SM,

Excuse me for imagining that courts are our "decision makers" - they are the mechanism we employ in reaching conclusions.

Besides, I have carefully read and reread the judgement which forensically pieced together the machinations and sequence of events as they unfolded in this case.

So I'm not abdicating my decision making at all - unless you're suggesting that I disbelieve the information contained in the judgment.

I'm only surmising as far as Pyne is concerned....unlike you who declares either guilt or innocence, without charge or a finding of guilt in a court - in an extremely partisan manner.

Unsure, in a thread I started to let the pain out.
The pain of loving the ALP.
Loving my union.
Knowing both are to suffer because of filth in both movements.
Shadow Minister appears.
To rebut reported truths, about his team.
To PRETEND THE JUDGMENT handed down in the Slipper Gate case never happened.
Surely I can be forgiven for laughing?
For being stunned?
In one thing, believe me, Liberals are better than Labor.
They have as much filth.
But hide them better.
Must surely be an embarrassment, for SM to post the party line and nothing else.
AF, after Abbott, he will be dumped, our SM . will pretend he always knew he was no good.
Loven it!

Poirot,

The vast majority of our decisions are resolved without requiring access to the courts or the high courts etc. The courts are one of a myriad of our decision makers and typically the arbiters of last resource. They are not always right either, as they have to follow a set standard of rules, which often acquits people on technicalities, and whose judgement are often criticised. Other decision makers include coroners, judicial and other inquiries, Parliamentary appointed bodies such as FWA etc, even down to disciplinary committees etc.

Craig Thomson has essentially been found guilty of a multitude of corrupt activities by a judicially headed, independent body, appointed by parliament precisely for that purpose. Was the report criticised, yes, was the conclusion criticised, No.

Am I entitled to declare his guilt, absolutely.

SM,

Here's a run down of your "...judicially headed, independent body....".

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=5416&page=0#148236

The Vice President is the partner of Thomson's chief accuser. The Vice President's computers, hand held devices and smart phone records were "not" provided to KPMG.

Great standards demonstrated in the FWA investigation(insert Sarmark)

(Sarcmark)

Belly,

From a personal standpoint, I offer you this true story.

My company operated in a state where it was not compulsory to join any union. This was in the building sector. The company employed both union and non union members within separate divisions, and workers were given the choice of division to work in. The employer offered higher rates of pay to non union members, together with performance bonuses, and offered union members the rate which their union demanded they be paid, but only that.

The company workers decided for themselves which was the better offer, and obviously chose the path which paid more. The union member division lost it's workers and closed down. The now non union division members were happy enough to turn down all union arguments that they should rejoin the union. Both sides of this company reaped the benefit.

For the employer a boom in business, and the wholehearted support of well paid employees with pride in their work, and the company the worked for.

For the employees - more money, a happy working environment, and access direct to their employer to resolve any problems without an intermediary, or to discuss their ideas for improvement.

Word got out in the industry, and the company had no shortage of people asking for jobs.

Downside to ths story is that the company had a rash of houses mysteriously burned to the ground - proven to be arson, after it became completely non union.