FROM
today's AFR:
While Mr Thomson may have been in technical breach of some of the union
rules, it is expected he will argue he was acting within the normal
ethical flexibility given to officials, and that the same practices
occurred in every other union.
OK, grant the Brothel Creeper a little slack and accept for the sake of argument that billing your members for a ready supply of mattress testers is no worse than a "technical breach" and where does that leave us? Still with ample grounds for a Royal Commission to examine that "normal ethical flexibility" which prevails in "every other union".
Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't the amount of money alleged to be missing from this union exceed $20 million?
ReplyDeleteThat would seem to be more than a mere "technical breach" to me.
Not really Comrade ,most of these onionist Loiders have a BA inLAW and Deserve Suitable Renumeration and Reasonable Expenses .also there must be something in a "uni degree" that turns ordinary kids into sexcrazed incompetent Idiots,look at those WA liberal and green couple one is Treasurer for GODS SAKE ! Incestuous Clowns,go back to Edward the Third.No Lawyers in Government,Sounds Good to Me,perhapsthe Professor knows what ails the uniwankers?
DeleteHi Boris, having a uni degree is one thing, but being an illiterate twat is another. Thanks for the insults. I have a university degree, and I bothered to learn to write while I was at school. It's called 'work'.
DeleteOMG Boris I think you have covered EVERYTHING. I particularly like Renumeration but geez, this must have taken Ages.
Deleteanon at 11.52
Deletebut address Boris' point.
Most Kings and Queens have far less sense of entitlement than sitting ALP members.
And Edward seems to have taken good advice about Agents of the Court not sitting in Parliament.
Anon, while you learnt to read and write your educations seems wanting thereafter.
Thanks Boris' - this country needs you.
“….acting within the normal ethical flexibility given to officials, and that the same practices occurred in every other union.”
ReplyDeleteSome further examples I expect to see printed in Fairfax sometime soon:-
“Whilst the Real Estate Agent was found to be in breach of under-quoting rules, no further action will be taken because it was within the normal ethical flexibility given to agents”
“There seems little doubt that the logging company was cutting down endangered rain-forest trees, but this is within the bounds of normal ethical flexibility in the industry”
“The used car dealer is unlikely to face disciplinary action having demonstrated that winding back the odometer on second hand vehicles is within the normal ethical flexibility exercised by car dealers”
“Ronald Biggs argued for early release on the grounds that smacking train drivers on the head and knicking 3 million quid is well within the normal ethical flexibility of the Train Robbers Guild”
“There is no doubt that Sea Shepherd should stop harassing Japanese whalers because catching whale steaks under the guise of scientific research is (you guessed it) within the normal ethical flexibility spectrum for Japanese fishermen”
The Irish Lion
I don't think 'everybody else is doing it' is a legal defence. I've tried it with the traffic police when they were issuing a speeding fine but the law didn't care what everybody else was doing, only what I was doing.
ReplyDeleteThis is becoming quite interesting.
ReplyDeleteIf Thomson is to argue that he was just acting "within the normal ethical flexibility given to (union) officials" then he has moved from outright denial to an admission of guilt with mitigating circumstances.
It appears that the FWA investigation has unearthed some hard facts to cause Thomson's change of direction
If he admits that "he dun it", he would, by extension, also admit that he lied to Parliament. Goodbye Mr. Thomson, I sense a bi-election coming up for Dobell.
Normal ethical flexibility, they really don't match up do they? Sounds like double talk to me. A slippery slope if there ever was one.
DeleteNot long now
RussR
This is interesting. Lets have them prove to the court, with examples detailed, that brothel creeping is a normal part of official union duty.
ReplyDeleteI am informed that Mr Thomson WILL shortly receive word that similar explanations will have to be furnished to a County Court judge in Victoria.
ReplyDeleteI suppose if everyone else is doing it, it must be alright then.
ReplyDeleteBunyip, this is such fun. Boris, the lion and all the anonymouses, inspired by your good self are all really great. Maybe we can be a bit optimistic at last. Perhaps the worst is over.
ReplyDeleteDave A - yes indeed. In order to establish his defence he will need to provide evidence of pretty close parallel behaviour by other union officials. This could lead to a lengthy hearing. My first thought was that this line of defence was a signal to various union and Labor identities to put a stop to what FWA is doing. This is unlikely, but the vigour with which FWA prsoecute their case is another matter.
ReplyDeleteOOh, maybe the Pants Man is about to tell all including the names of those whom he "shouted" free ladies and beds on a few occasions that the parlour bills were so high?
ReplyDeleteHm, there is an (ex SubPrime lover) MP with whom he was rumoured to share digs when in Canberra, who comes to mind and I cannot help wondering why anyone would think HIM attractive--er, will his name appear on Craig's List?
We might yet get a well awaited Christmas or New Year present and Craig a new home for the duration--could Australia be so lucky?