Examples of corruption in Australia

[old man emu]

3 hours ago, Jerry_Atrick said:

Looks like Morrison is going to be censured.

But not by the moral eunuchs sitting on the Opposition Benches.

[facthunter]

The dummy spitter's Party. They hand it out but can't take it.   Nev

[nomadpete]

Perhaps Mr Morrysong thought that parliamentary ministeries run the same way that other kinds of Song ministeries (ala religious ministries)?

 

Edited November 29, 2022 by nomadpete

[Jerry_Atrick]

18 minutes ago, nomadpete said:

Mr Morrysong

I see you've altered it enought to avoid a copyright claim, ol' chap! Ne'er mind.. carry on! 😉

 

[willedoo]

59 minutes ago, nomadpete said:

Mr Morrysong

I bet Mr Morrysong won't sing a sorry song.

[nomadpete]

I hear they only sing happy songs.

Songs from the hills.

[willedoo]

13 minutes ago, nomadpete said:

I hear they only sing happy songs.

Songs from the hills.

It keeps the evil one away.

[nomadpete]

11 minutes ago, willedoo said:

It keeps the evil one away.

But I thought the evil one likes loud music, parties, debauchery, sin, and all the vices of mortals.

He/she might be less corrupt and misleading than the righteous mob. (No offence intended intended to believers of either mob.)

[old man emu]

5 hours ago, nomadpete said:

But I thought the evil one likes loud music, parties, debauchery, sin, and all the vices of mortals.

It's the clapping he's afraid of.

[Marty_d]

Clap him in irons, I say.

[Jerry_Atrick]

Well, the Federal ICAC bill has passed both houses of parliament and will be sent to the GG for the formal nod to go. Adam Bandt has stated it weill be very busy in its first year. It still has hearings in secret, but maybe (hopefully) that will change over time.

 

 

[nomadpete]

One hopes that in a year or so, after the initial honeymoon period, some ethical person will propose amending the rules to allow secret hearings ONLY for rare issues of national security.

[old man emu]

I really feel that this "secret hearings" thing has been very poorly explained, and typically the pro-conservative Media has misrepresented the wording. Fortunately, unlike the Ten Commandments, our laws are not carved in stone, immutable for Time evermore. No Human law ever is. Perhaps, as you say, in a year or two, as experience is gained, amendments may be required. However, let us be happy that the conduct of all Federal Government employees from Prime Minister to toilet cleaner is subject to review.

 

The Bill passed unanimously. A cynical effort from the Opposition who would be damned by the People if they didn't support it, and damned by their Party for doing so. It would appear that there is only one Opposition member with Integrity, and that is the woman who remained in the House, deserted by the rest of the Party, to vote in favour of censoring Morrison.

[facthunter]

ALL Outcomes will be published and the Presiding person makes the decisions as to the format of the investigation. The fact the LNP agrees makes me a bit suspicious, but we will see.  Nev

[Jerry_Atrick]

14 hours ago, facthunter said:

he fact the LNP agrees makes me a bit suspicious, but we will see.

I agree, but without transparency, unless there's a whistleblower, at best we can hope is to be able to see with foggles that only half-work.  I haven't read the latest incarnation of the bill, but as I recall, the test for a public hearing is in exceptional circumstances - but what are they? If it were a public interest test, then surely each hearing would be in public.

 

Where there's opacity, there is an opportunity for corruption. Regardless of the evidence tendered and the way in which it was tendered or cross-examined, we only have what the final report says.. And that can be presented any which way they like. As an example, scroll to 22:10 of this video of the Royal Commission on Robodebt.. The witness was the Dept. of Social Services senior lawyer at the time.. Listen to her testimony and watch her. She may just be naturally nervous, or she knows what was done was going to be poopey.

 

A report wont necessarily capture these salient subtleties and we again rely on people paid by the purse of government to administer justice to the government, but in secrecy, who knows what deals will be made:

 

[nomadpete]

1 hour ago, Jerry_Atrick said:

Where there's opacity, there is an opportunity for corruption.

Got it in one. And that explains why the bill got bi partisan support. At least it is a foot in the door.

[old man emu]

I've watched several videos from various Royal Commissions and Senate Estimates enquiries and the "I don't remember" response comes up very frequently when witnesses are backed against the wall. If you or I responded similarly to questions in day-to-day life, our families would be taking us for dementia diagnoses. 

 

Are our Government Departments staffed by sufferers of mental decay? I watched that woman pause regularly when asked a question before uttering those words. I could almost hear the mill stones of her mind grinding away at her real knowledge of events until she was able to push out that floury reply. Blind Freddy on a galloping horse could see that she was making porkies with the flour. And isn't it an offence to lie to a Royal Commission?

[Jerry_Atrick]

21 minutes ago, old man emu said:

And isn't it an offence to lie to a Royal Commission?

Deliberately - indeed. As the statements are made under oath, the offence is perjury. Of course, it has to be deliberate, and who would admit they actually could recall at the time of being asked. People do often recall things some time after being unable to. But given the resources the departments put into Robodebt, the importance of it for SFM (of which this does confirm he is a complete nutter to even concoct, or agree to such a method), it is impossible to believe she had as little recollection as she claims. 

 

45 minutes ago, nomadpete said:

At least it is a foot in the door.

Yes, that is one way to look at it. But, it didn't need partisan support, did it? Labor has a majority in the HoR, and there is enough cross-ben ch support in the senate to see it through. Murdoch press aside, it would be tough for the LNP to look anything other than corrupt if they tried to block it because it allowed trials in public to be the norm. Also, when they do get in again (not, if), it will be harder for them to revert to less transparent operations because transparency will be entrenched, and it will be on the record they were spitting chips at it being made transparent. 

 

But, maybe I am being too 'arsh... and you are right, at least it is a foot in the door. Maybe what Adam Bandt said, about it being a very first year or so of operation, was the reason for having the hearings in private - easier to get through that monumental road-block of cases.. Let's hope the early days are expedient and fair... but ewe have only their reports to judge it by.

[nomadpete]

I await the good news with baited breath. After all, the simple fact that neither party was keen on public hearings, suggests that both parties might have some dirty laundry that they don't want aired in public

[facthunter]

That is an assumption one could make. IF you are familiar with the trade union royal commission the LNP set up to get Gillard Shorten and Rudd you would be aware that the questions asked by the Counsel assisting were arranged to fit prepared front page headines even though the allegations were immediately withdrawn without prompting. The headlines read 
"IT was ALLEGED at the TURC today"  That Bill Shorten steals lollies from Babies' (OR something equally ridiculous) IT provided front page headlines right up to an election  and COST US 60 to 80 million dollars. It's all on record  that's all I will say about it.  Commenting Lawyers were astounded at the behaviour of the Commission in asking such "strange, out of the Blue, assertions.  Nev

Edited December 2, 2022 by facthunter

[Old Koreelah]

An encouraging story my wife found on FB; she’s a keen bowler and our club only has a few pokies, hidden away. Some clubs we’ve been to are depressing places, probably because their glitzy upgrades are paid for by poor gambling addicts.

 

The Petersham Bowlo has found a way to cast off the tentacles of this evil industry:

[facthunter]

The ONLY gambling I do these days is driving to see the specialist's  in Melbourne. Nev

[Bruce Tuncks]

I was real sorry to hear that the " no pokies" lot have lost their seats. We should be moving in the opposite way and empowering them.

[spacesailor]

More important things in politics than gamblers! .

Like Alcoholism & Drug use ! .it,s  SELF-INFLICTED .

Last year I spent  " throw-Away money "  on a new house from ' MatorHospitanl lottery. '  LoL

i Don,t normaly gamble at all .

spacesailor

 

 

[facthunter]

They  are ALL harmful addictions that damage our society. . Nev