pm

    Cheers Meta, I might just pour meself another one now you mention it 😉

  215. TB Queensland permalink
    April 6, 2012 5:27 pm

    I give up … I really do … 🙄

    Find your own fucking evidence, Noddy …

  216. Neil of Sydney permalink
    April 6, 2012 5:30 pm

    TB

    “The programme was de jure terminated in 2003”

    This happened BEFORE the war started.

  217. TB Queensland permalink
    April 6, 2012 5:48 pm

    Sigh …………………..

  218. Bacchus permalink
    April 6, 2012 5:56 pm

    What does that sentence mean Neil?

    And what does “and de facto terminated in 2010” mean?

  219. TB Queensland permalink
    April 6, 2012 6:02 pm

    NO! Bacchus! NO! Don’t do it … its just a mindless fkn whirlpool! They’ll suck you into the vortex! Get out before it’s too late!

  220. Bacchus permalink
    April 6, 2012 6:04 pm

    I’m not going to provide the answer for them TB 😉 As you wisely said, “Find your own fucking evidence, Noddy …” 😆

  221. Neil of Sydney permalink
    April 6, 2012 6:11 pm

    “And what does “and de facto terminated in 2010” mean?”

    Well you will have to ask the UN since they were running the program.

    But I find it hard to believe that with hundreds of companies selling stuff the first thing that was not done was to abolish the programme. Is the US Army that stupid???

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UN_Oil_for_Food_Scandal

    “End of the programme

    Shortly before US and British forces invaded Iraq, UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan suspended the programme and evacuated more than 300 workers monitoring the distribution of supplies.”

  222. TB Queensland permalink
    April 6, 2012 6:17 pm

    You really are selecting bits, Noddy … quote the whole paragraph and include … UN Security Council Resolution 1483 …

    See what I mean, Baccy! Why do I bother …

    Happy Easter Holiday to all the Reporters here at TFR …

  223. Tom of Melbourne permalink
    April 6, 2012 6:18 pm

    Even Slater & Gordon didn’t think much of Thomson’s explanation.

    The most plausible is-

    Thomson joined the HSU as a committed union activist. Well qualified, he was promoted and then won elected positions. The existing culture of the union was to supplement the relatively poorly paid positions with a few off the books benefits. Many unions pay officials at a rate applicable to their members. HSU officials would not have been well paid.

    Thomson accepted this culture, as he understood the demands, stress, long hours associated with being a union official. The off the books benefits could be easily rationalised, and everyone in that union did it.

    He’d rationalise the benefits by saying he dealt with hospital CEOs paid $200-$400k a year. Health dept officials paid similar amounts. He was worth as much.
    =========
    The alternative explanation?
    ==========
    …and all Thomson has to do is provide the detailed statement he promised.

  224. Neil of Sydney permalink
    April 6, 2012 6:29 pm

    Selecting bits???

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UN_Oil_for_Food_Scandal

    End of the programme

    Shortly before US and British forces invaded Iraq, UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan suspended the programme and evacuated more than 300 workers monitoring the distribution of supplies.”

    AWB was not trading with Iraq when the war was going on. The US and Britain stopped the programme before the war started.

  225. Bacchus permalink
    April 6, 2012 7:03 pm

    More questions Neil…
    When did the invasion of Iraq take place?
    What was AWB up to between this time and the end of 2003?

    I think you’ll find they delivered Australian wheat to Iraq on or about 9th April 2003 and 1st May 2003…

  226. Neil of Sydney permalink
    April 6, 2012 7:37 pm

    Well the invasion took place from March 19- 1 May 2003.

    “What was AWB up to between this time and the end of 2003?”

    I don’t know but i guess they stopped selling wheat when the war started. There is no way the Americans would not have stopped the Oil-For_food programme before the war started. After the war some other food program started up.

    What I find strange is you demand people say Thomson is innocent till proven guilty but make outrageous claims against the Howard govt with no evidence.

  227. armchair opinionator permalink
    April 7, 2012 1:02 am

    “When discussing a legal situation, de jure designates what the law says, while de facto designates action of what happens in practice”

    I thought I’d better put that explanation up because neil seems slow to do so!

    Goodness, does “and de facto terminated in 2010” mean that the program was in reality, still running until 2010. Guess that means it was running while the war was on!

    It doesn’t really matter though because we all know that the evidence can be paraded before neil a million times over and he will simply say “well, I don’t believe it” when cornered. That is the card he plays all the time, the online version of fingers in ears and singing lalalalala!
    Neil will never accept any evidence from anyone. If it gets overwhelming and incontrovertible Neil will simply “not believe it” and it becomes his faith over evidence. If Neil doesn’t believe something then it hasn’t happened.Why do we bother?

  228. Meta permalink
    April 7, 2012 6:17 am

    The alternative explanation?

    Nope, can’t think of any.

  229. Tom of Melbourne permalink
    April 7, 2012 9:26 am

    So what is this plausible alternative? No one has actually put it in their own words.

    ( as I’ve said, I don’t see any point discussing the issue on the basis of duelling links, and I’m not inclined to navigate around them all from my mobile)

  230. April 7, 2012 5:36 pm

    Tony Abbott should remember the old saying that “people who live in glass housing should not throw stones”. Check out the following quotations which refer to his failure to report performance Indicator Targat breaching fatalities. The South Australian Attorney-General, John Rau, is currently under presssure to launch an investigation into the offical cover up of the fatalities that occurred in SA because they may violate an ancient FELONY MURDER statute found in the Consolidated Criminal Law Act of 1935. Please note that these deaths are the subject of at least 2 Liberal Party chaired senate committee suppression orders. Check out tthe following WordPress blog for further details on the comments below:

    http://yadnarie48.wordpress.com/2012/03/21/tony-abbott-and-the-unreported-performance-indicator-target-fatalities-have-been-referred-to-the-sa-attorney-general/

    1. ‘A leaked document from the Department of Employment, Workplace Relations and Small Business requires of Centrelink that: …at least 60% of all possible breach notifications actioned are maintained. This is one of the key performance indicators that the Government requires Centrelink to operate under so as to receive their funding.’

    (Source: Media Release by Cheryl Kernot MP – Shadow Minister for Employment & Training. June 27th 2000)

    2. “Breaching is the targeted, and therefore deliberate, removal of the only means of support from people who have no other means of support, so that for a period of 13 weeks, they are unable to meet even the most basic costs of living.” (Source: Derived from Paragraph 47 of the Tony Abbott & Amanda Vanstone authorized 2002 Welfare Reform Discussion Paper.)

    3. ‘This data was extracted by the Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations from the Centrelink customer data system using SAS (statistical analysis software).’

    (Source: Job Seeker Compliance data Attachment 1 – Public Compliance Data December Quarter 2008)

    4. ‘Centrelink does not collect ‘Post Breaching Terminal Outcomes Statistics’ snfd there is unable to make this information available..

    (Source: Assistant Secretary Neil Skill, Centrelink correspondence 18th May 2010)

    5. “In order to help peoplemake submissions, the Review sought early release of DEEWR data on the operation of the new system. Some data (sets) were released eventually but rather too late for many people to take them into account in their submissions”.

    (Source: Impacts of the new Job Seeker compliance Framework. page 2, paragraph 8. tabled in parliament in September 2010.

    6. “…irrelevant and unsubstantiated”.

    (Source: Letter from the Senate’s Employment, Workplace relations and Education Committee – March 2006.re Tony Abbott’s Breaching Quota fatalities.)

    7. “Your submission is number 287… classified confidential… do not copy or distribute…”

    (Source: undated letter from the Legal & Constitutional Affairs senate committee inquiry into the Anti-Terrorism Bill #2 legislation in November 2005.)

    8. “…do not copy and distribute…”

    (Source: Letter from the Arts, Communications & Environment senate committee inquiring into the 4 “Roofgate” fatalities in March 2010.)

    9. “The estimated death toll from Breaching may be 2-4 times the 9/11 death toll.”

    (Source: “Machine gunning the welfare lifeboat” – a submission to the Independent review of the Job Seeker compliance Framework,June 2010)

  231. TB Queensland permalink
    April 7, 2012 5:49 pm

    I think this “niceness” thing is a bit of a failure. sreb!

    Wished everyone here a Happy Easter Holiday … not one reply … miserable bunch of sods …

    Noddy, calls me a liar a couple of weeks ago with no evidence and no apology … I make a typo 21 rather than 2 (a BIG boo-boo) and with evidence I apologise … is it acknowledged and appreciated no …

    I’ll keep trying but eventually one way streets run out … especially for Fuckwits™ people who don’t even make the effort …

  232. April 7, 2012 6:03 pm

    CLASSIFIED CONFIDENTIAL: In a letter dated July 7th 2004, the Australian Federal Police declined to investigate the anove mentioned Performance Indicator Target Fatalies citing “gravity/sensitivity” and (Howard) “government protocols”. Did this mean that the Performance Indicator Target Fatalies, which may have exceeded 1,000 in number, were not of sufficent “gravity/sensitivity” to justify a federal police investigation or did it mean that there was simply too much “gravity/sensitivity” for the federal police to investigate?

    The refusal of the federal police to investigate these fatalities raised the issue of whether or not the federal police and the Howard Government did a ‘dirty deal’, i.e. no investigation of the fatalities in exchange for the draconian, human rights violating, legislation found in the November 2005 Anti-Terrorism Bill #2 legislation? If there was a dirty deal, then that legislation is the proceeds of a crime and is illegal. Who cares about that? How about the Muslim gentlemen recently jailed for planning to attack the Holsworthy Army Base?

    Coming back to the “gravity/sensitivity” issue: Complaint ACMA2011/9-15 C 21620 to the Australian Communication & Media Authority is still being investigated at the time of writing. One part of the complaint against the 7 Network alleges that the today-tonight program engaged in “Targetd Socio-Economic Vilification”. i.e. welfare bashing. The response from both the ACMA and the Office of the Federal Attorney-General was that “socio-economic vilification is not unlawful”.

    So, if you are a welfare recipient, how do you feel about the fact that all forms of vilification by the media are unlawful except the vilification of welfare recipients? Could it be that you and your welfare peers are so low on the social scale that federal police don’t consider that the unlawful killing of welfare recipients through the misuse of lawful authority (breaching quotas) is worth investigating? I don’t know what you think about that but this I do know, according to the paragraph 5 of the constitution the “law is binding on the people”, a constitutional rule that means that the federal police should have investigated Tony Abbott’s ministerial role in the Performance Indicator Target Fatalies.

    The Clear message from the federal police refusal to investigate the Performance Indicator Target Fatalies is simple, if you are a member of the Liberal Party, then Justice is totally blind no matter how serious the crime. i

  233. TB Queensland permalink
    April 7, 2012 6:29 pm

    yadnarie is The FB in disguise? 😯

  234. el gordo permalink
    April 7, 2012 7:45 pm

    Happy Easter TB.

  235. Tom of Melbourne permalink
    April 7, 2012 8:14 pm

    OK, happy easter. If you like that kind of thing.

  236. April 7, 2012 8:22 pm

    Oh “happy easter” then….FFS… 🙄

  237. armchair opinionator permalink
    April 7, 2012 8:49 pm

    happy easter TB
    now stop sooking!

  238. April 8, 2012 3:29 am

    GO BORNCOS! Happy lomg weekend, TB. 🙂

  239. April 8, 2012 3:30 am

    “The FB in disguise? ”

    😆 😯

  240. Tom of Melbourne permalink
    April 8, 2012 9:45 am

    Has anyone yet articulated an alternative explanation for Thomson-

    ¶Having thousands on his credit card to pay for prostitutes?
    ¶Approving the expenses for the brothel services himself?
    ¶Being in receipt of $100k worth of unauthorised cash withdrawals from a union account?
    ¶Having a credit card for personal expenses that was issued by a contractor to the union?

    If the best explanation is ‘it’s part of an internal union fight’, does this mean his enemies fabricated the evidence, or just leaked it?

  241. Bacchus permalink
    April 8, 2012 10:26 am

    OCD or ASD ToM. Surely there must be a medical explanation for your dogged repeating of Liberal party talking points for months, sometimes years 🙄

    For the last fckn time – we don’t know, and nor do you! All will no doubt be revealed shortly when we can all make an educated analysis of what’s happened, as opposed to the ignorant guessing and speculation you forever insist on regaling everyone with…

  242. Tony permalink
    April 8, 2012 10:48 am

    “On Wednesdays, after dinner, a large assortment of the wise and callow, coming from all disciplines and all nations, assembled around a massive oval oak table in a mock Gothic chamber to talk about topics proposed by Hayek…philosophy, history, social science, and knowledge generally…Hayek presided over this remarkable company with a gentle rectitude that made his seminar an exercise in the liberal virtues…The general subject was [market] liberalism…the only obligation was to enter into the thoughts of others with fidelity and to accept questions and dissent gracefully.”

  243. April 8, 2012 11:21 am

    “we don’t know, and nor do you”

    What we do know is that ….

    Someone used Thomson’s HSU credit card to pay for prostitutes, lavish lunches, and cash withdrawals to the value of $100,000.

    I do recall that Thomson originally said that it wasn’t him – but he knew who it was – but then refused to name that individual.

    Someone also used his mobile phone to arrange for “escort services” to be provided…

    “It wasn’t me, I know who it was, but I’m not saying” is not an acceptable explanation in most organisations, yet the Thomson apologists continue to accept his defence as reasonable.

    Pfft..

  244. April 8, 2012 11:30 am

    A good litmus test is to imagine what we’d be saying if the Coalition was in power & one of its MP’s was in the same position as Craig Thompson.
    I find it hard to believe that the same courtesies would be maintained.

  245. TB Queensland permalink
    April 8, 2012 4:53 pm

    Toilette … I personally disagree (happy easter holiday, BTW …)

    I find it hard to believe that the same courtesies would be maintained.

    I think you would find that Baccy and I would be saying pretty much what we have said here … no-one can be found guilty without evidence and a trial … not a shonky government manipulated Royal Commission … a trial …

    I do agree wholeheartedly with the title of this thread though …. 🙄

  246. Tom of Melbourne permalink
    April 8, 2012 6:49 pm

    Thousands on prostitutes, self authorised cash withdrawals, credit card for personal use issued by a contractor… but we don’t know what happened!

    If only my 3rd wife had been as gullible. Or my 2nd for that matter.

  247. TB Queensland permalink
    April 8, 2012 7:33 pm

    If only my 3rd wife had been as gullible. Or my 2nd for that matter.

    Haaaa, so that’s why the vendetta … credibility ziiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiip …

  248. Tom of Melbourne permalink
    April 8, 2012 8:39 pm

    The history of Craig-
    *Age 10 – ‘the Crunchie Bar must have fallen into my school bag’
    *Age 14 – ‘the dog ate my homework’
    *Age 17 – ‘I wasn’t copying her work, I was looking at her inkwell’
    *Age 21 – ‘Of course I’ll always love you’
    *Age 28 – ‘I do’
    *Age 30 – ‘It was me mate’
    *Age 35- ‘I’m committed to serving the members’
    *Age 40 – ‘I’m committed to serving the community’
    *Age 45 – ‘I’m committed to serving myself and having myself serviced’

  249. Bacchus permalink
    April 8, 2012 9:56 pm

    What we do know is that ….

    No Reb – that’s what’s been alleged in the public arena by those who may very well have a wider agenda in the HSU faction wars. It may also turn out to be in fact what happened – we’ll all know in the fullness of time (hopefully).

    In the meantime, I’ll take everything said by all sides in this with a pinch of salt, and totally dismiss as probable rubbish everything that ToM dribbles 😉

  250. TB Queensland permalink
    April 9, 2012 8:12 am

    That’s pretty creative for a Liberal Party barracker, YoM

  251. el gordo permalink
    April 9, 2012 10:02 am

    It’s funny, Craig went to school in my town and nobody can remember him.

  252. Tom of Melbourne permalink
    April 9, 2012 11:31 am

    Unions NSW are going to sack Thomson’s mate, Williamson, unless he resigns from various union boards.

    That’s bound to bring howls of protest from Bacchus, Tom R etc, along the lines of-
    *Where’s the evidence?
    *But no one really knows what happened.
    *They should wait for FWA/DPP/police (etc) to complete their inquiries.

    It seems that Unions NSW have a lower tolerance of corruption than some contributors.

  253. armchair opinionator permalink
    April 9, 2012 2:10 pm

    Unions NSW are going to sack Thomson’s mate, Williamson, unless he resigns from various union boards.

    I think they should all resign, every single one of them, past and present who benefited from the practices [including kathy jackson]. Declare all positions vacant and don’t let any of them stand.

    Let the clean out begin.

  254. April 9, 2012 2:45 pm

    “I think they should all resign, every single one of them”

    But why???

    According to Bacchus and Tom R it’s all just “gossip”……..

  255. Splatterbottom permalink
    April 9, 2012 2:55 pm

    “I think they should all resign, every single one of them, past and present who benefited from the practices”

    Does that include Gillard? And Ludwig? Or aren’t we going anywhere near the rest of Unionland?

  256. Bacchus permalink
    April 9, 2012 4:50 pm

    ToM, that you can’t see the difference between Mr Williamson and his current positions on various boards and employment status with the HSU, and a parliamentarian who no longer holds positions with any of the above mentioned bodies, says it all!

    And what does Kitty’s opinion of that particular union, along with other right-wing unions (especially the SDA), have to do with FWA investigations?

    FMD – talk about being verballed and many very long bows being drawn 🙄

  257. Splatterbottom permalink
    April 9, 2012 4:56 pm

    Richo’s opinion:

    The NSW chief, Michael Williamson, has done particularly well for himself. Apart from being paid more than $300,000 a year, he has organised for companies in which he or other members of his family have the sole or controlling interest to supply IT services to the union and, now it has been revealed, secretarial services as well.

    The police are yet to report on the allegation that the printer massively overpaid to produce the union magazine also provided credit cards to Williamson and Thomson.

    It all points to the extent to which the looting had gone.

    ………

    What really burns me is that Williamson bravely announced he was setting up an inquiry to be conducted by no less a personage than Ian Temby, QC. He has now refused to co-operate with his own inquiry because his lawyers say it might incriminate him.

    This farce must come to an end. Those officials pledging loyalty to Williamson might think again. They owe their members one last-minute burst of honesty. And if they ever want to look proudly at their reflection in a mirror again, they owe it to themselves as well.

    This is not just a problem with the HSU. It is a problem with Unionland. It is time to hand over regulation of the unions to ASIC. MAke them subject to the same rules as companies – disclose all benefits to senior officer. At least ASIC would not take three years to produce a useless report.

  258. armchair opinionator permalink
    April 9, 2012 5:16 pm

    Does that include Gillard? And Ludwig? Or aren’t we going anywhere near the rest of Unionland?

    Let’s be a bit logical. Have Gillard and Ludwig personally benefited from the individual wrongdoing by the executive of the HSU?

    It is time to stop the rot and stop people like useless Ludwig, DeBruyn etc having so much power in Labor politics through membership numbers. A membership that they refuse to even represent properly.

    By the same token, the miners and other big business should not have the power over the Coalition and the political process that they have through the rivers of gold being donated to Liberal Party coffers. Coalition ministers should not be writing to the children of a miner to get them to act in the interests of said miner. Business should not be writing the legislation that the Coalition puts into law when in office but they do. Do you think Clive Palmer should have been able to buy such influence in QLD LNP?

    Perhaps we should stop the corporate and union donations and only allow personal donations from voters, or only allow taxpayer funding. Why should our political parties have it all ways in such a bonanza? They are funded by the taxpaying public and they also get corporate/union donations which buy political influence.

    The only ones missing out are the general public who stupidly think that they vote for a democratic outcome where in reality it doesn’t matter which puppet party gets in, the corporations and vested interests run the country.

  259. Tom R permalink
    April 9, 2012 5:22 pm

    According to Bacchus and Tom R it’s all just “gossip”

    I’m just joining the conga line 😉

    Acting HSU president Chris Brown says 10 of the 14 members of the union’s national executive decided this morning to ask Mr Williamson to quit because allegations against him are damaging the rest of the union.

    http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-04-09/hsu-executives-want-president27s-scalp/3939570

  260. Tom R permalink
    April 9, 2012 5:23 pm

    Let’s be a bit logical.

    I guess it’s never too late to start 😯

  261. armchair opinionator permalink
    April 9, 2012 5:25 pm

    And what does Kitty’s opinion of that particular union, along with other right-wing unions (especially the SDA), have to do with FWA investigations?

    Yes, joe debruyn’s refusal to honestly represent his membership makes me mad, grrrrr!

    The right wing unions have too much influence in Labor, they and Labor’s commitment and capitulation to neo-liberal ideology have killed the party.

  262. el gordo permalink
    April 9, 2012 5:31 pm

    ‘Labor’s commitment and capitulation to neo-liberal ideology have killed the party.’

    And here’s me thinking it was the tax on carbon dioxide that’s killed the party.

  263. TB Queensland permalink
    April 9, 2012 5:36 pm

    … right wing unions …

    … and its not by accident that they (and the present government) are “right wing” … maybe why so many of us “long term” ALP supporters … criticise “our” government so much …

    Reducing the “influence” of unions might actually encourage an increased, more active and involved ALP membership …

  264. April 9, 2012 5:45 pm

    “allegations”

    Yes, it’s hilarious the way in which the “apologists” insist that it’s all just “gossip” and “allegations” where the known “FACTS” are that:

    Thomson’s Union HSU credit card was used to pay for prostitutes, lavish lunches and cash withdrawals to the tune of $100,000, and;

    Thomson authorised those expenses, and;

    Thomson’s drivers’ licence was used by “the holder of the licence” as photo id to verify the credit card payment at one of the brothels, and;

    Thomson’s mobile phone was used to call and arrange escort services.

    I can appreciate that Bacchus and Tom R might have some difficulty in discerning known “facts” from speculation in their rush to absolve Thomson of any wrongdoing, but these are actually known facts already in the public domain, and Thomson does not dispute them, but it is amusing the way in which you guys do… 🙂

  265. TB Queensland permalink
    April 9, 2012 5:48 pm

    As for the LNP – let’s face it it’s easier to write than the Liberal/National Coalition and it means pretty much the same thing …

    … as for the LNP, they’ve always been manipulated behind the scenes by the faceless men of business, religion and politicians past … (Does anyone in their right mind believe that John Howard doesn’t dabble in and advise the Opposition front bench?)

    It’s only recently that certain mining billionaires have thought that they could openly influence the Australian electorate … with the assistance of openly right wing radio stations such as 4BC in my own city …

    The sad part about that, is that they seem to have been successful … mischievous … deceptive … and manipulative …

  266. armchair opinionator permalink
    April 9, 2012 5:51 pm

    The police are yet to report on the allegation that the printer massively overpaid to produce the union magazine also provided credit cards to Williamson and Thomson.
    It all points to the extent to which the looting had gone…

    Oh come on! You one-eyed, crazy Lib supporters have very short memories, have you forgotten the printgate scandal of Howard’s government?

    http://www.crikey.com.au/2007/06/20/slow-progress-at-printgate/?wpmp_switcher=mobile

    …The Federal Police are investigating whether three Federal Liberal backbenchers used their taxpayer-funded printing allowances to prop up last year’s state election campaign of their party.

    What’s harder to understand is why three months have passed without a decision on whether Ross Vasta, MP for Bonner, Andrew Laming, MP for Bowman, and Gary Hardgrave, a former minister who is the MP for Moreton, have a case to answer.

    What is known is that Mr Vasta has repaid the Federal Finance Department expenses wrongly claimed as a result of “administrative errors.”…

    $24,000 repaid by Vasta. It really pisses me off that when they are found out, they are allowed to re-pay the money and pretend they did not commit a crime. What other thieves in society are allowed to put the money back when they get caught and not face trial and punishment?

    They all do it, it is so hypocritical to pretend that your side is innocent of wrongdoing. Howard ensured his gutless stooge Keelty never took any action on anything, including AWB, (BTW, how many years have we been waiting for that court action?), doesn’t make ’em innocent. Actually with the AWB precedent, I don’t even know why you lot are carrying on like you are, it’s quite funny the memory loss and red-faced apoplexy about how Labor is soooo bad!

  267. TB Queensland permalink
    April 9, 2012 5:51 pm

    And here’s me thinking it was the tax on carbon dioxide that’s killed the party.

    egg! Wrong thread, methinks! Cheeky! 😆

  268. Bacchus permalink
    April 9, 2012 6:07 pm

    Allegations – exactly reb. You call them “facts” but they have not been tested by any authority at this point in time. The NSW police supposedly investigated these allegations once they hit the public domain and decided not to prosecute. Why is that?

    There is talk of fraud in the investigations into the HSU, but that could easily be the fraudulent production of this “evidence” by opposing factions involved in the “war.”

    Your “FACTS” may well be true, but they may just as well be fraudulent – why the need to have Mr Thompson hung, drawn & quartered before the actual facts are revealed. In ToM’s case, I can easily guess at the reason, but I would have believed intelligent thinking people may be capable of taking a more cautious approach until more is known – Azaria Chamberlain comes to mind again…

  269. el gordo permalink
    April 9, 2012 6:07 pm

    Yes…naughty me, but its the troof.

  270. TB Queensland permalink
    April 9, 2012 6:15 pm

    … as soon as you start saying … might, could, may, likely and the “killer” – obviously! … you really don’t know …

    I ask anyone here … if someone you know, or, you, had their/your employment terminated on the word of a fellow employee … would you just accept it and walk away?

  271. Neil of Sydney permalink
    April 9, 2012 6:18 pm

    Why is that?”

    Apparently it is not illegal to use the Union credit card for prostitutes. And that apparently is the fact.

  272. April 9, 2012 6:39 pm

    “Azaria Chamberlain comes to mind again…”

    So does “there is no leadership speculation, it’s all just a media beat up” …

    chuckle.

  273. Bacchus permalink
    April 9, 2012 6:49 pm

    So it IS true. Peter Garrett is going to resign so Bob Carr can have his HoR seat and take over as PM from Julia 😯

  274. Tom R permalink
    April 9, 2012 6:56 pm

    rush to absolve Thomson of any wrongdoing

    Sorry, where do you get that idea?

    It is this reference to illegality that I have an issue with. The media constantly referring to his imminent need to step down, even in the absence of a charge, let alone verdict.

  275. Tom R permalink
    April 9, 2012 6:58 pm

    Bacchus, apparently, Gillard is gone by Christmas (2011)…..Easter…….Christmas (2012)

  276. Tom of Melbourne permalink
    April 9, 2012 7:04 pm

    Lindy Chamberlain had an explanation – ‘the dingo took my baby!’. She provided this explanation immediately

    There is no comparison, because (despite his commitment) Thomson has offered no explanation.

  277. April 9, 2012 7:53 pm

    “Thomson has offered no explanation.”

    Well that’s not quite true….

    His explanation is…

    That “someone took my dingo, it spended up large or prostitutes, lunches and made substantial cash withdrawals, and then put the dingo back in my pocket wiithout me ever knowing it was gone…”

    seems perfectly plausible really……. 🙄

  278. Tom of Melbourne permalink
    April 9, 2012 8:04 pm

    Tom R, who here has used ‘criminality’?

    You & Bacchus don’t even acknowledge that he has a case to answer.

  279. Tom R permalink
    April 9, 2012 8:16 pm

    who here has used ‘criminality

    It’s all about you aint it yomm 😯

    The media constantly referring to his imminent need to step down

    Although, you used to infer it regularly, and you still do to a small extent with your finally settled on refrain ‘case to answer’, even though, depending on what is in the report, that may not be the case at all.

  280. Tom of Melbourne permalink
    April 9, 2012 8:17 pm

    That’s funny.

    HELP! The dingo took my credit card!

    Was there a dingo in Dallas in November 1963?

  281. Tom of Melbourne permalink
    April 9, 2012 8:25 pm

    Fine Tom R, let’s not use ‘case to answer’. How about Thomson just provide the ‘comprehensive statement’ he promised a year ago…

    Do you think we’re entitled to expect that?

  282. Tom R permalink
    April 9, 2012 8:27 pm

    Do you think we’re entitled to expect that?

    I think that we are entitled to await the outcome of the report, and what it says. Then perhaps form some views based on more than allegations.

    not long now yomm 😉

  283. Tom of Melbourne permalink
    April 9, 2012 9:00 pm

    So that’s yet another (inconvenient) ALP political commitment that you’re willing to excuse.

    That’s nice.

    Though not too good for demonstrating any integrity to a new (now cynical) generation of voters.

  284. Neil of Sydney permalink
    April 9, 2012 9:40 pm

    “Howard ensured his gutless stooge Keelty never took any action on anything, including AWB, (BTW, how many years have we been waiting for that court action?),”

    I cannot believe you said that comment. We have been through that. The UN Oil For Food program was stopped before the war started.

    The only thing wrong with AWB is that Labor supporters keep making false allegations like we were trading with the enemy while the war was going on when the person who made that allegation had no idea if that was true or not.

  285. April 9, 2012 9:57 pm

    Thomson said that he knew who had used his credit card to pay for the prostitutes, but won’t say who it was….

    Would Bacchus and Tom R at least admit, that in the interests of “cooperating with police” he at least ought to reveal who that individual was…?

  286. Tom R permalink
    April 9, 2012 10:13 pm

    reb, why does he need to ‘co-operate with police’

    Have they asked him for any information that he is with-holding?

    The NSW police have closed their investigation, nothing to see there. The Victorian police are in the midst of theirs, and haven’t contacted him at all.

    Of course, nobody hear is insinuating that anything illiegal has taken place.

  287. April 9, 2012 10:20 pm

    ” why does he need to ‘co-operate with police”

    Why shouldn’t he…?

  288. Tom R permalink
    April 9, 2012 10:34 pm

    😯

    with what reb?

    If they thought he had something that might help them with anything, they would have asked. Or is the Government in on that ‘conspiracy’ too

    FFS

  289. Neil of Sydney permalink
    April 9, 2012 10:38 pm

    “The NSW police have closed their investigation, nothing to see there”

    You mean they can find nothing to charge him with. Apparently it is not illegal to use a Union credit card for prostitutes. I am sure the members would not agree but apparently no law has been broken.

    However since Thomson is an MP, perhaps we should except a higher level of morality.

  290. armchair opinionator permalink
    April 9, 2012 10:47 pm

    How about Thomson just provide the ‘comprehensive statement’ he promised a year ago…
    Do you think we’re entitled to expect that?

    We can wait for one. Goodness, after all these years Peter Reith has only just come out and provided a re-write of history statement about his phone card fraud. The whole thing has become so politicised now that Thomson couldn’t make a statement of his own free will.

    …I cannot believe you said that comment. We have been through that. The UN Oil For Food program was stopped before the war started.

    We have been through all of that neil, so why are you continuing to tell lies?
    Remember the de-facto ending of the program in 2010, what did that mean again?
    Surely nobody is that dense, you are just pretending because you refuse to admit the truth (as usual). How about you just say that you “can’t believe it” and fall back on your default position of faith over evidence.

    Just watching Q&A, did anyone else think Pell was pretty weasely?

  291. armchair opinionator permalink
    April 9, 2012 10:55 pm

    I cannot believe you said that comment. We have been through that. The UN Oil For Food program was stopped before the war started.

    Oh, there it is, I didn’t notice it before!

    It’s all about belief.

    I cannot believe that neil is genuine.

  292. Neil of Sydney permalink
    April 9, 2012 10:58 pm

    “We have been through all of that neil, so why are you continuing to tell lies?”

    Get stuffed. I gave you the link

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UN_Oil_for_Food_Scandal

    “End of the programme

    Shortly before US and British forces invaded Iraq, UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan suspended the programme and evacuated more than 300 workers monitoring the distribution of supplies.”

    Why do you continue to be DECEITFUL????

    I guess suspended means suspended. Why don’t you tell me what “de-facto ending” means since you claim to know so much.

    The Americans are not that stupid that they would go into battle with the UN Oil For Food program running.

    You makes all sorts of claims about AWB with NO evidence but say nothing when we have written evidence that Thomsons credit card was used for prostitutes.

  293. Neil of Sydney permalink
    April 9, 2012 11:12 pm

    By the way here is a picture of Thomsons credit card and payment of $2475. And his drivers licence was used I guess as proof of signature

    http://www.petermartin.com.au/2011/08/maybe-craig-thompson-will-greet.html

    “THE federal Labor MP Craig Thomson’s mobile phone records, driver’s licence details and credit card vouchers with his signature show he used a Health Services Union credit card to pay for the services of a Sydney escort agency, the Supreme Court was told yesterday ………… The credit card vouchers for the transactions were issued in Mr Thomson’s name, were signed and noted a driver’s licence number. According to subpoenaed RTA records, a licence with that number was issued to Mr Craig Robert Thomson of Bateau Bay. NSW drivers’ photo licences can be used to verify a person’s identification.?

  294. Bacchus permalink
    April 9, 2012 11:31 pm

    You & Bacchus don’t even acknowledge that he has a case to answer.

    Once again, it’s proved ToM is FOS – Verballing has limited effect on the intertubes ToM…

    https://farnhamreport.wordpress.com/2012/04/04/craig-thomson-the-gift-that-keeps-on-giving-edition-6-volume-12-chapter-5/#comment-542

  295. Bacchus permalink
    April 9, 2012 11:39 pm

    Hmmm – of course it is totally impossible for such “evidence” to be fraudulently produced Neil 🙄 We’ll believe everything that’s “given” to the MSM by one side in union war…

  296. Bacchus permalink
    April 9, 2012 11:56 pm

    You were right Kitty – present all the evidence to the Neils – if it doesn’t fit with their dogma => ignore it 🙄

    https://farnhamreport.wordpress.com/2012/04/04/craig-thomson-the-gift-that-keeps-on-giving-edition-6-volume-12-chapter-5/#comment-736

  297. Neil of Sydney permalink
    April 10, 2012 4:33 am

    You were right Kitty – present all the evidence to the Neils – if it doesn’t fit with their dogma => ignore it”

    Bacchus, I was the one who provided the link.

    The programme was de jure terminated in
    2003 and de facto terminated in 2010. As the programme ended, there were revelations of corruption involving the funds

    Why don’t you tell me what it means. I guess the programe was suspended while the war was going on. But from the same link we have

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UN_Oil_for_Food_Scandal#End_of_the_programme

    Shortly before US and British forces invaded Iraq, UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan suspended the programme and evacuated more than 300 workers monitoring the distribution of supplies.

    I find it strange how you are quick to throw mud at the Howard govt but bend over backwards to defend Thomson.

  298. el gordo permalink
    April 10, 2012 6:54 am

    ‘THE woman who blew the whistle on the alleged credit card misuse by the Labor MP Craig Thomson is herself in the sights of senior officials who are out to purge the Health Services Union of its leadership over claims of endemic corruption.’

    Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/political-news/now-knives-are-out-for-hsu-whistleblower-20120409-1wl6j.html#ixzz1rZwUXbNS

  299. el gordo permalink
    April 10, 2012 6:58 am

    And from the Oz…a spill is on the cards.

    ‘HEALTH Services Union national secretary Kathy Jackson will call for a spill of all positions of the organisation’s national executive to help purge the union of corruption allegations.

    ‘Ms Jackson said last night she would call for a spill of all positions at the next national executive meeting, saying HSU members had “lost all confidence” in the union amid a raft of corruption allegations that last week resulted in it being suspended by the ACTU.’

  300. el gordo permalink
    April 10, 2012 7:32 am

    ‘To believe Thomson never visited the house of ill-repute that appears on his credit card statement, you would have to believe that a person unknown stole his credit card, forged his signature, stole his driver’s licence – a copy of which was appended to the credit card payment – and also stole his phone, which was used three times between the Central Coast and the city of Sydney to call the house on the day in question.’

    Richo

  301. Neil of Sydney permalink
    April 10, 2012 10:00 am

    Richo got that from Barnaby

    http://www.barnabyjoyce.com.au/Blog/tabid/59/articleType/ArticleView/articleId/1362/TRANSCRIPT-MEET-THE-PRESS-21-August-2011.aspx

    “One is that a thief broke into Craig’s house and he stole Craig’s mobile phone, he stole Craig’s credit card and he stole driver’s licence. He then managed to operate Craig’s mobile phone as he drove to Sydney. When he got to Sydney he presented himself, and this thief looked a lot like Craig Thomson, he then had to vouch for his signature and his signature was a lot like Craig Thomson’s. Then a transaction took place which we will not go into. He then went back up to the Central Coast, broke back into the house and put everything back where he found it. Now, that is one possibility and the other possibility is – and this is a far-fetched one – is Craig Thomson. They’re the two possibilities we’ve got.”

  302. Tom of Melbourne permalink
    April 10, 2012 10:10 am

    Bacchus, Thomson said he would provide a comprehensive statement, which would answer the “allegations”.

    That’s the incomplete part of this picture. It’s no use arguing that we don’t have all the facts, because Thomson has declined to numerous opportunities to provide parliament with an explanation, and has walked away from his own commitment.

    Any reasonable, balanced commenter would condemn him for neglecting this.

  303. Bacchus permalink
    April 10, 2012 10:18 am

    I would suggest that Mr Thompson has been advised not to provide any statement at this point in time, no matter how much he’d like to do so. This would be particularly so if his statement could contain allegations of illegality by other parties.

    Barnaby may live in a black and white world where everything has only two possibilities, but just maybe, there are other explanations involving fraudulent activities by other parties involved in the internal union war.

    Of course he may also be as guilty as sin, but we won’t know this until all the enquiries and deliberations have been properly completed…

  304. Splatterbottom permalink
    April 10, 2012 10:40 am

    Thomson is pure sleaze. And every Labor member of parliament has chosen to be that sleaze. They have a choice – to go on stalling and thus reap the rewards of office precisely because it Thomson keeps them in power. It would only take one or two to bring matters to a head. This is a personal decision each and every one of them have made. It defines them as meretricious mercenaries.

    This is what it is like to live in Unionland. A land where thugs and pimps and thieves run the show. The institutions designed to protect us from the depredations of petty crooks like Thomson have been corrupted to the point of failure. FWA is mocking the people of Australia with its incompetent chicanery. The stench is overpowering. The nauseated electorate will not soon forgive Labor.

    Thomson, if he had any decency at all would resign. But he has been bought and paid for by the ALP to the tune of a couple of hundred thousand dollars. The price he pays is to be held up as a laughing stock to be pilloried and hated by the people, just to keep a morally bankrupt government in office.

  305. April 10, 2012 10:49 am

    just maybe, there are other explanations involving fraudulent activities by other parties involved in the internal union war.

    Perhaps. But Thomson said “it wasn’t him, but he knows who it was”…

    Surely, “cooperating” with the investigation would involve identifying who that individual was, rather than refusing to do so, as Thomson has done?

    It’s remarkable how those who were so quick to call for the blood of Alexander Downer and John Howard over the AWB affair, now want Thomson to be afforded the utmost leniency…

  306. Bacchus permalink
    April 10, 2012 11:38 am

    He’s not cooperating with the investigation reb? How do you know that? He hasn’t been spoken to by the Victorian police, and I would assume he’s told all he knows to the NSW police and the FWA investigation already.

    April 03, 2012

    Mr Thomson, who was accused of using his union credit card to pay for prostitutes, denied any wrong doing again today.

    “I acknowledge the announcement today made by Fair Work Australia regarding the investigation into the Health Services Union,” he said in a statement.

    “I maintain my innocence and will continue to do so. I will also continue to fully cooperate with any further investigations relating to this matter.

    It’s unlike you to just “make shit up” reb 😯

  307. April 10, 2012 11:52 am

    “I will also continue to fully cooperate with any further investigations relating to this matter.”

    But yet he has refused to name the individual who he says used his credit card…..

  308. armchair opinionator permalink
    April 10, 2012 11:58 am

    Why don’t you tell me what it means.

    “The programme was de jure terminated in 2003 and de facto terminated in 2010”

    We told you what it means earlier, still you pretend you have no idea. This is why you have no credibility.

    And no, it doesn’t mean suspend, you keep trying to deceive people, this pretence at misunderstanding when you simply refuse to acknowledge something as a fact. You well know that suspend means a temporary cessation of something. De facto means an ongoing continuation of something as if the cessation did not exist.

    The terms de jure and de facto are used instead of “in law” and “in practice”, respectively, when one is describing political or legal situations.
    In a legal context, de jure is also translated as “concerning law”. A practice may exist de facto, where for example the people obey a contract as though there were a law enforcing it, yet there is no such law.

    So, the programme may have been ceased according to law, but in reality it was still going on until 2010 (as you well know).

    It’s remarkable how those who were so quick to call for the blood of Alexander Downer and John Howard over the AWB affair, now want Thomson to be afforded the utmost leniency…

    No, we just wonder why the same rules don’t apply to both sides. Howard & Co or Coalition dirty deeds and tricks = OK and nothing said by you lot about them, like neil you tie yourselves in knots defending them. No-one asks the hard questions, rigged inquiries and stalled/no justice or punishment. But if it is a union or Labor, well, they must have the full force of everything (media, kangaroo court of public opinion, inquiries galore and police prosecution) thrown at them and immediate action taken.

    Goose and gander?

    Hypocrisy is the one-eyed Liberal barracker’s game.

  309. Bacchus permalink
    April 10, 2012 11:58 am

    Has he? Once again, how do you “know” this?

  310. Tom of Melbourne permalink
    April 10, 2012 12:05 pm

    Apparently political excuses for ALP MPs rank much lower than honesty and transparency.

  311. armchair opinionator permalink
    April 10, 2012 12:10 pm

    Apparently political excuses for ALP MPs rank much lower than honesty and transparency.

    No, I believe in honesty and transparency. I also think that it should be practised by both sides, not an expectation to be placed on only one side while the other does what it likes with impunity.

  312. TB Queensland permalink
    April 10, 2012 12:18 pm

    Just watching Q&A, did anyone else think Pell was pretty weasely?

    Just saw this KL, I posted on Weekend Rostrum …

    … this thread is getting me rather dizzy … (both subjects) …

  313. Tom of Melbourne permalink
    April 10, 2012 12:22 pm

    I mean… Higher of course!

    Making excuses for ALP politicians who (apparently) spend union money on prostitutes ranks highly indeed! It’s number 1.
    ==========
    AO, I don’t think you’ve made excuses for Thomson.

    Quite the contrary.
    ==========

  314. Neil of Sydney permalink
    April 10, 2012 12:26 pm

    So, the programme may have been ceased according to law, but in reality it was still going on until 2010 (as you well know).

    Well there are a lot of dates in this link. Here is another one

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil-for-Food_Programme#End_of_the_programme

    The programme was formally terminated on 21 November 2003 and its major functions were turned over to the Coalition Provisional Authority.”

    And once again. The Americans would not go to war with the well known Oil-For-Food program running.

  315. el gordo permalink
    April 10, 2012 12:26 pm

    Thomson is probably innocent of inpropriety (sic) yet he might be protecting someone higher up?

    The story has Machiavellian potential.

  316. April 10, 2012 12:30 pm

    “No, we just wonder why the same rules don’t apply to both sides. Howard & Co or Coalition dirty deeds and tricks = OK and nothing said by you lot about them, like neil you tie yourselves in knots defending them”

    Not me Kittylitter, I was very outspoken in my condemnation of Dolly Downer and the lying rodent over AWB…(as were many others), I’m just simply pointing out that many people who were calling for blood back then (as I was) simply take a far more lenient approach with Thomson, when the evidence and the accusations from a number of sources just keeps stacking up…

  317. Bacchus permalink
    April 10, 2012 12:40 pm

    FACT Neil – AWB landed wheat for Iraq on 9th April 2003 and 1st May 2003. When was the war again? Your own link says the programme was “formally terminated” (de jure) on 21 November 2003? When was the war again?

  318. JAWS permalink
    April 10, 2012 12:40 pm

    “Has he? Once again, how do you “know” this?”

    Because he gave a “Live” interview to Paul Murray on Radio 2UE last year where he refused to name the individual. He also claimed the individual had paid back those monies for which there is no evidence.

    That’s how we know this.

    So not only is his story a total load of bullshit but he just shovels more bullshit on top of the initial bullshit to bat tough questions away.

    He has basically “clammed up” since that day to prepare his comprehensive statement. Not surprising since the answers he gave Paul Murray were just laughable.

  319. JAWS permalink
    April 10, 2012 12:43 pm

    “……..AWB landed wheat for Iraq on 9th April 2003 and 1st May 2003. When was the war again? ”

    If we are going to go back 9 years why not just jump in the Time Machine and go back further……….

    http://www.theage.com.au/news/tony-parkinson/shame-whitlam-shame/2005/11/14/1131951094949.html

  320. JAWS permalink
    April 10, 2012 12:49 pm

    Sorry my error. It was Mike Smith not Paul Murray on 2UE

    http://www.smh.com.au/national/thomson-agrees-he-approved-escort-bill-20110801-1i869.html

  321. Bacchus permalink
    April 10, 2012 12:51 pm

    Ahh – so it’s only the public he won’t name names to – probably on very sound legal advice 😉

    He also claimed the individual had paid back those monies for which there is no
    evidence.

    This is probably where the “whiter than white heroine” Kathy Jackson no doubt comes in – allegedly destroying documents that prove this to be true…

  322. April 10, 2012 12:57 pm

    “whiter than white heroine”

    Heroine’s actually brown….

    Just sayin… 😉

  323. Neil of Sydney permalink
    April 10, 2012 1:03 pm

    Your own link says the programme was “formally terminated” (de jure) on 21 November 2003? When was the war again?

    Yes Bacchus and the same link says this

    Shortly before US and British forces invaded Iraq, UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan suspended the programme and evacuated more than 300 workers monitoring the distribution of supplies.”

    I guess suspended means suspended while the war was going on. Then we have terminted in November 2003 and de-facto terminated in 2010, all from the same link.

    I suspect that if anything wrong was done by the Howard govt it would have come out by now. Same goes for Thomson. If Thomson has done wrong it will eventually come out.

  324. JAWS permalink
    April 10, 2012 1:04 pm

    “…….This is probably where the “whiter than white heroine” Kathy Jackson no doubt comes in – allegedly destroying documents that prove this to be true…”

    Oh Yes of course…….Bacchus’ “probably”= FACT……………….why didn’t the rest of us realise that….

    ROFLMAO

  325. Bacchus permalink
    April 10, 2012 1:27 pm

    Did you get a touch of the sun on the weekend Jaws? 😉

    “Probably”, “allegedly” – no claim of facts there, unlike claims made by yourself & ToM on the “FACTS” of what you “know” Mr Thompson is guilty of 😆

    Interestingly, those claims did not come from Mr Thompson, rather from Ruth Kershaw, who worked with Ms Jackson in Melbourne.

    i tells ya – there’s more to this saga than meets the eye…

  326. Bacchus permalink
    April 10, 2012 1:29 pm

    Still avoiding that elephant I see Neil 😉

  327. armchair opinionator permalink
    April 10, 2012 1:33 pm

    I suspect that if anything wrong was done by the Howard govt it would have come out by now.

    It has, that is why the AWB execs are not going before the courts any time soon, they have publicly threatened that if they “go down, others will be going with them”

    And certainly not when the terms of reference forbid any questions to be asked of the government.

    Same goes for Thomson. If Thomson has done wrong it will eventually come out.

    I’m sure it will. Patience.

  328. JAWS permalink
    April 10, 2012 1:52 pm

    “Ahh – so it’s only the public he won’t name names to………..”

    So even though he wont publicly name the “other guy” its quite OK to use HSU funds for hookers which Thompson has admitted approving.

    Lets face it. The HSU is simply a criminal syndicate which the ACTU has now severed lest other instances of criminality are traced to other Unions.

    Lord knows whats going on with the Union controlled Super Funds.

  329. April 10, 2012 2:05 pm

    “Does the relationship between the unions and the Labor party need some serious re-thinking?”

    http://theconversation.edu.au/the-health-services-union-scandal-and-labors-unhappy-political-marriage-6329

  330. JAWS permalink
    April 10, 2012 2:07 pm

    “This is probably where the “whiter than white heroine” Kathy Jackson no doubt comes in – allegedly destroying documents that prove this to be true…”

    Or we could perhaps look at another totally ridiculous possibility that there is no evidence for Kathy Jackson to destroy because there is no other Union hack who paid back the monies because Thompson used the hookers himself.

    But that stretches credibility dont it ?

  331. Bacchus permalink
    April 10, 2012 2:32 pm

    Haven’t had time to catch up with all of the thread yet I see Jaws 😉

    https://farnhamreport.wordpress.com/2012/04/04/craig-thomson-the-gift-that-keeps-on-giving-edition-6-volume-12-chapter-5/#comment-885

  332. JAWS permalink
    April 10, 2012 3:41 pm

    I’m just noting your preface of “probably” in your posts Bacchus.

    The rest of us are going by what has already been published or stated. Including copies of credit card slips and crazy crazy stories of mobile phones and credit cards being stolen for escorts being used by the same union hack that Thompson was running.

  333. Meta permalink
    April 10, 2012 4:10 pm

    (Not that it’s apropos of much, possibly even nothing, but I was somewhat thinking that Cardinal Pell was indirectly rather frank about his position at 20:45.)

  334. TB Queensland permalink
    April 10, 2012 4:56 pm

    Meta, is that 20:45 last night on Q&A you are referring to?

    +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    Does
    everyone
    else
    have
    a
    strange
    expanding
    coment
    box
    like
    me?

  335. JAWS permalink
    April 10, 2012 5:31 pm

    Yes
    I
    have
    a
    very
    strange
    comment
    box
    too

  336. Splatterbottom permalink
    April 10, 2012 6:04 pm

    “No, we just wonder why the same rules don’t apply to both sides. Howard & Co or Coalition dirty deeds and tricks = OK and nothing said by you lot about them”

    Pot.Kettle Black.

    Surely you are taking the piss with this comment! As though any of the barrackers could bring themselves to criticise Labor even over something as egregious as this sick farce.

    It is just not going to happen, not at least until Labor no longer needs Thomson. Then it will be “If only there was enough evidence at the time. Who knew?” When Thomson is finally in the slammer they will still be maintaining that Gillard and her rotten government acted appropriately. Such is the nature of the party apparatchik. L. Ron Hubbard would be jealous of loyalty such as this.

  337. TB Queensland permalink
    April 10, 2012 6:13 pm

    Well I’m no Scientologist but L. Ron wrote some pretty good sci-fi … 😀

    … just sayin’

  338. April 10, 2012 6:28 pm

    I have an expanding box too.

  339. TB Queensland permalink
    April 10, 2012 6:55 pm

    😯 A concertina! 😉

  340. el gordo permalink
    April 11, 2012 7:40 am

    Williamson also has a ‘black Centurion card, which he has had for several years, is a secondary one attached to the private account of his close personal friend Cheryl McMillan, the purchasing officer.’

    Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/political-news/hsu-boss-put-30k-a-month-on-amex-20120410-1wn1n.html#ixzz1rfvg3hQa

  341. JAWS permalink
    April 11, 2012 8:56 am

    The next time a Union boss criticises a Banker for the salary/bonus they are on I’m just going to laugh out loud and utter the words

    “Well at least its in the public domain for all to see”

    Geeeeeeeeeee I think Mr Williamson will have a lot of explaining to do to……………………….

    The Australian Taxation Office

  342. Tony permalink
    April 11, 2012 9:01 am

    Don’t be silly Jaws, it’s only Robber Barons who are greedy. 😉

  343. Tom of Melbourne permalink
    April 11, 2012 9:07 am

    Yes…”HSU boss ‘put $30k a month’ on Amex”

    I suppose the media should stop reporting this type of speculation, because “no one knows what happened…”

  344. April 11, 2012 9:37 am

    because “no one knows what happened…”

    chuckle… 🙂

  345. TB Queensland permalink
    April 11, 2012 9:38 am

    Don’t be silly Jaws, it’s only Robber Barons who are greedy.

    If that was a tilt at me, ToSY, I can assure you, I agree with your sarcasm … anyone who robs from people in any way gets a black mark from me but anyone who robs from a position of power – ie a Robber Baron – should be put down immediately … anyone … (my only argument here, has been one of proof and evidence … while beheadings on the king’s command were commonplace in medieval times, I like to think we have advanced a little since then … legally at least)

  346. Tom R permalink
    April 11, 2012 9:42 am

    because “no one knows what happened

    That is not entirely true 😉

    there is sufficient now to say Thomson has “a case to answer

  347. JAWS permalink
    April 11, 2012 10:06 am

    So the baseless speculation is now that…………….

    Williamson collects a $350,000 pa salary

    Williamson gets $360,000 pa on a secret Centurion Amex

    Williamson controlled entities charge the HSU $400,000 pa for secretarial services

    Williamson’s mate Alf Downing receives “hundreds of thousands” per annum into his company Access Focus and no one seeeems to know what it does

    Williamson’s mate John Gilleland receives $640,000 pa to publish the Union Newsletter and issues to Williamson and Thompson 2 Amexes that he pays the monthly account of

    Williamson’s brother Daren is a highly pais HSU official.

    Williamson’s son uses an HSU building as a commercial recording studio rent free

    Anything to add ?

    But hey……………………………move along………………..nothing to see here

  348. Splatterbottom permalink
    April 11, 2012 10:19 am

    Pickering seems to understand.

  349. JAWS permalink
    April 11, 2012 10:28 am

    Oh wait I missed one…………………..

    Williamson’s other company receives $1Million for software support

  350. TB Queensland permalink
    April 11, 2012 10:46 am

    We all understand, bumbomb, but the authorties need be sure of their evidence … if they go off half cocked and the charge don’t stick you’d be the first on the bandwagon …

    Ratarse, for my edification (seriously) what’s the “relationship” between Williamson (sounds nasty too) and Thomson?

  351. JAWS permalink
    April 11, 2012 10:58 am

    “……….what’s the “relationship” between Williamson (sounds nasty too) and Thomson?”

    They are both blood sucking freaks

  352. Splatterbottom permalink
    April 11, 2012 11:23 am

    Both Williamson and Thomson are senior ALP figures. They both ripped off the same union and they both had credit cards from Gilleland’s company.

    The connection between Thomson and Bruce Wilson is that they both enjoyed the complete confidence of Gillard despite personally profiting from their respective unions.

    It is time we had a royal commission to drain the swamp of corruption that is Unionland.

  353. el gordo permalink
    April 11, 2012 11:52 am

    Its too early for a Royal Commission, but I think its time the ICAC got involved.

  354. JAWS permalink
    April 11, 2012 11:53 am

    So the ACTU in the light of new evidence ( which they must have just received otherwise why did they not expel the HSU months ago) decides to expel the HSU.

    But we already know according to TomR and Baachus that there’s nothing to see around here so they must have made their judgement on the baseless speculation from the Hate Media.

    How irresponsible of them.

  355. JAWS permalink
    April 11, 2012 11:56 am

    “………..but I think its time the ICAC got involved.”

    Egg ICAC is a NSW judicial body. This needs Federal intervention so a Royal Comm is most appropriate

  356. JAWS permalink
    April 11, 2012 12:04 pm

    Receiving Secret Commissions is a very serious Criminal Offence under the Federal Trade Practices Act. However I’m not sure if the TPA would apply to Unions in the same way it applies to corporates in that regard. Parts of do by way of the Secondary Boycott stuff.

    I’ll look that up later. Maybe sancty knows ?????????

  357. TB Queensland permalink
    April 11, 2012 12:28 pm

    Well that was helpful … 🙄

  358. armchair opinionator permalink
    April 11, 2012 12:34 pm

    I was disappointed to read crikey and find that if all HSU positions were vacant, very little would change. I had thought the membership decided the outcome but apparently not so.

    I apologise for the length of cut & paste and hope crikey will forgive me (or not find out about) my copyright infringement.

    http://www.crikey.com.au/2012/04/10/kathy-jackson-fights-on-but-cant-win-a-hsu-ballot/

    …But without a substantial rule change, the election’s results would likely just produce a facsimile of the status quo. Under current union statutes the executive is elected not by the general membership but by the approximately 80-member national council. Each branch is allocated one delegate for every 1000 members and Jackson’s supporters remain thin on the ground. Yesterday, 10 of the 14-member national executive yesterday demanded Williamson’s head.

    But the situation on the ground is more complex. A member of the national executive can only be removed if they are found guilty of misappropriation of union funds, gross misbehaviour or gross neglect following an investigation by the union’s ombudsman, according to union rules. And an election mightn’t bear fruit either.

    The 2010 merger of the Victorian No. 1 and No. 3 branches and the Williamson-loyal New South Wales branch produced a NSW-dominated super-union stretching along the south-eastern seaboard. Jackson became HSUEast’s “executive president”, while Williamson became HSUEast general secretary and the union’s national figurehead.

    Despite the colour and movement provided by Jackson and Tasmanian secretary and acting president Chris Brown, the HSU’s claimed 77,000 members remain overwhelmingly drawn from NSW and are loyal to Williamson or Williamson proxies including HSUEast general secretary Peter Mylan. Of HSUEast’s approximately 55,000 members, only about 12-15,000 are sourced from Victoria. Those are divided among themselves — on a charitable estimate only about 6000 would be supportive of Jackson.

    Under HSU rules, each branch sends delegates to the national council at the ratio of one per 1000 members. Jackson currently does not have anywhere near the numbers on the HSU national executive, amid a smaller bloc aligned to Brown. A new election would therefore result in another pro-Williamson, NSW-dominated executive.

    Williamson is now on death row in the aftermath of the as-yet unpublished Fair Work Australia investigation and will almost certainly be stripped of his Unions NSW positions and related super fund sinecures.

    Brown has called for Jackson to stand down at the next meeting of the national executive on April 27. He told Crikey this morning Jackson’s calls are a kamikaze attempt to drag the union down with her

    “The worse Kathy makes the union look the better it is for her at the moment,” he said. “She has got nothing to lose so she’s got everything to gain”. But the National Executive can’t sit back and let that happen.”

    “It sounds good doesn’t it, these calls for ‘democracy’ and ‘clean sweeps’, but the reality is Kathy does not and will never have the numbers.

    Jackson has called for the new national executive to be directly elected by the membership, which would require a change in the HSU rules. But that scenario is highly unlikely. In the meantime, she has kept up a NSW-centric media barrage to bed down her freedom fighter image…

    In my experience of my union, we vote for our branch delegates and we also vote for the secretary of the union (I don’t think I vote for a president, but perhaps I do, I can’t remember) I have no idea who decides the delegates for union representation, I think it must be the union itself.

    It all seems quite undemocratic to me, a real ‘boys club’ and no wonder the union execs create personal empires open for fraud, favouritism and nepotism which ends up giving the biggest empire builder a seat in parliament eg shorten, conroy, howes (perhaps).

    I think the unions and Labor should part ways or at the very least, the unions should not have such a big say in Labor Party politics as many workers feel unrepresented.

  359. el gordo permalink
    April 11, 2012 12:37 pm

    A Royal Commission it is then, bring it on.

  360. JAWS permalink
    April 11, 2012 12:38 pm

    “……….hope crikey will forgive me (or not find out about) my copyright infringement.”

    We’ve turned over a new Borneo Rainforest and dare not speaketh or utter of such things no more

    LOL

  361. JAWS permalink
    April 11, 2012 12:48 pm

    From Kitty’s Crikey link

    “…….Despite the colour and movement provided by Jackson and Tasmanian secretary and acting president Chris Brown, the HSU’s claimed 77,000 members remain overwhelmingly drawn from NSW and are loyal to Williamson or Williamson proxies including HSUEast general secretary Peter Mylan…………”

    In the light of recent publicity I doubt they’d remain loyal and if they did then the members deserve everything they vote for.

  362. JAWS permalink
    April 11, 2012 12:51 pm

    What would happen if all the HSU members at a hospital got together and requested their employer to cease taking their dues out of their pay ?

  363. Tom of Melbourne permalink
    April 11, 2012 1:12 pm

    The bizarre issue about the NSW police investigation of Thomson is that they found no grounds for charges of fraud – when he used union funds to pay for prostitutes.

    That’s because they were satisfied that it was him who used the card. Therefore it was not fraudulently used.

    It’s all hilarious, or it would be if it wasn’t so pathetic.
    ==========
    Interesting AO. A decade ago John Button said it ‘was time for the ALP and unions to have an amicable divorce’

    Wise words.

  364. armchair opinionator permalink
    April 11, 2012 1:25 pm

    What would happen if all the HSU members at a hospital got together and requested their employer to cease taking their dues out of their pay ?

    They have already thought of that. For a few years now unions have been pushing for members to stop their pay contribution,s they want us to direct debit from bank a/c or do credit card and/or yearly fee payments. They say it is because employers might refuse to make the deductions.
    For some reason I have been obstinate, I keep my existing pay deductions from employer because I don’t like being a conformist or just complying because that is what they want me to do. When my employer actually does refuse to deduct, then I will change my arrangements!

  365. JAWS permalink
    April 11, 2012 1:26 pm

    “Wise words.”

    Many who would be members of Unions are now tradies with a few employees of their own. The Union members of the past are now small businessmen and women and their employees are better off for it.

  366. JAWS permalink
    April 11, 2012 1:29 pm

    Kitty,

    Dont dare sign a direct debit form from your Union. They are a pain to cancel.

    Pay things from your account by periodical payment or B-Pay. Those two you control

  367. JAWS permalink
    April 11, 2012 1:31 pm

    “They say it is because employers might refuse to make the deductions.”

    Well if I recall employers are legally bound by the Awards. Its just the Unions want the pennies in Real Time

  368. TB Queensland permalink
    April 11, 2012 3:54 pm

    … and their employees are better off for it.

    … most not all …

    Dont dare sign a direct debit form from your Union

    Absolutely agree … no-one gets a direct debit from this household … especially the ones that can do you a “favour” and increase automatically …

    Well if I recall employers are legally bound by the Awards

    Yes they are …

    This expandable box thingymajig … is annoying the crap out of me … especially when I have to go back and forth to copy and paste I can’t see a bloody thing I’ve just written! 😦

    BLOGMASTA! Wherefore art thou?

    Can it be increased (or returned to the original concept) … ? 😕

  369. JAWS permalink
    April 11, 2012 4:32 pm

    “…………I don’t like being a conformist or just complying because that is what they want me to do…………”

    Shit………………….we I’ll be…………………………Really…………………….LOL

  370. armchair opinionator permalink
    April 12, 2012 12:13 am

    Just got home from work, I left after my previous post so am just catching up now.

    Thanks for the advice rat-jaws I will keep it in mind [not that I’m planning to change anything for them anyway].

    Shit………………….we I’ll be…………………………Really…………………….LOL

    😆 some of us are just contrary by nature!

  371. el gordo permalink
    April 12, 2012 7:24 am

    The SMH is maintaining the rage….

    ‘THE corruption crisis tearing apart the Health Services Union threatens to engulf NSW Labor with claims emerging that key party figures were warned about the alleged antics of senior HSU officials but took no action.’

    Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/political-news/top-nsw-labor-officials-warned-about-hsu-time-bomb-20120411-1wscz.html#ixzz1rlkAHbOL

  372. JAWS permalink
    April 12, 2012 8:57 am

    From EG’s link above

    ”…………Didn’t I mention the number of times Michael had been mugged at ATMs and had to withdraw additional money with the union credit card?………….”

    Its just sooooooooooooo disgusting the escalation of violence in Sydney these days

  373. Tom of Melbourne permalink
    April 12, 2012 9:14 am

    I saw a report that the president of the HSU is paid $350k, and the national secretary $270. That’s quite good for a union hack.

    It should almost be enough for the union officers to pay their own bordello expenses.

  374. JAWS permalink
    April 12, 2012 4:38 pm

    From EG’s link above

    ”…………Didn’t I mention the number of times Michael had been mugged at ATMs and had to withdraw additional money with the union credit card?………….”

    Oh………………….now I understand what has been going on.

    I believe Craig Thompson might just be telling the truth and I think Bacchus and TomR will further ferret out the Truth to the Bombshell that I am about to tell you all about.

    Obviously Bacchus and TomR have been holding out on us.

    Clearly the thief who stole the HSU’s Craig Thompson’s mobile phone, credit card and drivers licence was the same one who has been stalking and the mugging ATMs used by the HSU’s Michael Williamson.

    It is all so clear to me now.

    All we need now is for Bacchus and TomR to confirm that Truth is indeed stranger than Fiction.

  375. TB Queensland permalink
    April 12, 2012 5:44 pm

    If the present government wants to put runs on the board then laa it has to do is to bring the unions to heel and involve ASIC via legislation as has been suggested here (I believe) …

    If the HSU can run amok as the senior members have … then there is nothing to prevent ANY or ALL unions from wandering down the path of absolute power …

    http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/political-news/hsu-boss-put-30k-a-month-on-amex-20120410-1wn1n.html?skin=text-only

    If the ALP is concerned about losing the union’s support … they won’t lose the genuine ones and the unions being run by Fuckwits™ will hoipefully wake up (or be woken up) …

    … the ALP may have the unions as its “historical foundation” BUT its the ELECTORATE and us ordinary folk that they are losing and the modern “supporters” …

  376. el gordo permalink
    April 12, 2012 9:00 pm

    ‘Union NSW secretary Mark Lennon says the executive has accepted Mr Williamson’s decision to quit.’

  377. Neil of Sydney permalink
    April 12, 2012 9:49 pm

    Wow. Williamson has even more money from other appointments

    http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/industrial-relations/spend-by-hsu-boss-obscene/story-fn59noo3-1226324306431

    “Mr Williamson’s union-appointed directorships, including a $34,000-a-year position he was appointed to by former NSW treasurer Eric Roozendaal just before Labor lost office, is believed to have added more than $100,000 to his union pay.”

    Kathy jackson seems to be doing O.K. as well.

  378. Tom of Melbourne permalink
    April 13, 2012 8:26 am

    Anyone see the 7.30 Report last night?

    The HSU delegates seemed to think various current and former officials should explain their actions. This is a union which as exploited the voluntary goodwill of people like those 3 while they splash around their membership fees on prostitutes and personal expenses.

    No doubt Bacchus and Tom R etc will criticise the 3 voluntary, disgruntled delegates of making those comments without evidence.

  379. JAWS permalink
    April 13, 2012 9:20 am

    “No doubt Bacchus and Tom R etc will criticise the 3 voluntary, disgruntled delegates of making those comments without evidence.”

    Oh come on ToM……………………it’s not about Michael Williamson or Craig Thompson at all.

    They are just a convenient sideshow to distract from the Big Picture which is the evil intentions of Kathy Jackson and her own ambitions to clean out the Union via her call for the entire HSU leadership to resign for a brand new democratic election of all positions.

    Nothing virtuous in that is there…………………?

    Nah………this is all about her own ambitions.

    They (TomR and Bacchus) should be here shortly to confirm this

  380. Tom of Melbourne permalink
    April 13, 2012 9:29 am

    …and prominent union lawyer, Josh Boreinstein, was particularly critical of Fair Work Australia for declining to release the report on Thomson.

    But what would he know about the law, or FWA or unions?

  381. JAWS permalink
    April 13, 2012 9:45 am

    And apparently Julia has not even bothered to read it.

    Which she is entitled to do.

    So obviously nothing to see here………………

  382. Bacchus permalink
    April 13, 2012 9:51 am

    Perhaps others would like to read the transcript or watch the story and judge for themselves what was said, as opposed to what ToM says they said 🙄

    http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2012/s3476190.htm

    And Jaws, what Josh Bornstein actually said:

    The members of this union have been treated like mushrooms for too long. There are all sorts of people manoeuvring and making public statements and spreading innuendo and there is political manoeuvring going on, obviously. I’m not fussed about that. What I am concerned about is the members of this union are given the information they’re entitled to immediately.

  383. Tom of Melbourne permalink
    April 13, 2012 10:02 am

    I wonder whether the union will release the Ian Temby report they commissioned, and let their members know how their money was spent.

    It’s all grim for the reputation of the government too; this will continue to drag on for months more, tarnishing everyone associated with it, including Gillrd. It’s all of their own making too.

  384. Splatterbottom permalink
    April 13, 2012 10:10 am

    “They are just a convenient sideshow to distract from the Big Picture which is the evil intentions of Kathy Jackson and her own ambitions to clean out the Union via her call for the entire HSU leadership to resign for a brand new democratic election of all positions.”

    You are so right Comrade Jaws. This is about the betrayal of the Party and the destruction of Party discipline by the capitalist running dog Jackson.

    Also Comrade we should note the role of the treacherous bourgeois media in inducing false consciousness in the masses with their endless sensationalist exaggeration of what is essentially a trivial internal Party matter. We must mobilise the loyal cadres to drive home the push for government regulation of the media. We need enforceable standards to be imposed on the media and the blogosphere to ensure the masses are quarantined from capitalist lies.

    Solidarity, Comrade.

  385. Tom of Melbourne permalink
    April 13, 2012 10:13 am

    And Bacchus, I don’t think I misinterpreted Boreinstein’s comments.

  386. JAWS permalink
    April 13, 2012 10:19 am

    “………..There are all sorts of people manoeuvring and making public statements and spreading innuendo and there is political manoeuvring going on………….”

    So let the political manoeuvring takes its ultimate course in a spill of all leadership positions as Jackson is calling for (including hers) and allow the election to take place.

    But the others in leadership positions don’t wanna do that do they…….?

    Because they’ll be cactus and she might just get in.

    Which cant be too bad since I doubt she has a fetish for hookers……

  387. TB Queensland permalink
    April 13, 2012 10:21 am

    Just for all the Comrades …

  388. TB Queensland permalink
    April 13, 2012 10:22 am

    Which cant be too bad since I doubt she has a fetish for hookers……

    … and I doubt she’s squesky clean either!

  389. TB Queensland permalink
    April 13, 2012 10:22 am

    whatever squesky is? 😯

  390. Bacchus permalink
    April 13, 2012 10:34 am

    Perhaps a different view to that which Murdoch is pushing?

    http://www.crikey.com.au/2012/04/10/kathy-jackson-fights-on-but-cant-win-a-hsu-ballot/

    Ms Jackson is certainly not whiter than the driven snow –

  391. Bacchus permalink
    April 13, 2012 10:37 am

    I don’t think I misinterpreted Boreinstein’s comments.

    Never said you did ToM – the 3 HSU organisers however is another matter 😉

  392. Bacchus permalink
    April 13, 2012 10:42 am

    Mr Brown said Mr Williamson had been asked to step down “for the good of the union” and Ms Jackson was facing unresolved accusations that meant she was not in a position “to objectively play the role of the national secretary”.

    He denied he had failed to act on the allegations, saying he had been “actively involved with both the NSW police and the Victoria police and all the investigations”.

    “We have been waiting to see whether the Temby report or the NSW Crime Squad investigation is able to demonstrate that there is wrongdoing by Michael Williamson . . . if it is, then we will act decisively on that,” he said. “If it exonerates Williamson, then Kathy Jackson has thrown all this stuff out there for nothing. If he is found guilty, then we will deal with it.”

    What a novel approach – see where the evidence leads and then take action based on the evidence. Why didn’t anyone else think of that? 🙄

  393. Tom of Melbourne permalink
    April 13, 2012 10:53 am

    No, a novel approach would involve-
    • Having a Member of Parliament accept the opportunity offered to make an explanation to the parliament.
    • Having Bacchus support the expectation that an ALP MP would meet the unconditional commitment of providing a “complete explanation”

  394. Splatterbottom permalink
    April 13, 2012 11:43 am

    “Ms Jackson is certainly not whiter than the driven snow”

    Whether that is true or not, it is completely irrelevant to Thomson’s position or, more importantly, to the moral corruption of the ALP in supporting Thomson.

    The actions of the ALP are sickening. And every member of the lower house is to blame as any one of them could join the opposition in requiring Thomson to explain himself to parliament. But they won’t do this. They’d rather retain the fruits of office than behave honourably. They are rubbing the voters’ noses in their sleazy, slimy shit. Only the rusted on barrackers enjoy this particular fetish, and they do seem to relish it, but everybody else knows that the emperor has no clothes and there will be a dread reckoning come polling day.

  395. JAWS permalink
    April 13, 2012 11:45 am

    From Bacchus’ Link

    “………..the HSU’s claimed 77,000 members remain overwhelmingly drawn from NSW and are loyal to Williamson or Williamson proxies including HSUEast general secretary Peter Mylan.”

    Do you seriously believe that whatever happened at an election in 2010 would be mirrored today in the light of these allegations. Williamson’s proxies would get massacred.

    Then there is this………………

    “…….Other allegations still doing the rounds include those made by former union economist Ruth Kershaw that Jackson had asked her to issue invoices for $10,000, the money for which was deposited into her personal account and then handed over to Jackson (she denies this).”

    So a really naive degree qualified economist agrees to have deposited $10,000 into her account to give to Jackson. So I am now to believe someone with a good idea of how the statutory world works would be stupid enough given the questions that could be raised if the ATO did an audit of her or the Union ?

    Let the “Light Shine In” on your beloved “Gambino” Unions.

    Jackson might not be totally clean but if she’s willing to resign, but the others are not, would lead me to believe that she has a fairly good defence for the bullshit that’s eminating from others in the Leadership group.

    She’s at least willing to take her chances at re-election.

    More so than the cowardly males of the HSU

  396. Neil of Sydney permalink
    April 13, 2012 11:51 am

    TB

    Apparently the US National anthem was written by Francis Scott Key but he set the words to a British drinking song.

    And it was written while the British were bombing Baltimore. Why were the British bombing Baltimore?? Well during the French revolution the Americans had another war with Britain. The British were blocking trade with the French which was fair enough since Napoleon was trying to conquer Europe. The Americans did not like this. They said they should be able to trade with whoever they liked. Free trade and sailors rights.

    Anyway the Americans declared war on Britain and did so by invading Canada. The US was too small at the time to do much else. While in Canada, American troops burnt down some British govt buildings. Britain was too busy with Napoleon to do anything. After the Battle of Waterloo they had some troops to spare and used them to drive the Americans out of Canada and then burnt down American govt buildings (White House) in retaliation and bombed Baltimore.

    Very few Americans know the full story. They appear to believe that for no apparent reason the British came and bombed Baltimore.

  397. Bacchus permalink
    April 13, 2012 12:00 pm

    » Why would I support something that, in all likelyhood, Mr Thompson has been strongly advised against doing on legal advice?
    » Why would I support something that ToM advocates? 😆

  398. Bacchus permalink
    April 13, 2012 12:06 pm

    An alternative reality to MessyBottom’s diatribe:
    « The FWA report will be released shortly.
    « The Temby report will be available to the HSU, if not publically released.

    Depending on what comes out here, all allegations and counter-allegations will be dealt with, charges laid, court cases held – then all the BS the rusted-ons like SB, ToM and Jaws carry on with will be redundant – they will no longer be able to speculate based on incomplete (or possibly totally incorrect) information…

  399. JAWS permalink
    April 13, 2012 12:09 pm

    Anyway, Kathy Jackson was on Skynews last night very vigorously defending the Gillard Government as well. She said it was “a good government”.

    Pretty clearly the Right has failed to convert her to “the Dark Side”

    So why beat up on her when all she is doing is asking for an election at which even she’s prepared to take her chances on ?

  400. Splatterbottom permalink
    April 13, 2012 12:18 pm

    No one can have any confidence in FWA. They have served the government well enough by taking three years to present their report and then presenting something useless to the DPP. Par for the course in Unionland, but completely disgusting to anyone with a sense of decency.

    The only thing I’m rusted on to is the idea of having respectable government. This government of moral cretins is the result of a generation of ambitious spin-driven careerists taking over the Labor party. Welcome to Unionland. I’ve certainly been sickened by the Liberals in government, and said so loudly at the time, but that is not even relevant now. Whether this mob are better or worse than, say Howard bailing out the company that his brother was a director of, is neither her nor their. What is relevant is the stench that hangs over the current arsewipe government. The sad thing is that there seems to be plenty of loyal toadies prepared to argue that the ALP’s shit doesn’t stink.

  401. Bacchus permalink
    April 13, 2012 12:19 pm

    It’s not a matter of “beating up on”. If she’s complicit in any of the rorting that’s allegedly been going on for years, she should go too. It seems she entered the fray to fire a shot in the faction wars going on. You’ve got to ask, “what has she got to gain?”

    She may be totally innocent (as may Williamson and Thompson), or they may all be as guilty as sin, or any permutation you’d like of all the players. We’ll know soon enough. Speculation purely based on your own political view is pointless…

    when all she is doing is asking for an election
    Is that “all she is doing” though. Have a read of that Crikey piece I linked to earlier – it’s not as simple as what she’s making out. Changing union rules – what’s involved in achieving that for a start?

  402. JAWS permalink
    April 13, 2012 12:24 pm

    Well that’s interesting.

    I just did a bit of investigating of my own

    It seems Ruth Kershaw never even worked for the HSU………Only the ACTU. If she did then she’s lying on her online CV.

    http://au.linkedin.com/pub/ruth-kershaw/17/42/9a

    Then there is this

    “Ms Kershaw alleges Ms Jackson would deposit money from the union into Ms Kershaw’s account and then ask for it to be given to her…………..
    Ms Kershaw, who sent the email after Ms Jackson instigated a police investigation about corruption within the union, also said she fobbed police off by saying she was going overseas straight away, when she really wanted to consult a lawyer before she spoke to the police again.”

    Yeah……….sure a very convenient argument

    Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/national/hsu-whistleblower-denies-money-laundering-20120203-1qxn1.html#ixzz1rsmn09Yd

  403. Bacchus permalink
    April 13, 2012 12:46 pm

    Lying? I reckon you’d leave it off your Linkedin profile if you’d worked for the HSU too Jaws 😉

    As for the rest – just allegations. We may see when the reports are dealth with…

  404. Tom R permalink
    April 13, 2012 1:16 pm

    No doubt Bacchus and Tom R etc will criticise the 3 voluntary, disgruntled delegates of making those comments without evidence.

    Again, yomm pretends to have insights into matters he obviously has no clue on, and prefers to attempt to disparage people instead of admitting this.

    The difference here yomm, which you fail to see, yet again, is that these members of the affected union are asking to see the evidence, unlike yourself, who declares the guilt in the absense of any evidence.

    It is interesting that people directly affected by the machinations within the union hold a more reasonable view on the matter than yourself, who for months have been declaring ‘he has a case to answer’. These ones are asking ‘ let us see if they have a case to answer’

    There is a difference, which you fail to acknowledge

  405. Meta permalink
    April 13, 2012 1:37 pm

    (If I were quilling a narrative about a narrative, a variety of stakeholders might hold a variety of views about a variety of things, and a kind of matrix could be conjured up recapitulating/rehearsing various stakes. Key issues seem to be ‘knowledge’/’knowing’ and ‘justice’/’morality‘ and ‘democracy/authority’ and ‘accountability/authorisation’; eg, (in)justice for HSU members, (in)justice for accused(s), (in)justice for/by responsible entitites, (in)justice for/by society as a fraction or an aggregate or a whole, based in/on (not) knowing(s), and when(s), and where(s), and why(s), of sundry kinds and per what (wanted) immediate and/or backacting and/or next effects/actions (by sundry stakeholders, per their views and loci of interests). Or, something like that.)

  406. Tom of Melbourne permalink
    April 13, 2012 1:37 pm

    Tom R, I’ve not said he is ‘guilty’, so you might reconsider your comment.

    I’ve said-
    *He’s made a commitment to provide a comprehensive statement – he’s broken the commitment. Even you should acknowledge this and agree.
    *He’s had numerous opportunities to make a statement to parliament, but hasn’t.
    *If he was in any responsible position in a company, he would be required to explain his actions. He would face dismissal if his explanation was regarded as inadequate.

    None of these points require a decision on his ‘guilt’.
    ==========
    Bacchus, you repeatedly suggest that I’m ‘speculating’. Are you privy to his legal advice, or are you speculating about it?

    If he is breaking his commitment on ‘legal advice’, then he should say so.

  407. armchair opinionator permalink
    April 13, 2012 2:01 pm

    If he was in any responsible position in a company, he would be required to explain his actions. He would face dismissal if his explanation was regarded as inadequate.

    But he’s not is he? So that argument is completely irrelevant.

    If he is breaking his commitment on ‘legal advice’, then he should say so.

    Why?

    He’s made a commitment to provide a comprehensive statement – he’s broken the commitment. Even you should acknowledge this and agree.

    Did he give a firm date and time for the comprehensive statement? I’m sure that when the inquiry process is completed and made public, he will be providing a statement.

  408. Tom R permalink
    April 13, 2012 2:02 pm

    Tom R, I’ve not said he is ‘guilty’

    did I say that?

    I have said that you infer that. continually. At least the members on the show last night didn’t go that far

    you repeatedly suggest that I’m ‘speculating’

    😯

    there is sufficient now to say Thomson has “a case to answer”

  409. Tom R permalink
    April 13, 2012 2:11 pm

    At least this one doesn’t have a ‘case to answer’

    Despite accusing the NSW HSU’s Mike Williamson of serious wrongdoing, the HSU national secretary and de facto Victorian boss Kathy Jackson has been stonily silent about receiving massive financial support and assistance from Williamson in a hotly contested trade union election in Victoria in 2009, sources say.

    http://www.vexnews.com/2012/04/blowing-the-whistle-jackson-took-cash-from-williamson-for-her-hsu-2009-campaign/

  410. Bacchus permalink
    April 13, 2012 2:15 pm

    🙄 By definition, it’s all speculation ToM – we don’t know sh!t yet…

    If he is breaking his commitment on ‘legal advice’, then he should say so.

    Why? Because some nobody on a backwater blog says so? Because his political opponents say so? Is he “breaking his commitment” or merely deferring it? I don’t know, and neither do you!

  411. Tom R permalink
    April 13, 2012 2:33 pm

    yomm wants it all, AND HE WANTS IT NOW!!

    (onya Freddy)

  412. Splatterbottom permalink
    April 13, 2012 2:34 pm

    “But he’s not is he? So that argument is completely irrelevant.”

    Because it is just so totally wrong to think union officials should be as accountable to their members as say directors are to their shareholders. I mean there is no relation of trust in being a union official. Everyone knows that those positions are just waystations for aspiring Labor pollies and they are there to be exploited by the up-and-comers as a prelude to becoming morally degenerate ALP politicians. I mean if union officials couldn’t exploit their positions where would Julia have got all those dresses from? Or how could Joe Ludwig be expected to pay his own legal bills? If proper ethical standards of conduct are imposed on Union officials half the brothels in East Sydney will have to close down.

  413. Meta permalink
    April 13, 2012 2:36 pm

    (For “fun”…I will be making a comprehensive statement about X, then Y happened, and because Y happened I will not be making a comprehensive statement about X, or X+Y, or Y, because making a comprehensive statement about X lapsed with X’s lapse and the happening of Y. Eg, wasn’t Craig meant to making his circa August/September 2011 comprehensive statement about an FWA report expected in October 2011, or shortly, or shortly before Senators Abetz/Brandis trundled off to the NSW Police Minister, err NSW Police Commissioner, err Federal Police, err Victorian police, err started arcing-up about FWA political interference and trying to embroil the Prime Minister in the mere knowledge that Craig was being investigated, err recommenced demanding interference with the FWA, started demanding that the Prime Minister look at the FWA Report before the FWA has decided what action to take on its report? Did that happen? Anything else happen since? Has Craig said anything else in lieu of (not) making a comprehensive statement about X, or some or any other (in)comprehensive statement about Y, Z, A, B, C?)

  414. Tom R permalink
    April 13, 2012 2:41 pm

    Has Craig said anything else in lieu of (not) making a comprehensive statement about X, or some or any other (in)comprehensive statement about Y, Z, A, B, C?

    QED?

  415. April 13, 2012 2:42 pm

    BREAKING NOOZE!!!

    Kathy Jackson says she’s obtained a QC to formally charge Michael Williamson with a series of charges over his stewardship of the HSU…!!

    Will all this baseless speculation and idle gossip ever come to an end….????

  416. TB Queensland permalink
    April 13, 2012 2:55 pm

    How does a QC “charge” someone? A police officer “charges” … against a breach of legislation …

    … She could bring a civil action … but would be difficult at this stage of “investigations/machinations” …

  417. Tom R permalink
    April 13, 2012 2:56 pm

    lol, so, if the cops can’t find anything, to charge him with, maybe the QC will 😉

  418. armchair opinionator permalink
    April 13, 2012 3:01 pm

    Because it is just so totally wrong to think union officials should be as accountable to their members as say directors are to their shareholders.

    No, because it’s a false analogy, an invalid argument.

    A false analogy is an argument based upon an assumed similarity between two things, people, or situations when in fact the two things being compared are not similar in the manner invoked.

    Your argument is equally invalid for the same reason, is it a false analogy or a non-sequitur?
    Non-Sequitur
    In Latin this term translates to “doesn’t follow”. This refers to an argument in which the conclusion does not necessarily follow from the premises. In other words, a logical connection is implied where none exists.

    Get back to us when the unions are, in fact, companies where the same rules and conditions apply.

  419. Splatterbottom permalink
    April 13, 2012 3:02 pm

    No doubt after Thomson is finally charged the barrackers will be demanding that no one has right to form an adverse opinion until the trial is over and all avenues of appeal have been exhausted. By then Labor’s full term will have expired and then a whole lot of “shocked” ALP lackeys will denounce Thomson and claim the ALP acted properly at all times.

    Meanwhile the people of Australia will vote this sleaziest of governments into obscurity.

  420. armchair opinionator permalink
    April 13, 2012 3:03 pm

    How does a QC “charge” someone?

    tada, enter george brandis 😆

    trial by media, in the court of public opinion!

  421. Splatterbottom permalink
    April 13, 2012 3:08 pm

    “No, because it’s a false analogy”

    Wrong again.

    The analogy is quite a good one. It only breaks down if you can show that there should be a lower standard expected of a Union official (apart from the fact that every should know by now that self-interested grubs are attracted to such roles) than of an employee.

    There is no reason why Union officials should not be as accountable as employees in the private sector. In fact they should be more accountable as they occupy positions of trust and are expected to act in the best interests of members. Sadly many of them are happy to shit on the members and enrich themselves in the process.

  422. April 13, 2012 3:10 pm

    in January, this year Ian Temby, QC, who has been appointed by the union to inquire into allegations of corruption and nepotism, notified union officials that Mr Williamson had refused to co-operate with his investigation.

    Given Mr Williamson’s “assertions of total innocence”, his “refusal to co-operate with the Temby investigation involves a gross dereliction of duty to the members … warranting removal from the office”, Ms Jackson said in a formal complaint to the union’s executive.

    The second charge she has levelled against Mr Williamson relates to his failure to explain to members the $30,000 a month he has been spending on a secret credit card attached to the primary account of his close personal friend Cheryl McMillan, who is also the union’s procurement officer.

    The Herald revealed this week that Mr Williamson had been using a black Centurion American Express card, a titanium invitation-only card for customers who put more than $250,000 a year on American express cards.

    “Given the obvious damage being done to the union” by the Herald’s report, Ms Jackson claimed Mr Williamson was obliged “to provide such innocent explanation as is available to the members and to the council as soon as that report was published and that remains his continuing duty”.

    The third charge Ms Jackson, wished to bring against Mr Williamson relates to the $400,000 the union has paid to Canme Services, which is registered in the name of Mr Williamson’s wife, Julieanne.

    Ms Jackson said that Mr Williamson, when seeking approval for such payments, had never disclosed his family’s interest in the company.

    No, nothing to be seen here, move along everyone…….

    Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/national/jackson-allegations-pile-pressure-on-health-union-boss-20120413-1wy5a.html#ixzz1rtV1S6Tj

  423. armchair opinionator permalink
    April 13, 2012 3:20 pm

    In fact they should be more accountable as they occupy positions of trust and are expected to act in the best interests of members.

    So, now you’ve lowered the accountability bar for corporations, the suits do not occupy positions of trust or should act in the interests of shareholders?

    Love the way the conservative mind works, HT to fats domino “hey everybody, let’s do the twist” 😆

  424. armchair opinionator permalink
    April 13, 2012 3:29 pm

    The analogy is quite a good one. It only breaks down if you can show that there should be a lower standard expected of a Union official

    No, it totally breaks down because the union is not a company. Otherwise tomm would be arguing that “they has gone and broked all the company rules”, not “if he was in a company”.

    Not that I disagree with the sentiment expressed, I think they should operate under the same lax corporate governance rules in existence here. It’s not as if ASIC takes it’s regulation seriously.

  425. armchair opinionator permalink
    April 13, 2012 3:31 pm

    Meta
    April 13, 2012 2:36 pm

    😆

  426. Splatterbottom permalink
    April 13, 2012 4:26 pm

    “No, it totally breaks down because the union is not a company. “

    WTF? The critical issue here is the nature of the duty owed. The legal form of the entity is not relevant if the nature of the duty owed is the same. Your point might have some validity if you could show that a union official has a lower standard of duty to act honestly and in good faith than an employee. But that is clearly not the case.

  427. TB Queensland permalink
    April 13, 2012 4:48 pm

    No doubt after Thomson is finally charged the barrackers will be demanding that no one has right to form an adverse opinion until the trial is over and all avenues of appeal have been exhausted …

    And so they should, bumbomb?

    I’m beginning to think you have no understanding of the legal system in this country (and any other countries using “innocent until proved guilty” as the foundation of their justice system) …

    … do you have a French background by any chance?

  428. Splatterbottom permalink
    April 13, 2012 5:16 pm

    I don’t much like the frogs TB. I do appreciate the presumption of innocence. It means that Thomson is not to be taken to be guilty of a crime until he is convicted. I also understand that people are entitled to form opinions as to whether it is tenable for a person to hold high office and that these opinions may be based on something other than proof beyond reasonable doubt as tested in a court. You do get that sometimes a person may dishonour themselves and their office and ought to resign in the interests of the integrity and reputation of their organisation, don’t you? You know, like Richard Nixon did.

  429. JAWS permalink
    April 13, 2012 5:53 pm

    In qone legal jurisdictios (NSW) the presumption is against bail for the accused if the charges are serious enough.

    So even a court system will work on probabilities rather than proven guilt in some cases.

    Hang em high and let em swing !

  430. armchair opinionator permalink
    April 13, 2012 6:12 pm

    You do get that sometimes a person may dishonour themselves and their office and ought to resign in the interests of the integrity and reputation of their organisation, don’t you? You know, like Richard Nixon did.

    That’s not in vogue anymore.
    The bar got lowered when Howard’s MP’s couldn’t meet the requirements of his own Ministerial code of conduct.

  431. TB Queensland permalink
    April 13, 2012 6:14 pm

    I also understand that people are entitled to form opinions as to whether it is tenable for a person to hold high office and that these opinions may bebased on something other than proof beyond reasonable doubt as tested in a court

    As, egg, mentions above in civil matters ’tis … on the balance of probablities … in criminal matters – beyond reasonable doubt …

    FYI, we are dealing with civil law …

    However, you say that “people are entitled to form opinions … and these … may be based on (sic) something other than proof …”

    Well, I agree, that opinions may be formed … but most reasonable (and courts base decisions on “a reasonable person”) on a person’s particular personal bias but that simply gives the “opinion” no value whatsoever …

    … that is the point many peple here are trying to make …

    It is my opinion, for instance, that the people of Queensland made an awful mistake by allowing Noddy and the LNP to completely control our state government … a virtual dictatorship that defies our democratic principles … three years and counting …

    … you see I have to WAIT for my opinion to be proved in THREE years by the PEOPLE … my OPINION counts for naught when it comes to due process …

    Guilty or innocent it has to be PROVEN … not simply an opinion … however you think they are ENTITLED …

    That’s why most of us here attempt at least to back up our opinions with some evidence of facts … often referred to as links …

  432. Tom of Melbourne permalink
    April 13, 2012 7:04 pm

    A reasonable person would certainly conclude that Thomson has a case to answer, to the parliament, and the public. The balance of probabilities is that he’s used union funds for a range of unsavoury personal expenses.

    There is only a remote possibility of an alternative, and thus far there’s been no plausible alternative explanation.

  433. armchair opinionator permalink
    April 13, 2012 9:24 pm

    There is only a remote possibility of an alternative, and thus far there’s been no plausible alternative explanation.

    Right, glad that’s settled then, as you were!

  434. el gordo permalink
    April 13, 2012 9:32 pm

    Barrie Cassidy (The Drum)

    ‘If you faced the prospect of the electric chair, who would you choose as your executioner?

    ‘Presumably somebody who had trouble turning on a light switch or boiling the kettle – but instead the Health Services Union and its suspended president Michael Williamson chose Ian Temby QC, who could find a way to fry you in a power blackout.’

  435. James of North Melbourne permalink
    April 13, 2012 9:43 pm

    It really is laughable watching the barrackers justify the actions of the Unions and the ALP in this. If it was a Lib, there’d be wailing and gnashing of teeth.

    The conduct, by “someone” is utterly disgraceful but equally disgraceful is the dragging of feet by those charged with investigating the matter. Also equally disgraceful is the enabling of the barrackers who are content to “wait until the conclusion of investigations” they know aren’t progressing at anything like an acceptable pace.

    Someone has taken the subs of low paid workers and spent it on hookers. That we do know. If it’s not Thompson, then who is it? If that’s not known, then is there at the very least a plausible alternative to what appears obvious? Those questions do not take years to answer. That they have leads me to conclude that it’s a cover up at multiple levels.

    Which I guess is fine if it’s Labor…..

  436. April 13, 2012 9:57 pm

    *guffaw…

  437. Tom of Melbourne permalink
    April 13, 2012 10:10 pm

    ”Someone has taken the subs of low paid workers and spent it on hookers. Someone has taken the subs of low paid workers and spent it on hookers.”

    They could have at least put their program out to tender. Fifi has a “friend” who is in very good order. Members should be questioning whether their executive obtained good value for money. It’s a scandal.

  438. Tom of Melbourne permalink
    April 13, 2012 10:12 pm

    Did you know… ”Someone has taken the subs of low paid workers and spent it on hookers.

  439. el gordo permalink
    April 13, 2012 10:16 pm

    This is shocking news, ToM.

  440. April 13, 2012 10:24 pm

    I’ve had few acceptable reds…

  441. Tom of Melbourne permalink
    April 13, 2012 10:28 pm

    There’s nothing like a good red to assist with clarity of thinking!

    …and at the moment I’m clearly thinking that I’d like to see some evidence that Craig spent the money wisely. Perhaps some “studio” photos.

  442. Tony permalink
    April 13, 2012 10:29 pm

    Those low paid workers should shut up and keep paying their subs, content in the knowledge that their parasites representatives have only their own members’ best interests in mind.

  443. Tom of Melbourne permalink
    April 13, 2012 10:32 pm

    ”members’ best interests”

    Double *guffaw…

  444. Tom of Melbourne permalink
    April 13, 2012 11:14 pm

    Craig always acts in the interests of his member.

  445. JAWS permalink
    April 14, 2012 12:47 am

    The “Devils Corner” was a nice light red to have tonight. Us in Sydney with its slightly warmer climate do like a bit of tassie Pinot. But we understand why beautiful Melbourne people do like a heavier red.

    Fuck the rest of the ctnsu…..!

  446. TB Queensland permalink
    April 14, 2012 9:21 am

    *guffaw*

  447. Splatterbottom permalink
    April 15, 2012 4:48 pm

    Armie: “The bar got lowered when Howard’s MP’s couldn’t meet the requirements of his own Ministerial code of conduct.”

    This is an important point. Successive governments of both stripes have “lowered the bar”. Remember Rex “Buckets” Jackson? Howard promised he would set new ethical standards, but after he lost four ministers that we he dropped the standards. He criticised Keating for using government advertising to push his policies and then promptly spent about 10 times as much government money doing the same thing when he got into office.

    Your argument is not an answer to the criticism faced by Thomson and his enabler Gillard. We should not accept this attempt to lower the bar even further. If you hate political sleaze then you should prepared to criticise both sides, not just troll for one side only.

    This is easy enough to do when it comes to expense rorts and the like as both major parties do it. However, when it comes to pedophilia, Labor are in a class of their own.

  448. Splatterbottom permalink
    April 15, 2012 4:53 pm

    Now Craig won’t co-operate with the police. Maybe he thinks his detailed statement to parliament has covered all the relevant facts.

  449. April 15, 2012 5:10 pm

    ” If you hate political sleaze then you should prepared to criticise both sides, not just troll for one side only.”

    Agree!

  450. April 15, 2012 5:15 pm

    So first Thomson promised to provide a “comprehensive statement” and then refused, then he promised to cooperate fully with the investigation but refuses to be interviewed by police.

    Is that some kind of new version of “cooperation” we’re not familiar with….?

  451. Tony permalink
    April 15, 2012 5:22 pm

    I’m sure there’s a very reasonable explanation for Thomson’s not cooperating with the police. He probably just doesn’t want to incriminate himself.

    Oh, wait . . . 😯

  452. TB Queensland permalink
    April 15, 2012 5:55 pm

    ” If you hate political sleaze then you should prepared to criticise both sides, not just troll for one side only.”

    It is dangerous though … having been accused of being not only a right wing troll … but a right wing “mole” … I can assure you that saying it the way it is has its “ups and downs” …

    … strangely enough … even when you do say it the way it is … ‘tother side of posters don’t recognise it … only “your own” …

    … I’m not apolotical by any means but crap is crap … keep doing it and reporters will write about it …

    I read the article about the Olymipcs “boss” being upset … he referred to the PM as Julia … did anyone at that level ever refer to John Howard as John or PJK as Paul or Bob Hawke as Bob … maybe the latter … and Joh … but never Bob for menzies … Gough was a goer …

    … just sems strange … have a little whimper ’cause the PM wouldn’t come to you party but still call her by her first name … did Kevin set the modern precedence?

  453. Tom of Melbourne permalink
    April 15, 2012 5:56 pm

    I thought Thomson had previously said he would co-operate with the police.

    I suppose it’s just another broken commitment. He’s clocking up a few of them.

    People who don’t co-operate with police have no place in parliament. He’s a continuing blight.

  454. el gordo permalink
    April 15, 2012 5:57 pm

    ‘…but refuses to be interviewed by police.’

    Its all very well for you to sling off at Craig…his highly paid legal advisers have told him to keep his mouth shut and in his circumstances I would do the same.

    Not that I condone his behaviour.

  455. TB Queensland permalink
    April 15, 2012 6:01 pm

    Is that some kind of new version of “cooperation” we’re not familiar with….?

    I got the impression he thinks that the Police are investigating 2002 and he hasn’t been involved for eight years or some BS …

  456. April 15, 2012 6:02 pm

    If he has nothing to hide, why won’t he talk to the police…?

  457. el gordo permalink
    April 15, 2012 6:03 pm

    ‘Gough was a goer …’

    I blame Kevin 07 for this lack of respect for our leader Julia. This dumbing down of our chosen representative ….is unfortunate but understandable.

  458. Tom of Melbourne permalink
    April 15, 2012 6:05 pm

    If he’s unable to co-operate with police, then he has no place in parliament. People that get themselves elected on the basis of their values should resign in these circumstances. How on earth can he take responsibility for due diligence on legislation, if he looks for ways to duck co-operation with law enforcement?

    It’s yet another example of his lying.

  459. TB Queensland permalink
    April 15, 2012 6:16 pm

    G’day, ToMMy, fancy seeing you on this thread …

    People that get themselves elected on the basis of their values should resign in these circumstances.

    Ma-a-a-a-te, some of us saw Christine Payne on Insiders this morning … it really is about time you wrote some original material, instead of just regurgitating the latest Liberal party line … (badly too, BTW)

    … its almost like a fkn Tupperware Party … (“they told the same joke last week at, Glorias”)

    iView Insiders (starts 21:33) re ToMMy’s (LOL) post above …

    http://www.abc.net.au/iview/#/view/913750

  460. Splatterbottom permalink
    April 15, 2012 6:21 pm

    “did anyone at that level ever refer to John Howard as John”

    Keating, Albanese and Latham all referred to him as “LIttle Johhny Howard”. I am utterly sickened by this type of brazen rodentophobia!

    And a lot of her Labor colleagues referred to her as “Julia”, particularly in that phase where they tried to humanise her.

  461. Tony permalink
    April 15, 2012 6:23 pm

    ‘rodentophobia’

    😆

  462. Tom of Melbourne permalink
    April 15, 2012 6:30 pm

    Perhaps address the actual issue?

  463. TB Queensland permalink
    April 15, 2012 6:40 pm

    … but … but … The Little Rodent was name used by HIS OWN … I am utterly sickened by this type of brazen rodentophobia!

    Love the sarcasm, bumbomb!

  464. TB Queensland permalink
    April 15, 2012 6:40 pm

    I see, Little ToMMy is still here too …

  465. Splatterbottom permalink
    April 15, 2012 7:16 pm

    “The Little Rodent was name used by HIS OWN”

    and the “Julia” name was used by her own, as was “Bob” & “Paul” and “Gough” (when he wasn’t being called “Comrade”.

    The media also had their moments: Fraser was “Trouserman”, and there was a classic National Times front page after Billy McMahon was booted from office. It had a picture of him in a white suit under the headline “Gay Lib Bites Dust”. Mungo Macallum famously and brilliantly referred to Howard as “The Unflushable Turd”.

    For pure sexism you can’t go past Latham’s “Skanky Ho” comment about Janet Albrechtsen.

    What I don’t get is why all the fuss now about calling the PM by her name when it is merely following the lead of her colleagues.

  466. TB Queensland permalink
    April 15, 2012 7:19 pm

    I do agree, bumbomb, it was just an observation (or two) …

    Next time I have tea with the Queen I shall simply refer to her as Liz … no difference really (well, to me anyway) …

  467. Splatterbottom permalink
    April 15, 2012 7:34 pm

    Ah – Dreaming of the Queen:

  468. Tom of Melbourne permalink
    April 15, 2012 10:55 pm

    Thomson is unable to resolve the conflict between his personal legal problems and his responsibilities as a legislator, he’s got to go.

    A legislator, community leader, representative of thousands of people, should vacate their seat if they feel it necessary to decline to co-operate with law enforcement agencies.

    He’s a sleaze, a skid mark on parliament.

  469. Meta permalink
    April 16, 2012 8:05 am

    Christopher Pyne says some curious things sometimes…

    ”Julia Gillard can’t possibly stand by again surely and say this has got nothing to do with her, and like Pontius Pilate wash her hands of Craig Thomson.”

  470. TB Queensland permalink
    April 16, 2012 8:38 am

    ToMMy @ April 15, 2012 6:05 pm

    If he’s unable to co-operate with police, then he has no place in parliament. People that get themselves elected on the basis of their values should resign in these circumstances. How on earth can he take responsibility for due diligence on legislation, if he looks for ways to duck co-operation with law enforcement?

    It’s yet another example of his lying.

    ToMMY @ April 15, 2012 10:55 pm


    Thomson is unable to resolve the conflict between his personal legal problems and his responsibilities as a legislator, he’s got to go.

    A legislator, community leader, representative of thousands of people, should vacate their seat if they feel it necessary to decline to co-operate with law enforcement agencies.

    He’s a sleaze, a skid mark on parliament.

    Note the Liberal Party barracker … “da man’s gotta to go” … “da man’s gotta to go” … ranting … its like an awful rap song …

    We know it’s all about getting him out of Parliament, ToMMy, but constant repeat of the same tune won’t make it happen any faster …

    And you may as well tell your, Neil Team, the same when they drop into your Young Liberal Centre …

    +++++++++++++

    This fkn comment box is driving me up the wall too! Keeps on contracting and expanding …

  471. Tom of Melbourne permalink
    April 16, 2012 9:19 am

    OK TB, just tell us, do you think it’s fine for a member of parliament to decline to co-operate with law enforcement agencies?

  472. Splatterbottom permalink
    April 16, 2012 9:29 am

    “We know it’s all about getting him out of Parliament, ToMMy, but constant repeat of the same tune won’t make it happen any faster …

    Indeed. This is all about soulless careerists hanging on to power. Ordinary concepts like honesty, decency and integrity no longer apply. If an ALP pollie was caught raping a poodle in Martin Place at lunchtime it would still take years to investigate and the usual suspects would be shilling for her and tut-tutting about the presumption of innocence. There would be learned discussion about whether that particular use of a strap-on was merely the kindly act of giving a dog a bone.

    Sleaze like this is normal in Unionland. There is no sense of shame so long as power is maintained.

    Gillard is just pissing in our faces with her statements of complete confidence in Thomson. She knows we know she is lying. With good cause she will go down as one of our most mocked and hated PMs.

  473. TB Queensland permalink
    April 16, 2012 11:12 am

    That’s three posts this morning I’ve lost! Wasting time …

  474. April 16, 2012 5:04 pm

    “That’s three posts this morning I’ve lost!”

    Fair Work Australia are looking into that.

  475. April 16, 2012 5:19 pm

    “That’s three posts this morning I’ve lost!”

    Forgetfulness is a terrible thing. I’ve lost three cups of coffee today.

  476. April 16, 2012 5:27 pm

    “Forgetfulness is a terrible thing”

    Indeed, and then when they attempt to “blame others” for their own forgetfulness…

    It’s sad in a way, the onset of dementia, the best you can do is just humour them and remind yourself that they are “our” older Australians..

  477. April 16, 2012 5:48 pm

    Indeed, and then when they attempt to “blame others” for their own forgetfulness…

    I’ve forgotten what we’re talking about. 😦

    Who can I blame?

  478. April 16, 2012 6:05 pm

    Blame for what…?

  479. TB Queensland permalink
    April 16, 2012 6:06 pm

    Fuckwits™

  480. TB Queensland permalink
    April 16, 2012 6:08 pm

    Who invented this fkn yo-yo comment box?

    I notice the “you’ll feel better” has gone from the header … I fkn know why! 🙄

  481. TB Queensland permalink
    April 16, 2012 6:11 pm

    I’d hang around (or is that up and down) but I have a meeting to go to … life doesn’t stop when your retired y’know … 😀

  482. Tom of Melbourne permalink
    April 16, 2012 8:15 pm

    TB, do you think it is ok for a legislator to refuse to co-operate with law enforcement agencies?

    That’s hardly a partisan question, it’s simply about ethics.

    There’s a basic conflict if an MP decides that they lack commitment to law enforcement. So it’s time for Thomson to go.

  483. TB Queensland permalink
    April 17, 2012 9:03 am

    ToMMy … I actually spent ten minutes yesterday answering your question and the lot just dissapeared … I’ll make a full statement later … 😀

    (Seriously I come back later this am)

  484. el gordo permalink
    April 20, 2012 8:16 am

    I blame the Fairfax vendetta…

    ‘The confidential settlement, obtained by the Herald, shows that in September 2010 the union agreed to pay $129,555 in entitlements plus $30,000 to settle a defamation claim Mr Thomson had brought against the union and its national secretary, Kathy Jackson.’

    Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/political-news/thomson-received-secret-payment-of-160000-after-he-left-hsu-20120419-1xa41.html#ixzz1sWjvG1N2

  485. Tom of Melbourne permalink
    April 20, 2012 8:56 am

    All this must be terribly disappointing to all those who gave Craig such vociferous and unqualified support, such as the Prime Minister, and a range of blog contributors.

    It seems that just about everything that has been alleged about his unsavoury behaviour is true (on the balance of probabilities).

    So in addition to having the union (ie the hospital workers) pay for –
    • Various visits to brothels, and
    • A couple of dozen airfares for his wife’s travel, and
    • Huge sums in cash withdrawal for personal expenditure, and
    • Personal retail purchases, and
    • Secret commissions…

    …Craig sued them! And the union settled with a HUGE payment to him (also paid for by the hospital workers).

    Still, that stuff is hardly worth talking about on a political blog.

  486. el gordo permalink
    April 20, 2012 9:22 am

    ‘… the ALP’s NSW head office paid $150,000 of Mr Thomson’s legal bills to stop him being bankrupted, which would have automatically excluded him from political office, leading to the likely collapse of the government.’

    This is the crux of the matter …its the stench of political corruption.

  487. Splatterbottom permalink
    April 20, 2012 10:18 am

    The HSU would have taken legal advice, at least on the defo payout. I wonder which firm it was and whether the PM worked there when she was young and naïve.

  488. James of North Melbourne permalink
    April 20, 2012 10:19 am

    This is not just about protecting a Government. This is about protecting a bunch of individuals. Thompson knows that if he goes down, so do plenty of others. I reckon there is a huuuuuge payment coming his way after the next election.

  489. James of North Melbourne permalink
    April 20, 2012 10:23 am

    Wrong firm, Splatter. HSU affiliated with another firm.

  490. Splatterbottom permalink
    April 20, 2012 10:31 am

    Just a thought. There has been a connection – they did the audit report with BDO and they have worked with the HSU before.

  491. April 20, 2012 10:58 am

    “I reckon there is a huuuuuge payment coming his way after the next election.”

    *guffaw…

    Spectacular speculation ejaculation.

  492. TB Queensland permalink
    April 20, 2012 11:13 am

    Mmmm … the newspaper paid up and the HSU paid up … ya don’t reckon on the balance of probabilities that he may have been able to sustain a defamation action and that’s why?

    Just sayin …

    From: Thomson, Craig (MP)
    Sent: Wednesday, June 08, 2011 12:39 PM
    To: Thomson, Craig (MP)
    Subject: Fairfax v Thomson

    Dear Colleagues

    I am writing to you as you may have seen reports in the Fairfax press regarding my defamation action. The article was totally inaccurate and wrong. The facts are as follows:

    1. I took defamation action against the Health Services Union and separate action against Fairfax;

    2. The HSU settled on a confidential basis with me some six months ago. Whilst it was a confidential settlement it was one that I was very happy with and as a consequence withdrew my legal action;

    3. Over a month ago I reached a confidential agreement with Fairfax. This was reported in the press and the agreement filed in court as a settlement of my matters and again the legal matters where withdrawn. As with the HSU settlement I was very happy with the outcome.

    4. An AEC investigation cleared me of the allegations raised by Fairfax regarding electoral spending

    5. I have always strenuously denied the allegations made against me and I continue to do so.

    It is clear that Fairfax have both defamed me again and breached and misrepresented a confidential deed that settled the matter between me and Fairfax. I have now been referred this matter again to my lawyers.

    I thank you for your continued support in this matter and hope this corrects the grossly inaccurate and misleading reporting in the Fairfax media.

    Yours faithfully

    Craig Thomson

  493. James of North Melbourne permalink
    April 20, 2012 11:26 am

    Nice one, Splatter, it appears I could be wrong. One of the other big 4 (MB) refer to referrals from the HSU on their testimonial page. From that I assumed the affiliation. Perhaps it is a branch affiliation rather than all encompassing.

  494. Splatterbottom permalink
    April 20, 2012 11:37 am

    TB: “Mmmm … the newspaper paid up”

    You are as wrong as you can be on that one. In fact Thomson paid Farfax to go away.

    Thomson said:

    Over a month ago I reached a confidential agreement with Fairfax. This was reported in the press and the agreement filed in court as a settlement of my matters and again the legal matters where withdrawn. As with the HSU settlement I was very happy with the outcome.

    Also:

    ”He looked me in the eye and told me he won,” a minister has previously told Fairfax.

    The settlement was that Thomson pay Fairfax’s legal bill (about $200k) and that judgement be entered in favour of Fairfax. In no sane universe did Thomson “win”. And the only way he would be “very happy” with that outcome is if the alternative was worse for him, which it probably was. The cross-examination would have been gold.

    Note the slimy twist of “legal matters were withdrawn”. What he meant was that he withdrew his claim and agreed that judgment should be entered for Fairfax.

    Got that, TB. Fairfax didn’t pay Thomson. Thomson paid Fairfax. But Thomson didn’t have the money so the ALP funded the payment to Fairfax in the region of $200k.

    The reason the ALP ponied up the money might well have been that otherwise Thomson would have had to give evidence under oath. One thing is certain, if Thomson was in the right then it would have been far cheaper not to pay Fairfax and continue the case.

  495. armchair opinionator permalink
    April 20, 2012 11:38 am

    All this must be terribly disappointing to all those who gave Craig such vociferous and unqualified support, such as the Prime Minister, and a range of blog contributors.

    Why?

    Thomson has his battles with the HSU, we know that, why should it bother anyone either way?

    I might just add that it is terribly partisan of you to somehow turn it all arse about and manage to blame Thomson when he obviously would have won the case, hence the payout. It is Kathy Jackson costing the members money if she is shooting off her mouth and making the HSU liable for defamation action. Don’t you get that? Your seething need to grab a scalp is blinding you to all reason.

    I recall the media reports of the HSU with-holding Thomson’s entitlements when he left their employ. I think it was about $100,000 odd [not sure offhand]. Have you considered that maybe Thomson has a fairly strong case, if he can sue for what is being said about him by Jackson and to get his workplace entitlements back which were obviously wrongly with-held?

  496. armchair opinionator permalink
    April 20, 2012 11:46 am

    Got that, TB. Fairfax didn’t pay Thomson. Thomson paid Fairfax. But Thomson didn’t have the money so the ALP funded the payment to Fairfax in the region of $200k.

    Aren’t we talking about two different events here? One is Thomson vs the HSU [Jackson] and the other is Thomson vs Fairfax [which Labor paid to make it go away].

    Who knows? He may have won over Fairfax too, but the court case would have bankrupted him and Labor wouldn’t take the risk. He obviously thinks himself on strong ground.

  497. Splatterbottom permalink
    April 20, 2012 11:50 am

    Armie see my previous comment. Thomson didn’t have a strong case. That is why he paid Fairfax out. If he had a strong case he could have gone on with it. Most of the expense had been incurred by the time he walked out which, coincidentally, was shortly before he had to bite the bullet and give evidence under oath. It is curious though why the HSU settled. Must have been on legal advice.

  498. Splatterbottom permalink
    April 20, 2012 11:56 am

    “Who knows? He may have won over Fairfax too, but the court case would have bankrupted him and Labor wouldn’t take the risk. He obviously thinks himself on strong ground.”

    If Labor had any confidence in his case at all they would have waited until the end of the case to bail him out. The costs of the case had largely been incurred in preparing it for hearing and the preliminary issues had already been before the court.

    “He obviously thinks himself on strong ground.”

    This the same cynically delusional man who looked a minister in the eye and told him he’d won??? When he had judgment entered against him. For pity’s sake stop digging.

  499. armchair opinionator permalink
    April 20, 2012 12:13 pm

    For pity’s sake stop digging.

    Not me who is digging :lol:, Not me who so badly wants thomson charged with a crime.

    The police wouldn’t charge him either.

    http://vexnews.wordpress.com/

    …Fundamentally, expenses claims are not necessarily theft unless there’s a clear breach of guidelines and an intention to steal. If it were otherwise, we’d have plenty of empty ritzy restaurants and plenty of full jail-cells…

    …That all depends on whether it was correctly approved. It doesn’t make it right, but that was never what this little fracas was about. It was about whether an MP had committed a crime and whether he’d therefore be ineligible to serve in Parliament and therefore his fragile minority government would break. That’s now clearly not going to happen.

    While Thomson will be relieved, there’ll be little joy for the father-to-be. He’s taken the mother of all hidings. And all because of a letter sent by his successor’s lawyers which mysteriously found it’s way into Mark Davis’s hands…

    …The truth is that in the eyes of the law, Craig Thomson did nothing wrong. He has now been cleared of a crime he did not commit. Justice has been done.

    He had powerful enemies though. And perhaps unwisely got between punchy Tony Abbott and the shiny keys to the Lodge. A health hazard, indeed…

    Gee, i wonder how Tony Abbott’s dinner with ‘friend’ Greg Sheridan was paid, hope it wasn’t on the taxpayer!

  500. TB Queensland permalink
    April 20, 2012 12:16 pm

    No-one is “digging” … unlike you we’re discussing the pro’s and con’s … that’s what you don’t get … I for one, dislike the man and his behaviour …

    Why would a newspaper accept a “settlement” and not simply pursue the “truth” … does that mean that the Herald is only in it for the money …

    … something doesn’t make sense … I don’t know any newspaper (even a modern wannabe) that would just roll over and have its tummy tickled if it had a politician on the run … especially one in minority government … you could almost see and hear the slavering and dribble coming from an editor’s office …

    … unless of course the Herald is part of the consipracy … 😯

  501. TB Queensland permalink
    April 20, 2012 12:18 pm

    Gee, i wonder how Tony Abbott’s dinner with ‘friend’ Greg Sheridan was paid, hope it wasn’t on the taxpayer!

    And the lunches with Archbishop Pell would simply donations to the Catholic Church … with a bit of altar wine supplied of course …

  502. Splatterbottom permalink
    April 20, 2012 12:24 pm

    It is not me who is defending this hopelessly compromised grub, Armie. As I said earlier he may get off on a technicality, but however you slice and dice it, using members’ funds to pay for brothel excursions is rotten and wrong. There is clear prima facie evidence that he did this. He owes us the explanation he promised us, and in the absence of that, I am entitled to draw my own conclusions, not only about him, but about our wilfully and conveniently blind PM who has complete confidence in him (just as, no doubt, she had complete confidence in Wilson when AWU funds went missing) and also about every member of the government who stands idly by reaping the benefits of office while this sick Unionland charade is being played out.

    And AbbottAbbottAbbott is not an answer.

  503. armchair opinionator permalink
    April 20, 2012 12:29 pm

    He also stung the taxpayer for travel expenses while flogging his book “Abbottlines”.

    But that’s different, no mud can ever stick to a conservative who has the media on side.

  504. armchair opinionator permalink
    April 20, 2012 12:48 pm

    …If Labor had any confidence in his case at all they would have waited until the end of the case to bail him out. The costs of the case had largely been incurred in preparing it for hearing and the preliminary issues had already been before the court…

    Yes, and it was those costs that Labor paid.

    [wiki] …Thomson continued to deny accusations of impropriety and Fairfax Media’s claims were never tested or proven at trial: shortly before the defamation trial was due to begin in April 2011, a notice of discontinuance was filed on Thomson’s behalf with the New South Wales Supreme Court.[12] Thomson claimed that he had reached an out-of-court settlement with Fairfax Media and continued to deny any allegation of impropriety made against him;[13] Fairfax Media claimed that Thomson had “dropped” the case and maintained all allegations made against him.[12] It was subsequently revealed that the Australian Labor Party had contributed towards Thomson’s legal costs in the actions.[1]…

  505. Splatterbottom permalink
    April 20, 2012 12:50 pm

    TB: “Why would a newspaper accept a “settlement” and not simply pursue the “truth””

    Obviously (from your earlier comments about legal history) you don’t know much about the law. In this case Fairfax fought the case to the bitter end. Thomson withdrew his claim and (forgive me for using bold her just in case you miss the point again) judgment was entered for Fairfax. That is all they can do. If someone brings a claim against you and then withdraws it, pays your costs and asks the court to enter judgment in your favour, that is the end of the matter. Finito. You can’t then drag Thomson into court and make him give evidence. And it was precisely this last point that was no doubt uppermost in the minds of Thomson and the ALP when the case was settled.

    Armie, I’m not the one trying to defend this grub. Given he has failed to explain himself, and given that his army of arselickers has not given one plausible explanation for his conduct, it is appropriate for people to base their views on the uncontradicted evidence of Thomson’s sleaze.

    They are also entitled to judge the conduct of our willfully blind PM who could require Thomson to explain himself to parliament and the conduct of every member of this rotten government who enjoy the benefits of office by turning a blind eye to this.

    This is Unionland and it stinks to high heaven.

  506. Splatterbottom permalink
    April 20, 2012 1:16 pm

    Armie: “Fairfax Media’s claims were never tested or proven at trial”

    This is precisely because rather than test them in court and take the stand and contradict them, Thomson paid out Fairfax and agreed to have judgment entered in favour of Fairfax. If Thomson believed he had a case he could have taken the stand, explained what $2k gets you in a Sydney brothel these days, and why it was OK for him to spend the HSU’s money on it or perhaps, more improbably, how his licence, credit card and phone we stolen for a few hours and then returned to him all unbeknownst to him or. But it seems he didn’t want to take the stand, just like he doesn’t want to co-operate with the cops.

  507. TB Queensland permalink
    April 20, 2012 1:27 pm

    Obviously (from your earlier comments about legal history) you don’t know much about the law.

    ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ … you can be a nasty piece of work … snide comments but no back up …

    Thomson paid out Fairfax and agreed to have judgment entered in favour of Fairfax.

    Then the paper is free to write what it wants … my learned friend … but it hasn’t …

  508. Tom of Melbourne permalink
    April 20, 2012 2:33 pm

    Any issues concerning Kathy Jackson and Williams are serious, and I’m quite happy to discuss them.

    However, Thomson is the one who (on the balance of probability) spent union (ie hospital workers) money on prostitutes, dozens of airfares for his wife, personal shopping, cash withdrawals, secret commissions…

    He then stood sought to become a pillar of the community (a member of parliament), and committed to making a comprehensive statement to refute the allegations.

    While there may be plenty of dirt on the others, it is the behaviour of Thomson as an MP that provokes the discussion, not to mention Gillard’s “complete confidence “ in him.

  509. Tom of Melbourne permalink
    April 20, 2012 2:34 pm

    He then stood sought to become a pillar of the community

  510. Splatterbottom permalink
    April 20, 2012 2:52 pm

    It wasn’t that snide, TB. Probably about as snide as “…my learned friend….”. The quote I gave you explains the history about as succinctly as is possible.

    “Then the paper is free to write what it wants … my learned friend … but it hasn’t”

    Wrong again, old cock.

    Here’s the thing – usually in a defamation settlement, especially one the plaintiff is “very happy” with, there is a retraction and apology. But in this case there was no retraction and no apology. Instead, the very next day, Fairfax restated the allegations against Thomson, including that Thomson was not fit to be a Federal MP, and said that they stood by them. So, contrary to your assertion, the paper was and is clearly free to write what it wants about Thomson.

  511. armchair opinionator permalink
    April 20, 2012 3:17 pm

    They are also entitled to judge the conduct of our willfully blind PM who could require Thomson to explain himself to parliament and the conduct of every member of this rotten government who enjoy the benefits of office by turning a blind eye to this.

    The voters will have their chance to express their dissatisfaction at the next election won’t they?

    This is Unionland and it stinks to high heaven.

    I disagree with that, there are plenty of parliamentarians on both sides who play the favours game, sell themselves and their constituents out for bribes and plenty more have thieved.

    And, if Tony Abbott had the same circumstances, a hung parliament, he would be doing exactly the same to stay in office, you’re kidding yourself if you think otherwise. You have some weird belief that the other side is somehow better and more principled, they are not. Tony Abbott has already a number of dirty deeds on public record, that was before he declared himself ‘a born again innocent’. It should be to his shame that he plays the grubbiest, dirtiest, nastiest politics of any politician. There is nothing too low for him to stoop to. Abbott would be an equal match for any union thug/grub.

    Howard has ensured that himself, Downer and the AWB execs will never face justice for their crimes. That stinks.

  512. Tom of Melbourne permalink
    April 20, 2012 3:37 pm

    ”if Tony Abbott had the same circumstances, a hung parliament, he would be doing exactly the same to stay in office

    I think you’re right, which is why politicians in general are repugnant to voters, certainly to me. However, the fact is that Abbott isn’t doing this right now. Thomson and Gillard are the ones surrounded by the stench.

    But the nauseating stench is compounded by so much duplicity-
    • Knifing of Rudd
    • Breach of promise with Wilkie
    • “no carbon tax”
    • Multiple others that I won’t bother to list out of respect to those that don’t want to hear about them again.

    Thomson is simply the current example of dishonesty in this government, and the issue is getting entirely warranted attention.

  513. Splatterbottom permalink
    April 20, 2012 3:40 pm

    Three points, Armie:

    1. The people are entitled to form their opinion now. The only reason we are being strung along is because Labor prefers to piss in our faces with this grotesque circus in order to maintain their power. That they are defiling parliament in the process doesn’t seem to bother them at all.

    2. The voters will indeed express their anger at this corrupt charade. Gillard will leave office rightly ridiculed and reviled by the Australian people.

    3. AbbottAbbottAbbott isn’t an answer to this debasement of democracy. At best it is an evasion, albeit understandable, since there is absolutely no excuse with which to defend Labor’s disgraceful behaviour.

  514. armchair opinionator permalink
    April 20, 2012 4:19 pm

    But the nauseating stench is compounded by so much duplicity-
    • Knifing of Rudd
    • Breach of promise with Wilkie
    • “no carbon tax”
    • Multiple others that I won’t bother to list out of respect to those that don’t want to hear about them again.

    I don’t disagree with you on that tomm, I know that I was unhappy about the Wilkie breach and the knifing of Rudd. I don’t know how much Gillard is to blame for it personally or whether she is wearing the blame for the cowardice under pressure of the right wing union brotherhood. I am continually astonished at how much pressure is applied to government through lobbying by industry. It is this obscene and undemocratic interference in government that needs to be stamped out. I can’t see why unions can be given such a bad name yet industry power and behaviour goes unchecked and unregulated. We have all become victims of corporate bullying re wilkie, the carbon tax and the knifing of Rudd (mining). I wish someone would stand up to it, my only hope is that The Greens might offer some resistance.

    Gillard’s the leader though, so the blame goes with the job that the right wing unions put her into.

    Can’t say I’m unhappy about the carbon tax though – I love it!

    The voters will indeed express their anger at this corrupt charade. Gillard will leave office rightly ridiculed and reviled by the Australian people.

    So be it. Howard was too.

  515. armchair opinionator permalink
    April 20, 2012 4:43 pm

    That they are defiling parliament in the process doesn’t seem to bother them at all.

    Oh splatter, you’re such a quaint romantic, like it’s never been defiled before in the most hypocritical of ways imaginable. It’s all a big stage show and the actors only have to memorise their lines from the pages of a script!

  516. James of North Melbourne permalink
    April 20, 2012 4:56 pm

    Howard has ensured that himself, Downer and the AWB execs will never face justice for their crimes. That stinks.

    Actually I understood Rudd, once he got into power, was going to expose that whole thing. I wonder what happened? With all the Thommo mud, you’d think it would be gloves off. Certainly was when they were fuelling riots. One has to assume that upoon investigation, there was nothing to see.

  517. Splatterbottom permalink
    April 20, 2012 5:12 pm

    “Howard was too.”

    Indeed. Got what he deserved, but too late.

  518. Splatterbottom permalink
    April 20, 2012 5:16 pm

    “you’re such a quaint romantic”

    True enough. I prefer my innocence to loyalty to any party. I always give the new ones a chance, but they always disappoint (other then Hawke and Keating).

    It is a fair bet that 6 months after Abbott gets in I will have it in for him as well. In fact I don’t really see how it can possibly work, but it has to be better than this lot.

  519. April 20, 2012 5:42 pm

    I doubt that he (Abbott) will be better in any way, and will probably be worse in many…but, sadly, the current lot have done a fair bit to ensure that they’ve forfeited the right to remain; in the eyes of your ‘average’, politically disengaged punter, leastways.

  520. April 20, 2012 5:45 pm

    The true amusement will come in watching those who’ve wailed about Gillard ad infinitum, since she became the badge for the ALP, applying the same sort of indignance to Abbott’s inevitable cockshining.

    Or, more likely, watching those mentioned perform the same evasive contortions which they’ve spent a lot of time accusing the Laborphiles of undertaking.
    Self awareness isn’t a strong trait amongst political barrackers.

    I don’t think it’s unique to either side.

  521. Tony permalink
    April 20, 2012 5:59 pm

    “Self awareness isn’t a strong trait amongst political barrackers.

    I don’t think it’s unique to either side.”

    Funny you should mention that.

  522. Meta permalink
    April 20, 2012 6:00 pm

    (Speaking of Lord Carnarvon, and in the spirit of hypotheticals, I came across this in my excavations of British legalisms: surcharge. I guess a step up, or a step down, from that might be (sur)charge and fine.)

  523. el gordo permalink
    April 20, 2012 7:00 pm

    Abbott gets a lot of flack from the barrackers and endless streams of abuse from cafe dwellers.

    Its important to keep in mind that he will ultimately be controlled by the next president of the Liberal Party, who has every intention of keeping the Coalition in power for a decade.

    They will do popular and progressive things in terms of infrastructure, but little social engineering.

  524. Neil of Sydney permalink
    April 20, 2012 7:12 pm

    One has to assume that upoon investigation, there was nothing to see.

    Yep. But they will keeep bringing it up. They will say someone is innocent until proven guilty unless that someone is from the Coalition. They will continue to smear the Coalition about AWB just because they like to.

    Rudd (and now Carr) should be damned because they are sitting in the Foreign Ministers Office.

    Put up Mr Rudd since you damned Downer when in Opposition or come out and apologise for your false allegations.

  525. April 20, 2012 8:38 pm

    Interesting linked article, Tony.

    “Conservatives react more strongly to signs of danger, including threat of germs and contamination, and even white noise.”

    They reflexively piss their knickers. 😆

    “conservatives tend to be, on average, more fearful, unimaginative, unadventurous and, who knows, probably sexually inadequate too.”

    guffaw!

    “Since the conscious mind’s job is to justify the choices it has made, we are prone to confirmation bias, seeing what it wants to see our, and our mind treats contradictory evidence as a threat.”

    Readily apparent on political blogs, methinks. 😉

  526. Tony permalink
    April 20, 2012 8:49 pm

    😯

    I liked this bit . . .

    ‘Being proved correct provides us with a dopamine hit, which is why obsessed politicos and bloggers trawl the internet looking for anything to prove them right.

    ‘“If this is true,” says Haidt: “then it would explain why extreme partisans are so stubborn, closed-minded, and committed to beliefs that often seem bizarre or paranoid. Like rats that cannot stop pressing a button, partisans may be simply unable to stop believing weird things. The partisan brain has been reinforced so many times for performing mental contortions that free it from unwanted beliefs. Extreme partisanship may be literally addictive.”’

  527. Meta permalink
    April 20, 2012 11:06 pm

    (Haidt does seem to hold forth some odd views, indeed: Jonathan Haidt on the moral roots of liberals and conservatives.)

  528. TB Queensland permalink
    April 21, 2012 10:13 am

    Wo ho … here’s another one for you all to play with …

    http://www.news.com.au/national/peter-slipper-to-defend-claims-of-sexual-advances/story-e6frfkvr-1226334819088

    Guilty without a doubt!*

    *sarcasm alert.

  529. James of North Melbourne permalink
    April 21, 2012 10:20 am

    Yes, TB, I was wondering when that would be raised. It’s slightly different in that the allegations are not quite as serious (in my view) but the ramifications could be worse.

    In truth, assuming the veracity of the various allegations, it reflects poorly on both political parties. Slipper, if the allegations are true, has clearly been somewhat of a creep for some time and it’s damning of the Howard Government that he remained in Parliament for the length of time that he did. Unless it can be shown that the allegations were investigated and found to be false, in which case they were right to stick with him. I doubt this.

    But what were Labor doing picking him up? They knew he stank. I really don’t think this Government has one redeeming feature.

  530. Tom of Melbourne permalink
    April 21, 2012 10:31 am

    No surprises with Slipper. The government knew exactly what they were dealing with. All the allegations about his personal behaviour and expense rorting were well known.

    So if it all lands the government in the crap, it’s crap they would have expected.

    Equally, if he’s remained with the opposition, the government would use all this against them.

  531. Splatterbottom permalink
    April 21, 2012 10:43 am

    Slipper has been bought and paid for by the government. They knew they were buying damaged goods when they bought him off and in the process stabbed and humiliated a good and decent man in Harry Jenkins.

    Is there nothing these grubs will not do to stay in power?

  532. James of North Melbourne permalink
    April 21, 2012 11:45 am

    Still, the question does need to be asked. How did he manage preselection in 2007 and 2010? As far as I’m concerned, a swift sacking back in 2003 or 2004 assuming the allegations carried weight would have actually done the Coalition some good. Yet they chose to hang onto him. Or is it simply that none of the allegations on their own carry much weight, but looked at collectively have become a camel back breaking pile of straw?

    I have had one brief look at what Tony posted on the other subject and I have to say that whilst creepy, I’m not entirely certain that any great offences have been committed. Leaving aside the obvious matrimonial issues, if I were keen on a young lady (and remember that such interest creates, in and of itself, a level of confusion in the mind about the feelings of the other person) I’m not sure that the rejections as represented in the various bits of correspondence are necessarily that clear.

    Mrs Sancty played absolute havoc with my head for six months before we finally got together. My persistence in the face of two or three knockbacks could quite easily, if the knockbacks had proven to be overwhelmingly genuine, been regarded as harrassment. But I read the lay of the land, accused her directly of traffic policing (stop/go) and eventually won out.

    Now I wouldn’t vote for Slipper as my local member in a month of Sundays, I don’t care what political party he represents, because I think the bloke is a creep. But there’s a fair sized gulf between creepiness (which is subjective) and straight out harrassment or illegal conduct (which should be objective).

  533. el gordo permalink
    April 21, 2012 1:01 pm

    Nicely put James and I expect slippery Pete will live up to his reputation.

    The ‘traffic policing (stop/go)’ phenomenon may have its roots buried in our past, a question of survival, but in a modern perspective it might be seen as harassment.

    In the office a less intelligent male, driven by naive romantic emotions, might get the sack for being to forward.

  534. TB Queensland permalink
    April 21, 2012 1:58 pm

    It’s slightly different in that the allegations are not quite as serious (in my view)

    In what way, James … I read your own “personal” experiences but my understanding is that sexual harrassment is a personal assessment of the situation

    (I’ve been involved in three … terminated two – one on the spot … the other was inconclusive – he was however suspended – it was government commission) …

    BTW your posts are at least unbiased and objective … unlike the couple that followed … still points scoring …

    As for the “evidence” I tend to agree … and its all “one-way” … there needs to be demonstrable evidence that Slipper was called off in no uncertain terms … however, the “master/servant” relationship calls for a gretaer responsibility to fall on Slipper …

    … its always difficult for the “worker” when being harassed by the “manager” …

  535. TB Queensland permalink
    April 21, 2012 2:10 pm

    Just read the text messages (ToSY’s link), it could easily be interpreted as if , Ashby, was attempting to set, Slipper, up (or give him a come on) and then thought better of it … if that’s the case (ie just the texts) it seems pretty slim …

    Slippery all right! (Awful little egotist)

  536. James of North Melbourne permalink
    April 21, 2012 3:21 pm

    Well, TB, I think the Thompson allegations are more serious in that they involve the misappropriation of hundreds of thousands of dollars of union funds. Subs that were paid (probably mandatorily) for the protection of the working conditions of the members. I think, and this is only my read based on the scarce information available and my interpretation of the behaviours of those involved, that the Thompson thing will eventually expose wide and deep seated corruption within that Union and possibly others and eventually go a long way to explaining what I consider to be bizzare behaviour by Union leaders and politicians especially in NSW as well as, by lack of action, a tolerance of such more broadly.

    Now it may turn out that Thompson was innocent all along and the victim of a great big fraud, but if that were the case you’d think some info would have come out by now. It hasn’t, and he continues to sit in Parliament as a great embarrassment to himself, his family, and his party. That’s not something I could do so there must be a motivation.That motivation must be pretty big. Hence why I conclude that the real story is far bigger and involves far more people and that Thompson will be “compensated” down the track.

    I agree that there appears to be a hint of “fit up” in the Slipper thing. Particularly the text that challenges him to make clear what he wants. I’m not certain that Ashby comes with clean hands.

  537. TB Queensland permalink
    April 21, 2012 3:41 pm

    Agree with that, James … especially with “…not something I could do …”

    My dear old Mum (no longer here) was a real firebrand concerning lying and stealing … my nature (learning) is if you make a mistake, own up, cop the incoming and move on …

    Never failed for me yet … maybe that philosophy helps to prevent situations too …

    (Pity it didn’t work for my sister though … seven years my junior … lies, cheats, plots and no longer in my life … she’s a Mick though so she has/will be absolved) 🙄

    A bit more from my “Sure to Offend Everybody” email … seeing

    In the Pub the other day I was telling that old joke about what do you do if you see an epileptic having a fit in the bath?

    Answer. Throw in your washing.

    We were all having a good old laugh when this big bastard tapped me on the shoulder and said, ”I don’t find that very funny. My brother was an epileptic and he died in the bath during one of his fits”.

    I said, ” Sorry mate did he drown?”

    No he said, ” he choked on a sock ”.

  538. James of North Melbourne permalink
    April 21, 2012 3:45 pm

    Would you believe I had a sister that died in the bath during an epileptic fit?

    No joke, she really did.

    Doesn’t stop the joke being funny.

  539. October 23, 2012 4:32 pm

    I do not even understand how I finished up right here, but I thought this post was once good.
    I don’t recognise who you might be however definitely you’re going to a famous blogger for those
    who aren’t already. Cheers!

Go on say something...

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: