A little more frankness is called for poirot.
Foxy/Lexi left because of it,I did twice maybe three times.
A belief Shadow Minister CAN, GO FURTHER THAN ANY POSTER.
I concede I am no Angel, but, unless I have missed something, this Conservative site, has no rule stopping Centrists or ALP voters counter punching.
I am yet again considering my future here.
Making a last visit to some threads.
Running out of posts this morning wakened me.
My habit of posting in evrery new thread, as a welcome is not working, for me.
Combating new posters with harsh views is not.
I am considering yet again is it worth it.
And for a time confining my posts to fewer threads.
THIS MUCH I KNOW SM has far more who do not place him as high as he places himself, one day we may be shocked if we find out who he is.

Sm,

The KPMG investigation wasn't set up to probe the conclusions. It was set up to probe the mechanisms in place at FWA to accommodate investigations.

Some of the findings:

* FWA did not have and did not refer to any relevant investigation standards and procedures.

* There is a lack of adequate documentation setting out the main process followed by FWA;

* FWA did not implement an adequate investigation case management system or process, which resulted in deficiencies in the planning, management and execution of the HSU investigations;

* FWA did not have sufficient appropriately qualified and experienced resources involved in the conduct of HSU investigations;

* FWA did not consider all potential sources of information, particularly electronic information, and did not appear to fully understand its rights to access potentially relevant sources of information;

* FWA did not have protocols in place for the collection and retention of documents; and

* The security arrangements over documents were inadequate

.......................

In addition;

KPMG requested FWA provide access to the following electronic data for the FWA Vice President based in Melbourne (the'Vice President'):

* Restored FWA archived email accounts as at December2011, December 2010, December 2009 and December 2008

* Extracts of the personal workspace hosted on the FWA network.

* A restored FWA archived personal workspaces as at December 2011, December 2010 and December 2009;

* FWA computers allocated to the Vice President; and

* Any FWA smart phones and handheld devices allocated to the Vice President.

KPMG has not been provided access to the FWA computers or any smart phones and handheld devices allocated to the Vice President.

...............

SM,

You can employ your conservative credentials any way you like, but you will find it hard to deny that any investigative mechanism resting on such dubious standards and protocols deserves criticism, not applause.

Poirot,

I have many times in previous thread said that the FWA handling of the report was incompetent. The investigations were handled unprofessionally, and evidence was haphazard and not put together in a manner that could be used for a prosecution. None of this contradicts anything I said in this thread, nor does it indicate that every shred of evidence collected again Thomson is false.

Also the assumption that the prosecution is based solely on the report is forgetting the 6 months that the FWA has had professional legal help to put things right.

Poirot lets stop the in fighting.
We will do it the SM way
You get the rope
I will find the tree
SM can do the rest.
We can find out if he was guilty after the trial.
IF there is one.
Only way to go we have been told.
SM is never wrong!
See Liberal/Conservative views are the only ones that matter!
YE HA redneck heaven!

SM,

With all due respect, I can't find any intimation contained in your previous posts on this thread to support your claim that: "I have said many times in previous thread that the FWA handling of this report was incompetent. The investigations were handled unprofessionally, and the evidence was haphazard..."

The main gist of your argument seemed to rest more on comments like this: "...that there were a number of incidents that had not been investigated properly....ie, there should have been further investigations into more activities."

That, sprinkled intermittently, with your calling Thomson a "crook" seems to have been your main theme.

That you consider a report that you admit was incompetent, unprofessional and haphazard, is acceptable to be employed as the basis for prosecution (even with 6 months of legal "help") says volumes.

Poirot, in the same persons post history, if you have a strong Constitution,you will find some interesting stuff.
ANY conservative charged EG SA female senator, we are told should be given air until convicted.
HERE
A man not yet charged is flogged verbally, his wife insulted and it leaves me this thought.
Why should I not as SM does here, plumb the depths for BRAINLESS INSULTS and see if I get away with it.
Well see I respect OLO and its owner, that is the difference.