The author writes: "No woman freely chooses to be a prostitute."

How can he possibly know that? He is stating a belief as fact. In my opinion paying a prostitute for value received is a more positive act than giving money to a church which promotes prejudice against 'unbelievers' or covers up child abuse. It is wrong to use union money for purposes other than what the money is intended for, but there are worse things to do with the money to spending it on sex or other forms of pleasure.

Agree completely-great article!

Labor has shown such breathtaking contempt for ethics and the dignity of Parliament that it questions the whole foundation of democracy in Australia.
The majority disapprove of almost every act of Gillard and her cronies,yet she just pokes out her tongue-tough!!

This whole affair highlights that what Gillard is saying is "We're in power and I will do whatever it takes to stay there,no matter how wrong and contemptible.

The Governor General on advice,should step in and dismiss Labor.
But of course this wouldnt happen ,they are all left wingers including the son in law.

Its all so incestuous.

Makes me ashamed to be Australian

Well said Mirko. It is about character or the lack thereof. Assuming for a moment that Thompson is innocent, that he has been set up; one of the problems I have with that notion is that he is not behaving as though he is innocent, with the most recent of his aberrant behaviour being his stupid assertions to Laurie Oaks.

Bruce Haigh

A vote in parliament against Thompson was defeated because it was not constitutional.
The only ones that can remove Thompson from parliament is the people that voted for him.
The kangaroo court is in cession.

Yes a report exists; but it is only as good as those who have compiled it. If some evidence and or, witness accounts is excluded, then the report is either incomplete or patently biased?
This matter wouldn't occupy some much public space, but for a hung parliament and Mr Abbott's apparent all consuming desire to occupy the Lodge?
While I find Thomson's explanations unconvincing, he is still entitled to a presumption of innocence and his day in court, which is where this matter will finally wind up and or end.
In any event, Thomson will never ever serve in any public position again, may soon face a divorce; and may have to earn a future income as a taxi driver, a second hand car salesman or some such?
I see others like say Alan Bond, who may have misused or misappropriated many millions of public or other peoples' money, employed many providers of "PERSONAL SERVICES" etc/etc? And, much less harshly judged and or, allowed to go back and run companies etc.
But for a hung parliament, the Thomson affair would get the attention and media space it actually deserves, as opposed to all the puffed up hype, bluster and or politically motivated hyperbole? Rhrosty.

Yuyutsu; Appropriate comment mate, well almost; given the collective noun for a group of Baboons, is a parliament. Cheers, Rhrosty.