Lexi I am not targeting SM.
It however is impossible to skip past that comment.
It clearly denys the GFC ever took place.
In effect, by ignoring just why we are in debt, untruths take place of fair comment.
We MUST confront that type of reporting/avoiding truth.
My whole concept here is to lay open the horrible recent history of MY PARTY.
Any party not concerned about its faults, such as SM,s is doomed.
Much has taken place from the days of the NSW filths ruling.
We now need and will get, an end to the single bed Labor and Unions sleep in.
But never ignore words such as SHADOW MINISTER puts here.
Not lonely, such is said about many subjects by Conservatives, those words are unrelated to TRUTH.
Not no mention of SLIPPER, a crafted handmade lie?
This mornings SMH has yet another story of the filth worth reading 6 million dollars in a bank account and claims account owner did not know it!

"One Nation and Pauline Hanson won rapid support.
From all sides, while some will, and I think you and Poirot fit think this, that she was a bit racist.
She actually spoke for many of this country's voters."
Did she speak for you Belly, I suspect so, many of the conservative labour right find the simplistic views of the Hanson's of this world most appealing. Abbott and co are not philosophically opposed to the views of the extreme right, although they would like more of the moderates to think so. They, like some in the Labor Party think of The Greens, see Hanson as eroding part of their constituency.
(I Belly) challenge non Labor voters to contribute some things that concern them about thier party.
No one ever took up the challenge.
I wonder why Belly? Obeid, Macdonald, Thompson, Tripodi, Williamson the list goes on and on, they are all in YOUR party.

Belly,

As I wrote in my other post:

In the analysis

http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/no-one-wins-in-abuse-of-the-law-media-and-politics-20121212-2ba2l.html#ixzz2ErtMbtu6

Justice Rares concedes ''Mr Slipper's conduct in some of those text messages is capable of being characterized as sexual harassment''. The judge described the texts as ''vulgar''

Despite being dropped from Mr Ashby's case, the Cabcharge allegations are still being ''actively considered'' by the commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions.

And Nicola Roxon settled in Ashby's favour, for sexual harassment in the work place. And Notably Nicola Roxon was rapped over the knuckles for abusing commonwealth power to unduly favour Slipper.

Did Ashby's SC unduly use the press (outside the court) to pressure Slipper to concede? Probably. Was material released under court privilege that would not have seen the light of day? Certainly.

Were the texts etc that were published exposing Slipper untrue, and were the basis for his removal as Speaker? Absolutely not.

I see that Labor is considering an inquiry to pursue the Coalition. If I were Abbott, I would welcome it, as Labor's hands are far from clean.

Secondly Labor's claim that the entire debt was due to the GFC is also ludicrous given plentiful examples of wasteful expenditure, and the 6% increase in the public service for no additional services.

Lexi,

Your reference to Abbott's slush fund is irrelevant, as dealt with in another thread. Slush funds in themselves are not illegal and are common place.

What is not legal is creating a legal entity whose purpose is a slush fund and calling it "AWU work place reform association" implying that it was affiliated with the AWU and that its purpose was to reform work places to improve safety.

Especially in the light of its name being fundamental to its being used to rip off companies and the AWU.

Inquiries are only as good as the terms of reference which if coined deceitfully or with mindfulness to a desired outcome or limiting witnesses to a particular list, can be all but useless eg AWB.

I tend to agree with SM that the LNP should push the government for an inquiry into the Slipper/Ashby affair so that all aspects can be revealed including the legal advice (normally kept secret).

It does seem odd the government calling for an inquiry on this when the reason Ashby was paid off was due to risks as obtained in legal advice of a lengthy and possibly costly trial. Future complainants must be looking forward to the governments largesse as set by this precedent. However, it probably is legitimate to ask does the public really want to waste more time and money on this trite. It is a shame the end of the year of parliamentary sittings saw discussions over AWU, Ashby/Slipper and misogyny speeches at the cost of public policy.

In relation to Belly's main point there is clearly a need to clean out the unions via a formal inquiry and bring them back to their core duties of supporting their members. The inquiry would be worth the cost if it instituted some form of oversight and public audit of all union bodies not limited to workers' unions but to the business unions as well eg. BCA etc.

Au contraire, Shadow Minister,

http://www.judgments.fedcourt.gov.au/judgments/Judgments/fca/single/2012/2012fca1411

Above is the full judgment. I'd advise anyone who wishes to argue the point with SM to settle themselves in for an hour or so and read it. It is almost totally damning of Ashby, Doane, Brough and others.

Au contraire, Poirot,

I did read the judgement, and I didn't find anything to contradict what I said above.

Perhaps you could point out where the Judge said that Slipper was entirely innocent, or that the texts were not his / or were not vulgar, or that the cabcharges were not abused?

That the court was used to dig up dirt contrary to its purpose, so what, it is not that Labor has not abused its position to hide its policies from the productivity commission etc.