• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Julia Gillard - liar

A.A. Alfie said:
Any comments on the validity or otherwise of Labor MP Robert McClelland and his speech in Parliament?
Click to expand...

You mean this speech, when he was talking about this amendment?

Let me quote the summary of the bill:
Fair Work (Registered Organisations) Amendment Bill 2012 said:
Amends the Fair Work (Registered Organisations) Act 2009 to: require that the rules of all registered organisations deal with disclosure of remuneration, pecuniary and financial interests; increase civil penalties; strengthen the investigative powers of Fair Work Australia; and require education and training to be provided to officials of registered organisations about their governance and accounting obligations.
Click to expand...

Let me quote the portion of his speech that Senator Brandis thought was interesting enough to discuss the next day, since I doubt you're interested in the other ninety per cent:
In my experience, the vast majority of trade unions are professionally managed by highly competent and dedicated people who act on the basis of sound professional advice. But, regrettably, there have been exceptions to that. Officers have sought to obtain personal benefit, or benefit on behalf of others, at the expense of members of their union. Reported instances include not only misapplying funds and resources of the union but also using the privileges of their office to attract and obtain services and benefits from third parties.

Aside from issues of profiteering, secret commissions and tax avoidance, these undeclared benefits can compromise officials. Rather than diligently representing the interests of their members without fear or favour, they effectively 'run dead' as a result of these side deals. This is no less than graft and corruption in its most reprehensible form, and it occurs at the expense of vulnerable members whose interests they have been charged with representing.

To borrow the words of Prime Minister Gillard, speaking on ABC Radio on 9 May of this year:

Let me say I never want to see a dollar that a worker gives a union used for any purpose other than the proper purposes of representing that union member's best interests.​

Indeed, I know the Prime Minister is quite familiar with this area of the law; as lawyers in the mid-1990s, we were involved in a matter representing opposing clients...

...these issues also arose in those matters that I was involved with in the mid-1990s, which were filed in both the then Industrial Court of Australia and the Federal Court of Australia. There are a number of matters, generally under the name of Ludwig v Harrison and others, but probably most relevantly matter No. 1032 of 1996.
Click to expand...

In other words, as an introduction to his speech about a bill designed to reduce fraud/theft in unions, he talked about his experience and personal investment in the topic, and to demonstrate mentioned a case involving Bruce Wilson (although he didn't actually mention Wilson and somebody working for the Coalition would either have recognised the case or looked it up), and a remark that he worked against Gillard (not surprising since they weren't at the same law firm but evidently in the same geographic and legal area) which illustrates she also has experience and an investment in the topic.

That's it. Sure, it's valid, but it's not at all relevant to the "allegations" unless like Brandis you quote sentences out of context and read between the lines when there's nothing there.

Did you even bother to read it yourself before asking?
 
Newspoll data is out:
2 Party Preferred: ALP 47 (+1), LNP 53 (-1)
Primary Votes: ALP 35 (+2), LNP 45 (-), GRN 11 (+1) (AIUI, the +3 are from 'other', i.e. undecided)
Preferred PM: Gillard 38 (+2), Abbott 38 ()

Partially related: I've seen a few people suggest that Abbott should apologise in parliament to Craig Thomson, since Thomson has now been cleared of wrongdoing by the parliamentary privileges committee in a decision that will probably get far less press than the scurrilous Gillard allegations. Can anybody think of a word beginning with 'L' that Abbott might have to apologise for?

Pre-emptive md5 hash: 241CD7B4A30A73A1A475899D28C23D43
 
A.A. Alfie said:
So what lie did he tell? What exactly are you alluding to? "Something abut the carbon tax" is pretty vague, don't you think?

What is the lie?
Click to expand...
When the lie is shown to you you say nothing.
A big inconvenient truth for you hey Alfie.
Maybe if you say nothing it will go away.
 
Newspoll is interesting today 53:47

My guess is that either Newspoll or Essential has produced a rogue this time.
 
I've heard on the radio this morning that Wilkie is calling for the Yabbie to make a statement about her time with Slater and Gordon.
 
Her Grey Eminence said:
Yes, that was the connection I made as well.

Julia Gillard does seem to have some distinctly Kathy Jackson characteristics about her.
Click to expand...

What you care to be more specific about the characteristics you think they share, and what sharing them would imply? I assume you're not referring to the fact that they're both female.
 
A.A. Alfie said:
Newspoll is interesting today 53:47

My guess is that either Newspoll or Essential has produced a rogue this time.
Click to expand...

Let's go back to November 2011:
A.A. Alfie said:
In a very good fortnight for the pm it's back to 55:45 on 2PP.

I reckon it's slightly off in terms of actual public sentiment.
Click to expand...

A.A. Alfie said:
On the back of what was (supposed to be) a great fortnight for Labor, I hear Newspoll has the coalition in the lead on 2PP 57:43 (link later).

They are definitely onto a winning strategy.

Worst PM ever.
Click to expand...
February 2012:
A.A. Alfie said:
One month since my last post
2PP 45:55
Labor seems to be falling again - wonder why? Their primary vote at a catastrophic 33% again
Click to expand...
July 2012:
A.A. Alfie said:
Essential report has the following:
<snip>
Things don't seem to be going to either Labor's or the Green's plans now do they?
Click to expand...
What a coincidence that you only think the results are suspect when Labor gains.
 
Hedley Thomas - he of the recent Styant-Browne exclusive - wrote an article about failures of an inquiry into the Wivenhoe Dam failure many months ago, and contended that the engineers were at fault, though this was disputed at the time.

Eventually the engineers in question were investigated by the Crimes and Misconduct Commission and it turns out that no, they weren't responsible after all.

It seems Mr Thomas' contention was incorrect. Perhaps he will apologise since this investigation would likely have not occurred if not for his reporting and overzealous claims. Why would a journalist even make a contention in a supposedly-objective news article? One wonders why.

(At this rate the poor well is going to be nothing but bleach.)
 
uvar said:
What you care to be more specific about the characteristics you think they share, and what sharing them would imply? I assume you're not referring to the fact that they're both female.
Click to expand...

Thats the only thing s/he could be referring to.
 
A.A. Alfie, do you have any comments on Robert McClelland's speech? You did ask about it, after all.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom