Corruption in the Liberal Party

[noco]

My friend I was on the Management board of the Salvation Army for 3 years...I am very familiar with the Sallies

I was a Rotarian at the time where the Rotary motto is "Service above self". Several Rotarians served the Salvation Army with honor as we did many other projects around the city.

 

[Ves]

In a country where people celebrate an outlaw as a major hero, I suppose it's not surprising.

Ignoring what folk lore says, it sounds more complicated than that to me.

After all, they had a royal commission into the actions of the police in the whole affair.

Like most things in life there is no moral clarity - just what certain groups choose to argue as the actual reality. There are no sides that are 100% correct, no matter how much people on either side of the coin pretend that this is the case to prove the moral belief for which they stand.

I am not sure if you realised it, but the Ned Kelly affair is highly relevant to this thread. Government / police corruption and criminal activity has not changed one bit since those retrospectively famous days.

 

[sydboy007]

We all have our own opinions and each and every one should accept the others opinion without prejudice or personal attacks.

I guess we will have to wait and see how the present government fairs in their remaining term and then judge them from there....I hope they do get another term because there is no way they can rectify the mess left by the previous Government in just 3 years.

I never said you support PPL, only that you support the PM who wants to introduce it. The 2 are very different. You made the same mistake as you did with my comments about the greens, and a number of people have told you the same.

How about we just condemn all corruption and stop trying the "they're badder than my team" argument. Most of us don't see much to distinguish either party from the other when it comes to corruption and jobs for mates.

Do you have proof that 95% of greens are rotten apples? I don't seem to remember any of them billing their political mates weddings to the tax payer, or say book signing tours.

So you don't think it's a problem we have around $128B in tax expenditures? Do you know what they are? Do you know what the top 3 or 4 are? Do you think they provide at least as much benefit to the economy as the revenue forgone?

Kudos to Gillard for increasing the retirement age to 67, unless of course you think it was bad policy? It will certainly need to be raised again in the future. As you point out we're living longer and will need to work longer. It is a bonus that continuing to work will also keep us healthier. My comment was relating to Hockey dog whistling on further increasing the retirement age to 70, criticising Labor for their cheap opposition of a good policy reform, and also criticising Abbott for not showing the leadership required to get the public discourse going that is required to show these changes are necessary if we want to stop a blow out of the budget deficit in the future.

We all have our own opinions and each and every one should accept the others opinion without prejudice or personal attacks.

You could tone down your attacks on anyone not beyond centre right then. Reread your comments about the greens and you'll hopefully understand what I'm saying. Loaded terms like Comrade are very prejudicial.

 

[sydboy007]

Ignoring what folk lore says, it sounds more complicated than that to me.

After all, they had a royal commission into the actions of the police in the whole affair.

Like most things in life there is no moral clarity - just what certain groups choose to argue as the actual reality. There are no sides that are 100% correct, no matter how much people on either side of the coin pretend that this is the case to prove the moral belief for which they stand.

I am not sure if you realised it, but the Ned Kelly affair is highly relevant to this thread. Government / police corruption and criminal activity has not changed one bit since those retrospectively famous days.

If anything it got worse till the states brought in various anti corruption / integrity bodies to stamp out the extreme abuse of police power.

Probably one of the worst recent cases of police coverups was the 2012 beating of Corey Barker in the ballina police station, with the police trying to destroy video evidence that was latter restored by the police prosecutor, which showed the true story of 4 police officers giving Corey Barker a pretty sever beating, with others not doing their duty to protect him. They all lied under oath. I was a bit disappointed to see that four of the officers are on restricted duty, one has been suspended and another has been medically discharged. Some jail time and losing their jobs seems a better punishment.

In todays SMH there's a whole other level of corruption where the elite get away with "murder."

http://www.smh.com.au/business/life...s-in-the-hands-of-lawyers-20140418-36w83.html

Ian Humphrey was cycling along a road north of Adelaide when he was hit and killed by barrister Eugene McGee. McGee fled the scene.

It later emerged that McGee had been at lunch. His party of three had ordered three bottles of wine, a glass of port and a glass of beer. He was found guilty of driving without due care and of failing to stop and render assistance after an accident. His penalty was a $3100 fine and a one-year driving ban.

Humphrey's widow Di complained to South Australia's Legal Practitioners Conduct Board. Five years later she got a reply. The conduct board found McGee's conduct was not of a sufficiently ''infamous nature'' as to be deemed unprofessional.

 

[banco]

If anything it got worse till the states brought in various anti corruption / integrity bodies to stamp out the extreme abuse of police power.

Probably one of the worst recent cases of police coverups was the 2012 beating of Corey Barker in the ballina police station, with the police trying to destroy video evidence that was latter restored by the police prosecutor, which showed the true story of 4 police officers giving Corey Barker a pretty sever beating, with others not doing their duty to protect him. They all lied under oath. I was a bit disappointed to see that four of the officers are on restricted duty, one has been suspended and another has been medically discharged. Some jail time and losing their jobs seems a better punishment.

[/I]

Still a far cry from police corruption in NSW in seventies and eighties. If you were a NSW cop in seventies and eighties you were either corrupt or turning a blind eye to corruption.

 

[SirRumpole]

Still a far cry from police corruption in NSW in seventies and eighties. If you were a NSW cop in seventies and eighties you were either corrupt or turning a blind eye to corruption.

Corruption in the police is a result of corruption of the politicians. Askin, Hinze, Bjelke Petersen, Terry Lewis , politicians and police feeding off each other.

 

[noco]

I never said you support PPL, only that you support the PM who wants to introduce it. The 2 are very different. You made the same mistake as you did with my comments about the greens, and a number of people have told you the same.

I made it clear to you, I do not support the PPL.......but I do support the current PM....there is a difference.

I was asked not to mention to the Labor socialist left, so that why I now refer to them as Comrades of the Greens

How about we just condemn all corruption and stop trying the "they're badder than my team" argument. Most of us don't see much to distinguish either party from the other when it comes to corruption and jobs for mates.

Blind Fredy could even see the difference between the two major parties.

Do you have proof that 95% of greens are rotten apples? I don't seem to remember any of them billing their political mates weddings to the tax payer, or say book signing tours.

I was referring to comrades of the Greens (Labors socialist lefties) ok. ...Stay tuned Syd....it will all come out in the wash very soon.

So you don't think it's a problem we have around $128B in tax expenditures? Do you know what they are? Do you know what the top 3 or 4 are? Do you think they provide at least as much benefit to the economy as the revenue forgone?

I don't know what you are referring to on this point.

Kudos to Gillard for increasing the retirement age to 67, unless of course you think it was bad policy? It will certainly need to be raised again in the future. As you point out we're living longer and will need to work longer. It is a bonus that continuing to work will also keep us healthier. My comment was relating to Hockey dog whistling on further increasing the retirement age to 70, criticising Labor for their cheap opposition of a good policy reform, and also criticising Abbott for not showing the leadership required to get the public discourse going that is required to show these changes are necessary if we want to stop a blow out of the budget deficit in the future.

Yes, I am fully in favor of raising the retirement age......My Grand Parents never made 70......my parents just made 80.....In my era now, many of us will see 90 plus......My children will most likely see 100......My grand children will probably see 110 and my great grand children will see 120......So how will future governments pay for aged pensions if we all don't work longer?

We all have our own opinions and each and every one should accept the others opinion without prejudice or personal attacks.

I don't recall making personal attacks on you Syd or anyone else....I do try to choose my words carefully. Please quote me where I have.

You could tone down your attacks on anyone not beyond centre right then. Reread your comments about the greens and you'll hopefully understand what I'm saying. Loaded terms like Comrade are very prejudicial.

That applies to you too ole boy.....I do not see any problem with referring to comrades of the Greens, unless of course it is a worry to you.

 

[SirRumpole]

That applies to you too ole boy.....I do not see any problem with referring to comrades of the Greens, unless of course it is a worry to you.

So , it's ok with you if I refer to Nick Girolamo as a comrade of the Liberal Party ?

 

[Julia]

Ignoring what folk lore says, it sounds more complicated than that to me.

Ves, did you consider for a moment that my comment about Ned Kelly was somewhat tongue in cheek?
As so often happens, someone picks one throw away line out of a longer post and proceeds to respond to just that phrase. What I had said before that was

The Greens themselves engage in a type of corruption re their insistence that we are all doomed unless we dump electricity for candles etc. (Yes I'm exaggerating to make the point).
They are economic illiterates. There is no reason to imagine they have any way of ending corruption in the major parties.

Corruption is endemic across Australian politics and in business. It just blew me away when I came here from NZ two decades ago.

So, completely ignoring that, you go on with

After all, they had a royal commission into the actions of the police in the whole affair.

Like most things in life there is no moral clarity - just what certain groups choose to argue as the actual reality. There are no sides that are 100% correct, no matter how much people on either side of the coin pretend that this is the case to prove the moral belief for which they stand.

I am not sure if you realised it, but the Ned Kelly affair is highly relevant to this thread. Government / police corruption and criminal activity has not changed one bit since those retrospectively famous days.

So fairly obviously I'm highly aware of and find utterly repugnant the widespread corruption that occurs.

How about we just condemn all corruption and stop trying the "they're badder than my team" argument. Most of us don't see much to distinguish either party from the other when it comes to corruption and jobs for mates.

+100. And it's not just confined to politics.

A letter to "The Weekend Australian" says

The most frightening aspect of the sorry Australian Water Holdings tale is that if Barry O'Farrell had done great favours for them he would still be premier of NSW because then the damning thank you note would probably never have surfaced.

Says it all, really. Seems payback came to BOF for his refusal to participate in de Gerolomo's dirty attempts at bribery.

 

[McLovin]

So fairly obviously I'm highly aware of and find utterly repugnant the widespread corruption that occurs.

I don't think corruption is widespread in Australia. Yes it exists but it is lower than comparable sized countries.

The CPI might be of interest. I'd bet that part of the fall in Australia's ranking can be attributed to what ICAC has been uncovering.

http://cpi.transparency.org/cpi2013/results/

 

[SirRumpole]

Says it all, really. Seems payback came to BOF for his refusal to participate in de Gerolomo's dirty attempts at bribery.

The fact is though that Di Gerolimo DID get a payoff, an executive job at a government Authority, The State Water Corporation, signed off by Mike Baird.

So why should we assume that O'Farrell had nothing to do with this ? He may have suggested to Baird that Di Gerolimo was a 'mate' and should be found a nice job.

Assumptions that O'Farrell is a cleanskin in this matter are premature.

 

[Calliope]

Corruption in the police is a result of corruption of the politicians. Askin, Hinze, Bjelke Petersen, Terry Lewis , politicians and police feeding off each other.

You certainly have to did deep into the past in your crusade to dredge up dirt on the Liberals. But as usual you get it wrong. Of the four politicians you mention, only Askin was a Liberal. Perhaps you should stay on topic.

 

[SirRumpole]

You certainly have to did deep into the past in your crusade to dredge up dirt on the Liberals. But as usual you get it wrong. Of the four politicians you mention, only Askin was a Liberal. Perhaps you should stay on topic.

The Liberals and the Nats/Country Party are effectively the same thing and you are just nitpicking. When was the last time we had a Liberal Federal government ?

I can request a change to the thread title to "Corruption in the Coalition" if you prefer.

 

[noco]

So , it's ok with you if I refer to Nick Girolamo as a comrade of the Liberal Party ?

Rumpy, that is your prerogative .....If that gives you pleasure.....go for it.

 

[Ves]

Ves, did you consider for a moment that my comment about Ned Kelly was somewhat tongue in cheek?

I'm not sure that it matters that the line in your comment was a throw away comment. Intention of the author, can be and often is irrelevant, as interpretation in a different context by the audience will lead to different lines of discussion as a whole.

In fact others may not have realized that the Ned Kelly affair is very relevant to the discussion of corruption in the government and its related bodies.

I'm not really sure that you need to constantly lecture people how they reply to your posts. Publishing anything in a public space will, necessarily, despite your protestations lead to discussion outside of your own interpretation / or original context because different people will come make different connections or use different thought processes, and sometimes gladly arrive at different conclusions.

Often embedded in different posts are multiple subjects or contexts. Replying to one of them, rather than any others, is the right of anyone on a forum.

 

[noco]

[

How about we just condemn all corruption and stop trying the "they're badder than my team" argument. Most of us don't see much to distinguish either party from the other when it comes to corruption and jobs for mates.


That is fine by me too so why don't you ask Rumpy to delete this thread altogether instead of trying discredit the Liberal Party.......There seems to be a lack of principle here.

 

[Calliope]

The Liberals and the Nats/Country Party are effectively the same thing and you are just nitpicking. When was the last time we had a Liberal Federal government ?

You are just showing your ignorance. None of the people you mention had anything to do with Federal Government. Bjelke-Petersen hated the Libs as much as you do.

I can request a change to the thread title to "Corruption in the Coalition" if you prefer.

It's your thread, call it what you like. What about "Corruption in the Greens"? What about your much revered hero Bob Brown? He was fined $240,000 to repay costs that he ran up in a failed attempt to destroy the Tasmanian forest industry. If his rich mates hadn't bailed him out he would have been kicked out of parliament for insolvency. Shrewd business men don't pay out that sort of money and expect nothing in return.

In other words, his rich mates bought his seat in parliament. Why? As a closet Green i expect you would know.

 

[drsmith]

The fundamental problem with BOF is that he accepted that expensive old bottle of wee in the first place.

Had he not done so, his memory would not have been an issue.

Disclaimer:
If it was a bottle of red, the above comment demonstrates my level of knowledge with wine.

 

[banco]

You are just showing your ignorance. None of the people you mention had anything to do with Federal Government. Bjelke-Petersen hated the Libs as much as you do.

.

Sir Joh was a corrupt piece of **** who should have died in prison.

 

[Julia]

I'm not sure that it matters that the line in your comment was a throw away comment. Intention of the author, can be and often is irrelevant, as interpretation in a different context by the audience will lead to different lines of discussion as a whole.

Oh dear, I had no idea that my tongue in cheek remark about the benign affection seemingly bestowed on a dead outlaw would cause so much angst. My apologies for the apparent insult to the Australian persona.

I'm not really sure that you need to constantly lecture people how they reply to your posts.

Not lecturing anyone, just making a plea for the context to be included in replies.

Publishing anything in a public space will, necessarily, despite your protestations lead to discussion outside of your own interpretation / or original context because different people will come make different connections or use different thought processes, and sometimes gladly arrive at different conclusions.

Agree entirely. But if we can just try to avoid ignoring the main point in favour of some minor tangential focus it might be better.

Often embedded in different posts are multiple subjects or contexts. Replying to one of them, rather than any others, is the right of anyone on a forum.

Sure. And it's the right of the writer of the original comment to respond as they wish too.

It's one of the eternal problems of internet communication, ie the lack of tone, facial expression etc. If I've offended you I'm entirely happy to apologise.