http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/national/rob-oakeshott-lobbied-military-for-donor/story-e6freuzr-1225936188442

Whilst the illegalities of the deal may be difficult to prove, there is no doubt that Rob Oakeshott is not emerging squeaky clean from this. What is also interesting is Jula Gillard's sudden amnesia "I just don't specifically recall the conversation" when asked if her new ally had lobbied her.

Given RO's secretive request for a NSW cabinet position and recently his push for the highly paid federal cabinet and speaker positions, the extent to which Rob is prepared to put self interest over principles is becoming clear.

It will be interesting to see whether Rob will reflect his electorate's views on water allocations, presently being discussed, or will "sell them down the river" again.

In that article I get: Why are we buying from the UK when we could be buying Australian made?

Not to defend the guy, but the company he is trying to help would bring in a lot of jobs for people in his electorate and would keep money in Australia, a noble cause don't you think?

Scary company that Serco. Seems we give them a lot of our money.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vyFkXmx8gxc

I don't know much about the company nor much about Rob Oakeshott, but we should be lobbying for government to give contracts to Australian companies albeit not for one's mates. Another example why there is a strong need for reform on political donations.

It used to be a condition of government tender processes that companies awarded contracts be majority Australian owned (I can't remember the percentage but it was high). Now money earned and paid by taxpayers in Australia is used to benefit foreign interests. Unfortunately, there is a tendency to label anyone who supports local business as redneck or nationalist, which reflects just how strong conditioning and social manipulation on this issue has become.

Now foreign owned companies provide employment services, financial services, products and defence materiels; and many other services to government. It kind of made a mockery of Therese Rein selling off her Australian owned employment service due to conflict of interest, when there is little to separate the Australian owned wing from the foreign owned interests. (I don't blame TR for that anomaly)

While these companies employ Australian workers, would it not be in Australia's economic interests to keep profits mostly onshore. When the service cannot be provided by an Australian company then a foreign company may be the only option.

I suspect the corruption part of this will fizzle out.

The tender process for government business is riddled with inefficiencies, contradictions, inadequacies and incompetence. Thus there will always and inevitably be an opportunity for someone to shout "unfair", whenever a decision goes against them.

Any competent government purchasing department will have inoculated themselves against such challenges, given that they are well aware of the "Aussie Aussie Aussie" sensitivities involved. The result will be a tedious audit of the process, which will cost us taxpayers a fair few bucks, but which will change nothing. Honour will be satisfied, business will go on. Eventually.

But having said that - isn't that Oakeshott bloke an absolute 100% dyed-in-the-wool goose?

Everything he touches seems to go titsup, while nothing he does appears to be thought-through, or constructive. Making such a public fuss over a constituent is one thing; but making a fuss after having accepted money from him should at least have rung alarm bells with him, no?

He's a dill.

I hope he enjoys his brief fling in this parliament, 'cos he sure ain't gonna be given another. And along the way, he is going to be the biggest single catalyst for an early election that there could possibly be.

He brings an entirely new dimension to the term "loose cannon"

Make no mistake, I am all for keeping manufacturing in Aus, However, there is already a requirement in defence tendering to give preference to local suppliers.

Whilst lobbying for constituents is expected, doing so whilst accepting generous donations from the contractor confuses the motivation (self enrichment or genuine motivation)

Trying to have the tender board's decisions overturned whilst under this cloud does little for him or contractor concerned.

I have always believed that in defence procurement there was always a
preference for Australian made. The reason is obvious, in time of war
overseas supply might be impossible.

However this principle is also applicable to a time of zero growth and
the decay of the global economy.