Finding the truth vs. "The Rule of Law"

[sptrawler]

Real wages and nominal wages are different things, and that's why @IFocus was correct.
Under Hawke annual wages increased by 6.7% on average. And GDP more than doubled from Fraser's years while employment growth tripled!
Under Morrison wages growth is another pitiful display:

Under Hawke wages increased by 6.7%, cpi out stripped it over the same period, which ended up with real wages being -18% over the wages accord period, as was shown in the chart I posted.
But as usual, you don't let the truth get in the way of one of your stories. ? ?
So maybe some actual history, rather than your spin.

30 years on: Accord deal 'a bitter time', says Kelty

Setting the now historic Accord between unions and the then Labor government was ''an incredibly bitter time'', according former ACTU secretary Bill Kelty.

www.smh.com.au

From the article:
Mr Kelty said negotiating the Accord was an incredibly difficult process for unions and the government.

''It was very hard. You were trying to change people's ideas. The government was trying to do dramatic things for the country . . . They were trying to essentially remodel the country.

''What do you think – everybody said 'That's a nice idea - a real wage reduction would be good, can I have another one next year please'?''


Here is some articles from that era.

https://ro.uow.edu.au/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2227&context=alr

Anyway as @SirRumpole said we are going way off topic and there is no way we will see it the same way, so best to move on.
I just hope Albo brings a dose of reality back to Labor and get the grass roots members back.

 

[rederob]

Under Hawke wages increased by 6.7%, cpi out stripped it over the same period, which ended up with real wages being -18% over the wages accord period, as was shown in the chart I posted.
But as usual, you don't let the truth get in the way of one of your stories. ? ?
So maybe some actual history, rather than your spin.

30 years on: Accord deal 'a bitter time', says Kelty

Setting the now historic Accord between unions and the then Labor government was ''an incredibly bitter time'', according former ACTU secretary Bill Kelty.

www.smh.com.au

From the article:
Mr Kelty said negotiating the Accord was an incredibly difficult process for unions and the government.

''It was very hard. You were trying to change people's ideas. The government was trying to do dramatic things for the country . . . They were trying to essentially remodel the country.

''What do you think – everybody said 'That's a nice idea - a real wage reduction would be good, can I have another one next year please'?''


Here is some articles from that era.

https://ro.uow.edu.au/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2227&context=alr

Anyway as @SirRumpole said we are going way off topic and there is no way we will see it the same way, so best to move on.
I just hope Albo brings a dose of reality back to Labor and get the grass roots members back.

@IFocus was talking about what you get paid - a nominal amount that appears in a wages packet (of bygone years) - and that's not inflation adjusted, so stop looking for a new tack.
None of your charts used the correct metric, and those you posted were contradictory, so I suspect you had no idea that the capital component of income increased under Hawke, leading to the labour component falling.
As a metric the concept of real wages has been overtaken by the more rigorous Wages Price Index and I tabled that above.
Hawke's period oversaw massive economic changes and I know because I worked in Canberra while he was PM, including several years as a labour economics analyst, so I know this topic inside out.
I can only suggest that next time you post charts you have a better idea of what they show.

 

[sptrawler]

@IFocus was talking about what you get paid - a nominal amount that appears in a wages packet (of bygone years) - and that's not inflation adjusted, so stop looking for a new tack.
None of your charts used the correct metric, and those you posted were contradictory, so I suspect you had no idea that the capital component of income increased under Hawke, leading to the labour component falling.
As a metric the concept of real wages has been overtaken by the more rigorous Wages Price Index and I tabled that above.
Hawke's period oversaw massive economic changes and I know because I worked in Canberra while he was PM, including several years as a labour economics analyst, so I know this topic inside out.
I can only suggest that next time you post charts you have a better idea of what they show.

Nonsense as usual.
I quoted Bill Kelty, who was the head of the ACTU at the time, even he in reflection knows it cost workers a lot of money.
I actually think it helped Australia at the time, as unemployment and inflation was rampant, what you got in your paypacket was not as important as what it could buy in times of high inflation.
There is no point having wage growth of 6%, if you are running 10% inflation, in 2020 ASB statistics say wage growth was 1.8% and inflation was 0.87%.
What I take exception to, is people carrying on as though only one side of politics stymies wage growth, when both sides do the same.
Both sides of politics need to be held accountable, on their performance, not on tribal hatred and bias IMO.
Fortunately the group that elects Governments is usually the swinging voter, which makes the democracy work.
There is a reason labor have only been in Government for 6 of the last 25 years, their attitude is very reflective of yours IMO, the first step in fixing a problem is recognising you have one.
I think Albo is the first one who people trust, in a long time, criticising for the sake of criticising isn't well received by Aussies and Albo isn't going down that track.
Interestingly neither did McGowan.

 

[sptrawler]

Looks like another defamation case coming up, over false and or unproven accusation.

Former Labor MP Emma Husar threatens legal action over sexual harassment claims

An unproven accusation was weaponised against Emma Husar, she says, constituting sexual harassment.

www.theage.com.au

From the article:
Former federal Labor MP Emma Husar is threatening legal action against the ALP for sexual harassment, arguing key people within the party leaked false claims she exposed herself to a parliamentary colleague in 2017 and forced her out of Parliament two years later.

Ms Husar says she was forced out of the ALP after a male former staffer told the party Ms Husar had repeatedly performed an underpants-less “Sharon Stone” manoeuvre in front of fellow MP Jason Clare and his young child in Mr Clare’s parliamentary office. The allegation was leaked to online news outlet Buzzfeed, which published the claims without seeking comment from Ms Husar.

“This is a human rights violation. I had the right to go to work, the right to be treated with respect, I had the right to be given fair consideration, you know, natural justice processes and procedural fairness, that everyone else is entitled to.

Ms Husar struck an out-of-court settlement with Buzzfeed in July 2019, after launching defamation action against the publication. Buzzfeed apologised for not contacting Ms Husar to offer right of reply over the August 2, 2018 article, and agreed to retract the story.

 

[SirRumpole]

Ms Husar says she was forced out of the ALP after a male former staffer told the party Ms Husar had repeatedly performed an underpants-less “Sharon Stone” manoeuvre in front of fellow MP Jason Clare and his young child in Mr Clare’s parliamentary office. The allegation was leaked to online news outlet Buzzfeed, which published the claims without seeking comment from Ms Husar.

The other story is she was sacked because her staff reported bullying from her.

We are not a few 'bad apples': Emma Husar's staff break their silence

In a letter to NSW Labor general secretary her former employees write "Ms Husar's sustained inappropriate conduct made our positions untenable".

www.smh.com.au

 

[sptrawler]

The other story is she was sacked because her staff reported bullying from her.

We are not a few 'bad apples': Emma Husar's staff break their silence

In a letter to NSW Labor general secretary her former employees write "Ms Husar's sustained inappropriate conduct made our positions untenable".

www.smh.com.au

Obviously litigation is the new norm.

 

[sptrawler]

Last week the AG Christian Porter denounced accusations of rape against him as completely false. The accusations had been passed to the NSW Police who announced that because the person who had initially contacted them had not made a formal statement before she died there was insufficient admissible evidence to conduct any further inquiry or create any sort of criminal charge.

The case was therefore closed. On this basis the AG and the Prime Minister intend to close the inquiries and Christian Porter made an impassioned plea that opening any other investigations was tantamount to destroying "The Rule of Law".

But is this a legitimate statement? Is a formal Police charge the only means of finding out the truth or fully investigating a situation?

The reality is that we already have and use a multitude of mechanisms to investigate through legal structures, the circumstances and truth around events. Recent Royal Commissions into Child Sex abuse, failures in the banking system, failures in Aged Care facilities just to mention a few are examaples of non police investigations.

In industry Boards will routinely find a legal inquiry as a way of investigation serious allegations against senior management that can't or shouldn't be just given to the police. Same goes for Universities and community organisations. In almost all these cases the intention is to ascertain whether a person is fit and proper to hold their position. They are not necessarily interested in establishing "beyond reasonable doubt criminal convictions" because in the real world of business, education and community goverance a lessor level of certainty is all that is required to know that something stinks and the Board would be liable itself if it didn't take action.

Like many others on this forum I have had responsibilities on Boards and we have had to take investigative actions when allegations of misbehaviour come to our attention. They always require fair processes but in no case do we have the luxury of saying "Leave it to the Police" .

What do people think ? This article examines the question in more depth.

Christian Porter allegations: independent inquiry no threat to rule of law, legal experts say

Prof Ben Saul says it’s ‘par for the course’ in Australia for non-criminal inquiries to look at potential criminal matters

www.theguardian.com

This isn't a good look for Christian Porter, might be a career ending episode IMO.

Federal Court rules Christian Porter's barrister has conflict of interest in ABC defamation case

Christian Porter's bid to sue the ABC suffers a blow as the Federal Court rules his barrister has a conflict of interest and should be restrained from acting in the case.

www.abc.net.au

Christian Porter ends defamation action against the ABC

The ABC says that former attorney-general Christian Porter has decided to discontinue his defamation action against the broadcaster and reporter Louise Milligan.

www.abc.net.au

 

[basilio]

This isn't a good look for Christian Porter, might be a career ending episode IMO.

Federal Court rules Christian Porter's barrister has conflict of interest in ABC defamation case

Christian Porter's bid to sue the ABC suffers a blow as the Federal Court rules his barrister has a conflict of interest and should be restrained from acting in the case.

www.abc.net.au

Christian Porter ends defamation action against the ABC

The ABC says that former attorney-general Christian Porter has decided to discontinue his defamation action against the broadcaster and reporter Louise Milligan.

www.abc.net.au

I don't agree at all at this stage SP. From my perspective the Right Honourable Christian Porter (indeed..) has done exceptionally well in this legal exchange.

1) His initial action immediately stopped all discussions about his alleged rape of Katherine Thornton as well as his denials of any further conversations about the issue. It seems in his world he barely knew the girl..

2) The defamation action put the wind up everyone and in particular the ABC that he had the capacity and willingness to legally bankrupt anyone who wanted to raise the issue. Big tick

3) Closing the case without actually losing it means the various affadavits from James Hookes and other ABC background reports won't be heard in Court. Given that James Hookes statements alone completely undermined his statements that's a huge win.

4) In the political world he and the Government can still spin the story that he has never been charged let alone found guilty of anything. Furthermore on his Word of Honour he never ever did anything wrong. So he should be well within his rights to regain his position as AG and continue the work of the Government.

I think this is what we will see as his response and I won't be surprised if the Government in six months time also takes this view.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On the other hand... No one ever seriously believed The Right Honorable etc. should face a criminal trial for this alleged offense.
It was always the case that the allegation and perhaps associated evidence ( Christian Porters strenuous denial of any discussions later on ) should be examined by an independent body. It goes back to original thesis I raised in this thread.

In industry Boards will routinely find a legal inquiry as a way of investigation serious allegations against senior management that can't or shouldn't be just given to the police. Same goes for Universities and community organisations. In almost all these cases the intention is to ascertain whether a person is fit and proper to hold their position. They are not necessarily interested in establishing "beyond reasonable doubt criminal convictions" because in the real world of business, education and community goverance a lessor level of certainty is all that is required to know that something stinks and the Board would be liable itself if it didn't take action.

Like many others on this forum I have had responsibilities on Boards and we have had to take investigative actions when allegations of misbehaviour come to our attention. They always require fair processes but in no case do we have the luxury of saying "Leave it to the Police" .

 

[SirRumpole]

Like many others on this forum I have had responsibilities on Boards and we have had to take investigative actions when allegations of misbehaviour come to our attention. They always require fair processes but in no case do we have the luxury of saying "Leave it to the Police" .

I think that would apply to current cases where the alleged victim can give evidence, but I doubt if most boards would consider events of 40 years ago without statements under oath.

 

[sptrawler]

I still think he is toast, withdrawing the action, definitely gives the perception of guilt to many IMO.
As far a long and illustrious career goes, I think that wont happen.

 

[IFocus]

Was Porters problem the witnesses and file of evidence the ABC had?

I assume they would have gone his character around women perhaps.

Went to great effort's to supress (long shot) and when that failed, mediation was always going to be the out come, isn't this similar to the way Alan Jones ran his case?

This was always the case and Porter was always going to mediation trying to muddy the waters along the way.

I guess its up to his electorate now to decide.

 

[sptrawler]

Was Porters problem the witnesses and file of evidence the ABC had?

I assume they would have gone his character around women perhaps.

Went to great effort's to supress (long shot) and when that failed, mediation was always going to be the out come, isn't this similar to the way Alan Jones ran his case?

This was always the case and Porter was always going to mediation trying to muddy the waters along the way.

I guess its up to his electorate now to decide.

Courts cannot look at your previous convictions, or even charges laid against you, when they are deciding whether or not you are guilty. The exception to the rule is 'tendency and coincidence evidence'. ... In making that decision, courts will consider whether you were a person of good character or otherwise.

Maybe the stories surrounding someone, can cause as much if not more damage, than letting sleeping dogs lie.

As you say, it is up to the electorate now, but I can't see a long career, with this in the closet.

The ABC meanwhile have scored a bit of an own goal, by not being able to prove the allegation, so it will haunt them for a long time. Governments have very, very long memories, from my experience.

 

[sptrawler]

I certainly hope the media get enough mileage out of these cases, the courts will eventually get fed up and really start to dish out some fines, for both sides IMO, for bogging down the justice system. ?

I think that quote will prove true , one way or another, one side will cop a big settlement IMO. Which side? who knows.

Bonfire of the vanities as curtain rises on epic Ben Roberts-Smith case

Mr Roberts-Smith’s barrister indicated that he will seek the largest aggravated damages payout in Australian history.

www.theage.com.au

 

[sptrawler]

And now the next cab off the rank, well at least the media is being brought to account, for what they publish.
It may well be public interest, but it must be able to withstand scrutiny, or else it is gossip.
Otherwise why have police, why have courts?
https://www.smh.com.au/national/nsw...was-a-mobster-court-told-20210607-p57ytg.html

 

[moXJO]

All these reporters seem to think they can print what they like with little to back it up. Hope they get sued back to the stone age.

 

[sptrawler]

All these reporters seem to think they can print what they like with little to back it up. Hope they get sued back to the stone age.

That is the only way, they will bring about any editorial checking IMO. They have been getting progressively worse since the early 2000's IMO.
As you say, now they seem to just write what they like.

 

[SirRumpole]

I think that quote will prove true , one way or another, one side will cop a big settlement IMO. Which side? who knows.

Bonfire of the vanities as curtain rises on epic Ben Roberts-Smith case

Mr Roberts-Smith’s barrister indicated that he will seek the largest aggravated damages payout in Australian history.

www.theage.com.au

Will he pay it all back if he's found guilty by a military inquiry ?

 

[sptrawler]

Will he pay it all back if he's found guilty by a military inquiry ?

Probably at $50/day, I think that is what you get paid, in the can.

The other question is, will the share holders be happy, if the media is found guilty and the settlement runs into the millions? From reading an article, it sounds like one reported will pumping out bullets, apparently one wrote a book which places Roberts-Smith in a different location to an alleged killing of a teenager .
From your article Rumpy:
In all, the media alleges that Mr Roberts-Smith was responsible for six unlawful killings. One element of the defence, which was recently dropped, included the allegation that Mr Roberts-Smith killed a seventh unarmed Afghan man. Mr McClintock used this development to indicate that he intended to go for broke.

“At the end of the trial, we will put to Your Honour that this justifies an aggravated damages claim and I will put to you that an allegation of murder with no basis justifies the largest award of damages ever in this country,” he said.

It is a case that will make or break reputations, with millions of dollars at stake. Whatever the result, the scene has been set for a monumental showdown.

 

[Humid]

Nonsense as usual.
I quoted Bill Kelty, who was the head of the ACTU at the time, even he in reflection knows it cost workers a lot of money.
I actually think it helped Australia at the time, as unemployment and inflation was rampant, what you got in your paypacket was not as important as what it could buy in times of high inflation.
There is no point having wage growth of 6%, if you are running 10% inflation, in 2020 ASB statistics say wage growth was 1.8% and inflation was 0.87%.
What I take exception to, is people carrying on as though only one side of politics stymies wage growth, when both sides do the same.
Both sides of politics need to be held accountable, on their performance, not on tribal hatred and bias IMO.
Fortunately the group that elects Governments is usually the swinging voter, which makes the democracy work.
There is a reason labor have only been in Government for 6 of the last 25 years, their attitude is very reflective of yours IMO, the first step in fixing a problem is recognising you have one.
I think Albo is the first one who people trust, in a long time, criticising for the sake of criticising isn't well received by Aussies and Albo isn't going down that track.
Interestingly neither did McGowan.

You state that both sides of politics stymie wage growth and then go on to say that one party has been in power for 19 of the last 25 years lol
Just returned from a 3 week swing in iron ore and was payed less than the last time Labor was in power!
Even being employed full time if your on break while there is a public holiday you dont get payed for it.
Im going back to oil& gas....

 

[sptrawler]

You state that both sides of politics stymie wage growth and then go on to say that one party has been in power for 19 of the last 25 years lol
Just returned from a 3 week swing in iron ore and was payed less than the last time Labor was in power!
Even being employed full time if your on break while there is a public holiday you dont get payed for it.
Im going back to oil& gas....

Yes they were the days the highest influx of 457's and the fun part is Labor gave the Aussies an extra two years of working life, thanks to your hero Kev. ? ? ? ?
Thank christ he was only in for a short time, or else you might have to go until you are 70.
That's the good thing with shutdown work though, you can pick and choose which ones you want to do and you have had a tax cut.
Add to that two extra years of work that Labor gave you, what a beano, you will save heaps and wont need the pension win/win.

The other thing you could do Goldfields up in Kal have given a 6% pay rise and are paying their workers up to a $10,000 bonus, for referring new workers. Maybe you picked up the wrong job, or are ramping Labor. ?
By the way the son, just left them to an even higher paying job up there, so I think your pulling my pizzer mate.?
Great to have your sense of humour back though and rederob can do with the help.
We are drifting off topic though.

In the news | INVESTORS AND MEDIA | Gold Fields

www.goldfields.com