"Just in case you haven’t noticed, here’s a selection:
The alleged involvement of bikie gangs and underworld figures with the CFMEU at Barangaroo.

The fight between the AMWU and Toyota, which continues even though Holden and Ford have fled after facing similar battles.

The negative influence unions have had on productivity and labour costs at Qantas.

The finding that former union boss John Maitland is corrupt over the granting of coal licenses that made him millions.

The prospect of a royal commission into the alleged corruption and criminal conduct of key players in several unions.

And, of course, needing no explanation, the ongoing saga of Craig Thomson and his former buddy Michael Williamson at the HSU.

This toxic trend demonstrates the ways in which unions have morphed into the businesses they so despise. What they’ve spent so long opposing – the ruthless and greedy nature of the big corporates – they are now themselves guilty of, which is perhaps a reason why less than one in five people trust them to be their representatives at work.
Unions are unequivocally businesses selling themselves to potential consumers (industry workers) in return for a service (potential support). They engage in product development and marketing just like any other business, earning substantial revenue while paying their staff generously, much more than the workers they represent. They are, through and through, as much a product of capitalism as the organisations they oppose.
Surely a judicial inquiry would deliver benefits to union members by airing the crap and eventually clearing it out. How could any union leader tasked with protecting workers be against it?"

My personal understanding is that in the absence of any legal requirement to operate transparently the unions have sought to bolster their income through whatever means either legal or not. This has been increasingly obvious over the last decade, but as the Labor party's major source of income, Labor has not taken any action to stop this, and instead removed obstacles to criminal activity by the unions.

Unions have done a great job in years gone by but don't anymore, on the contrary.

< Unions have done a great job in years gone by but don't anymore, on the contrary. >

Indeed, Indi.

"""
Fittingly, Senator Abetz was speaking in the port city of Fremantle, the scene of a number of the unconscionable actions taken to undermine the war against Axis nations.

Just as former Prime Minister Paul Keating has attempted to rewrite history with his ­recent fallacious account of Australia’s engagement in World War I, so too, have Labor historians attempted to airbrush from our history the efforts of the trade union movement and the ALP to ­incapacitate Australian forces during World War II.

Fortunately, West Australian scholar, poet and author Hal Colebatch has published a painstakingly researched, fully documented account of the treachery in a book Australia’s Secret War. Quoting from the book, Senator Abetz said: “(a) systematic campaign of sabotage criss-crossed the nation, from Townsville to Fremantle, and cost the lives of countless Australian Diggers and allied soldiers.”

The actions of the trade unionists involved included deliberately damaging planes, removing valves from radio transmitters that made them inoperative, which in turn led to an inability to provide safe direction to a squadron of US planes and their crewmen, all of whom were lost.

Coalminers and munition factory workers went on strike, prejudicing the war effort, costing lives, all leading to unnecessary loss and increasing the length and cost of the war.

Senator Abetz continued: “Australian women were needlessly widowed. Australian children were needlessly left fatherless.”

"""

I can't say how much of that is true. But going on the rampant corruption in the ALP and their union mates, it would seem nothing's changed?

Your post is valid "Organised Labor, Organised crime." BUT it can also be said that.
Organised business, Organised crime.

The big difference is organised business can and do use the Government and criminals to do there dirty work.

One political commentator summed up the situation
in this way:

"For conservatives, unions are ever the bogeymen
of Australian politics. Many libertarians flatly
deny the right of workers to organise collectively,
equating it with a form of labour monopoly. For others,
it's simply an ingrained loathing of unions as the
key political force underpinning the ALP itself.
So, any time union misconduct rears its head,
conservatives are apt to leap on the allegations."

Apparently - the real value of attacking trade unions
for the Abbott government is tactical.
By attacking powerful unions like
the CFMEU the government can go after the funding base that
supports the ALP. It can also try to link misconduct
directly to senior ALP figures such as Federal ALP Leader,
Bill Shorten.

We're told that - "the people who really get worked up
about industrial relation laws and unions more generally
are the owners of capital - in other words Big Business
and Bosses, not to mention the right-wing activists
of the political spectrum that line up with them,
like the Sydney Institute."

"The age-old hatreds of Australian politics ensure that
trade unions will always be a juicy target during
periods of conservative government.
However, during the Howard years the Coalition established the
Cole Royal Commission into corruption in the building and
construction industry. The inquiry was motivated by exactly
the sort of allegations that have come to light in
recent days - standover tactics, union kickbacks, and so on.
Yet despite spending two years and $60 million - making it
one of the most expensive in Australian history, the Cole
inquiry did not result in a single prosecution."

Any balanced analysis of trade unions suggests that they
aren't generally corrupt and that the majority of union
officials spend their time doing exactly what they're
meant to: representing their members.

It will be interesting to see what eventuates as a result of
all this fuss. And will voters be really distracted by
it from holding the current government to account.

PS.

"The big difference is organised business can and do use the Government and criminals to do there dirty work"

Really,

Please do tell! Examples are better than rhetoric.

cont'd ...

I forgot to add that instead of spening tens of
millions on Royal Commissions to investigate
what could turn out to be money wasted (as demonstrated
by John Howard's earlier Royal Commission) - the money
could be put to better use by bailing out fruit Canneries
in the Goulburn Valley and winning support from the unions
and the voters. It is after all a no-brainer.

Foxy,

So the stories about the union corruption being broken by Fairfax and the ABC who are both traditionally labor supporters is liberal plot?

So Foxy, are you willing to declare that the union corruption is false information planted by the ABC and Fairfax?

If you accept that there is some merit to the reports, the question is whether you accept whether this corruption is acceptable because it is union based, or whether the rule of law applies to everyone.

The Howard governments last royal commission a decade ago lead to the introduction of the ABCC which labor at the time supported. It was only Bill Shorten (union stooge) which removed it.

at least the 'progressives ' have stopped defending Thompson but only because he is no longer in Government. They still demand people to turn a blind eye to theft, corruption, organised crime unless of course its the Catholic church. Pathetic!

Dear Shadow Minister,

As far as I'm aware in this country people are
innocent until proven guilty and your attempts
at stirring appears to be in keeping with your
political agenda.
In all fairness - we should wait and see
what the results will be from the Royal Commission
before commenting on anyone's guilt. Allegations
have been laid - now it's up to the Royal Commission
to investigate.

As far as your reference to the Howard Government's -
"tough cop on the beat" - The Australian Building
and Construction Commission (ABCC) goes - it did
not prove itself particularly effective at reforming
the supposedly corruption prone industry.
The ABCC was pretty successful in its prosecutions
record, but most of its actions were for minor breaches
of employment law, such as unlawful industrial action.
It did not uncover systematic illegality or entrenched
corruption.

Political commentators tell us, "There's no doubt
that Australian building sites could sometimes be
managed more efficiently - but there's little evidence
that unions are the primary cause of current
inefficiences. And there is no sign of any "wage explosion"
as Employment Minister Eric Abetz was warning this week
in a speech to the Sydney Institute."

On the contrary, according to the experts -
wages in the construction sector have
mirrored those in the broader economy in recent years.

Of course it's a bad look for the CFMEU, and indeed
trade unions more widely. And union malpractice is
all over the news.
These allegations couldn't have come
at a better time for Mr Abbott who promptly foreshadowed a
Royal Commission into union malfeasance. The inquiry could
drag many prominent unions through the court for years
tying up their energies and draining their coffers in legal
fees and that's not counting the expenses that it will cost
the government.

It will be interesting to see what the final
result will be and whether this Commission will be more
successful in uncovering systematic illegality or
entrenched corruption than the previous Commissions
under John Howard were. In any case I'm sure the government will
milk it for all its worth.

Shadow Minister - The RIA and Movie industry go to the FBI which in turn gets NZ security services to illegally spy on a NZ citizen then police helicopters and the SWAT armed police raid the persons house.

The movie industry just had FBI pull a person of of a movie theatre because he was wearing Google glass.

The RIA have just had British police used armed police to raid houses when arrested the interview was carried out by the RIA not the police.

Oil and arms industry and the middle east wars.

Rupert Murdoch getting criminals to bug phones and hack into peoples accounts.

There are a few for you even though I think you are just playing silly buggers and you know I am right.

Last yr on 4 Corners 3 RBA officials were involved in a corruption scandal involving bribes and the sale of our note technology. The Whistle blower loses his job and the two bank officials suffer no investigation but just move onto better paying jobs.

We see very little follow up on corporate or political corruption. The Unions just reflect at large what is happening in society. No mention of the biggest corruption in our history involving bankers and pollies, LIBOR, sub prime mortgage crisis, the US Federal Reserve using the GFC to rob the people via bail outs, quantitive easing etc

The attack on the Unions as usual is a distraction from the big corruption killing our economies.

PS,

Enforcing anti piracy laws is hardly "getting the government to do your dirty work" and stating "oil industry, arms industry" is not an example.

Foxy,

I haven't accused any one person of a crime so this does not apply, but there is more than ample evidence of union thuggery at various sites, the organised crime connection is new. (Are you still asserting that Craig Thomson is innocent?)

To refresh you on the findings of the Cole commission: (has anything changed?)

I am satisfied that the material received evidences practices and conduct which exhibit:

(a) widespread disregard of, or breach of, the enterprise bargaining provisions of the Workplace Relations Act 1996 ;

(b) widespread disregard of , or breach of, the freedom of association provisions of the Workplace Relations Act 1996 ;

(c) widespread departure from proper standards of occupational health and safety;

(d) widespread requirement by head contractors for sub-contractors to have union endorsed enterprise bargaining agreements before being permitted to commence work on major projects in state capital central business districts;

(e) widespread requirement for employees of sub-contractors to become members of unions in association with their employer obtaining a union endorsed enterprise bargaining agreement;

(f) widespread disregard of the terms of enterprise bargaining agreements once entered into;

(g) widespread application of, and surrender to, inappropriate industrial pressure;
(h) widespread use of occupational health and safety as an industrial tool;
(i) widespread making of, and receipt of, inappropriate payments;
(j) unlawful strikes, and threats of unlawful strikes;
(k) threatening and intimidatory conduct;
(l) underpayment of employees’ entitlements;
(m) disregard of contractual obligations;
(n) disregard of federal and state codes of practice in the building and construction industry;
(o) disregard of the rule of law.

5. Much of the evidence of such conduct and practices is not in dispute. Such conduct and practices are not restricted to any one category of participant within the building and construction industry

The word is spelled Labour.
AND I am not going to try to rebut most of what is said here.
I unlike my past union have zero time for the one targeted but highlight it put wages cuts to its members to help the firm.
The tenuous attempt to link the ALP is par for SM.
I however have questions.
SM do you think voters wanted to see Holden go?
SPC knocked back
ABC targeted to reward Abbott,s deputy PM Murdock?
Then Sir why is your polling so bad and to get far worse?
I think his replacement will be Hockey but hope, for my party,s sake, it is not your best chance Turnbull Abbott can start looking for a job
Bicycle sales man?

Belly,

The link between the unions and Labor is far from tenuous, in fact Labor is largely the political arm of the unions, getting most of their funding from "taxes" on worker wages and most of the MPs are ex union heavies. The issues with Thomson and Williamson's corruption while being involved both with the union and the Labor party are prime examples.

The unions and especially the CFMEU has been losing members and has been sourcing income from other sources, some of which are far from legal. Their immunity from scrutiny has allowed the corruption to fester, and the removal of the ABCC which provided some oversight has made the situation much worse.

As for subsidies, I remember a recent poll where the question whether the govt should continue subsidising the car industry got a strong NO.

Labor governments are very popular until they run out of other peoples' money.

Shadow Minister - burying your head in the sand, good tactic.

American and NZ judges have ruled what was done was illegal.

You forgot to address the comments by Arjay.

In this instance you appear to be being naive and not accepting what you know to be true

Dear Shadow Minister,

You may not have accused "any one person of a crime,"
but you certainly infer a great deal, and sling a lot
of mud, don't you. But that's a typical Liberal
tactic - twist and deny when confronted.

Let's look at the Cole Commission's record
of achievement:

1) The Commission's investigations led to not one
single prosecution of a union official or delegate.
Not one.

And as one article on the web points out:

"Yet the Murdoch press rountinely dragged affected
individuals and their unions through the mud. And not
surprisingly, the unions targeted by the Commission
had to divert time and resources (very considerable legal
fees) to defend their representatives. And for what?"

"Innocent people had their reputations smeared and their
lives shattered. Unionists who had dedicated their lives to
standing up for others were subjected to intensive cross
examination in the witness-box and they had their faces
splashed on the front pages of newspapers and on TV news."

We're told that "Despite the Cole Commissions' failure to
find corruption, the Howard Government used the Commission
to set up a special police force for the building industry
which the Abbott Government is now bringing back - the ABCC.
With little to do, the ABCC became little more than a
menace to building workers, spending their time harassing
rank and file union members. Construction Bosses were
delighted."

Here's the irony.

We're told that - "corrupt practices
occur in Australian unions on a lesser scale than those that
take place across other institutions in Australia, such as
sporting clubs, charities, governments, and political
parties. Serious corruption tends to follow the curcuits of
money and power. The union movement does not represent the
rich and powerful. What goes on behind those closed doors
is something about which most Australians know little -
but you can be assured that a Coalition Government would never
subject those elite interests to the investigative intrusions
of a Royal Commission."

Mr Abbott's Royal Commission is not about
corruption. Political commentators seem to agree that
"it is purely political strategy".

The CFMEU has always been on the edge, that has been established.
Another RC is just grandstanding and a waste of money.
Big business is what needs looking into, they don't support liberal for nothing, far from it they pay plenty.
SM only picks out the juicy bits, and leaves the seeds to grow.
Liberal govt; are very unpopular, especially this one. Headed by Howard and that newspaper bloke, they have Abbott as their personal puppet.
Big Joe is out pig hunting, trying to come to grips with counting, and julie is as hard faced as ever, trying to be important.

cont'd ...

One commentator poses an interesting question:

"Why is the Coalition such an eager instigator of
Royal Commission witch-hunts?"

The given answer provides some insight -

"Such commissions represent a 'win-win' for conservative
governments keen to attack unions. There doesn't need to
be any wrong-doing for the labour movement to be
forced to divert time, money and organisational resources
into defending their unions, their volunteer delegates,
and their leaders. And such a distraction couldn't come
at a better time, with the Coalition planning to impose
an aggressive austerity program on working people, to
dismantle Medicare, and to resume their attack on worker's
rights (here's WorkChoices)."

"A wide and extensive inquiry might also deliver additional
benefits if it was to somehow cast doubts on the Federal
Labor Opposition through its union links."

We're told that -

"Every little bit of mud - true or not will be thrown."

Cheers.

Foxy SM has a world of his own.
Let him have it and enjoy.
I have posted thousands of words demanding both the ALP and the Union movement get its act together.
I could post ten time ten that number telling why the best of both movements are Australia,s best hope.
I as most know post the challenge tell us about coalition government problems.
We see daily indeed hourly more storys about them that fail to flatter the whole party.
IF Labor did that the words would scream out loud.
It is unhealthy for the coalition that like its followers here muck and mud can be thrown at Labor.
But they bulk at finding fault within their own team.
Reinforcing my view Labor remains the only party to vote for, but needs to wash behind its ears now and again.
I unafraid of truth will continue to make sure they do.

The Abbott agenda on this is to do some political point scoring at a huge cost to the taxpayer. He and his government have no interest in the welfare of building industry workers. Because if they did they would be calling for a much broader inquire into the building industry in general. Inquiring into both the sleazy practices of unions and employers, with reference to the illegalities of developers and government. Here in NSW you have to question how come 98% of development gets the O'Farrell rubber stamp. I don't think things are much different in other conservative states like Newman Queensland. Grease the "right" palms and the blind eye will quickly be turned and the skys the limit, literally.

Foxy,

Quoting articles from New Matilda and Independent Australia is a sign of desperation. Both are far left blogs consisting of polemic opinion pieces by activists or unionists that bear very little resemblance to reality. The "web article" (obviously you are ashamed to admit where it came from) is written by a long time union organiser and is unsurprisingly against scrutiny of union activities.

The cole commission was a relatively short commission (6 months) tasked not to investigate in detail specific instances, but primarily to investigate the wide scale nature of unlawful and intimidatory practices. The findings as I posted above clearly showed that the unions were out of control.

The ABCC very effectively put a stop to most of this thuggery, and its abolition saw the disgraceful union behaviour start up again. The reports in the ABC and Fairfax clearly show this, and voters are getting sick of this.

I suggest you read this article.

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/alps-union-ties-under-fire-20140202-31vap.html

Strangely, SM how often you are predisposed to quoting from that bastion of unbiased journalism, ha ha, the Murdoch fish wrapper 'The Daily Telegraph'. Then you call it "desperation" when Foxy quotes from what you consider left wing. Can't have it both ways. Are you not a disciple of Piers Akerman?

Fish rapper? Paul we use it out the back here.
Strangest headline in the history of this country,s press.
Yes hard to beat the NT paper but last Wednesdays diatribe/headline in to toilet roll press questioning the ABCs balance wins hands down!

Paul,

Telling porkies again?

As I don't subscribe to the Telegraph, I don't have computer access, and so only quote it when segments have been quoted by other papers. If you cared to engage your brain before your mouth, you would find in my posts only a few quotes from the telegraph in the last year.

Secondly, the comparison between the telegraph and the NM and IA is specious as the first actually does investigative journalism with dedicated fact checkers, and the others are left whinge blogs where activists or unionists post their latest tirade with no regard for the facts, and often including blatant lies with almost no editorial oversight.

Belly,

I applaud your innovation in applying the paper directly to your mind.

organized crime..seized govt..as witnessed by BANKERS Stealing our federal Reserve money printing and mint....UNIONS ETC
http://www.infowars.com/why-are-banking-executives-in-london-killing-themselves/
it then further hijacked media sport science your super..your WORKPLACE..police law courts and freedom S..ETC ETC
http://www.infowars.com/new-fiscal-showdown-builds-over-debt-limit/

THIS DAY..[IN USA]..IS A PERFECT EXAMPLE
ITS THE GLORY HOLE SUPER BOWL DAY..today[the abc told me so]
the media will be advertising ELITES adverts for free and abc will talk EXCLUSIVELY..OF it..its all over news radio..etc

they get billion dollar tax free subsidies into tax exempt trust funds that yet get neat tax write offs..[the 'cheap SEATS COST 1700..DOLLARS..AND ITS 16 THOUSAND PLUS TO SIT..in thE LOWER LEVELS

THEN we find many bought their tax free seats,,upfront..for pennies on the dollar..thing is wake up..the fox runs the mad house
http://www.infowars.com/psychologist-to-the-rich-says-his-clients-are-feeling-really-persecuted-right-now/
big money CORRUPTS UNIONIST GOVT LAW AND MEDIA Alike

http://www.infowars.com/nfl-microcosm-of-the-corporate-class/
http://www.infowars.com/nj-gives-nfl-super-tax-break-for-super-bowl-and-pays-for-security/

supreme control

http://www.straight.com/news/578611/japanese-radio-commentator-quits-after-being-told-shut-about-fukushima-nuclear-plant

ITS A POLICE STATE MATE
http://www.militarytimes.com/article/20140131/NEWS/301310017/Exclusive-General-says-more-Marines-could-based-throughout-Africa

http://www.blacklistednews.com/Obama_Says_James_Clapper_%27Should_Have_Been_More_Careful%27_In_How_He_Lied_To_Congress/32526/0/38/38/Y/M.html

THE NEW WORLD order
http://www.blacklistednews.com/New_Model_Of_Governance_in_Bailout_Europe%3A_Silence%2C_Lies%2C_and_Evasion/32536/0/38/38/Y/M.html

dirty money..trying to wash away the blood shed in getting it
http://www.blacklistednews.com/Drug_trafficking_ravages_Central_American_forests/32492/0/38/38/Y/M.html

govt employees incentive's to get dirty
http://www.blacklistednews.com/State_crime_labs_are_incentivized_to_get_false_convictions/32498/0/0/0/Y/M.html

may the farce NOT BE CONCEALED..BY YOUR SILENce
http://libertyblitzkrieg.com/2014/01/31/may-the-farce-be-with-you-janet-yellen-compares-bernanke-to-obi-wan-kenobi/

http://rinf.com/alt-news/breaking-news/federal-reserve-tapering-gold-market/

THE SNOWJOB
http://vimeo.com/85155619

http://www.theguardian.com/world/video/2014/jan/31/snowden-files-computer-destroyed-guardian-gchq-basement-video

SM, are you saying you don't post stuff from 'The Daily Telegraph'? I distinctly recall you doing so on several occasions.

This under your nic

The Telegraph.

Is this the greens' way of differentiating themselves from the main parties and real issues? Is this the party for whom reality is too hard?
If I care to look closer you indeed post links to the said fish wrapper.

"actually (Telegraph) does investigative journalism with dedicated fact checkers" Yah right, run it past Rupert first. News of the World a prime example of Murdoch journalism. Even amongst the few thinking conservatives The Telegraph has no credibility, its simply a tabloid mouth peace for the right wing ratbags.

Paul,

Are you illiterate?

"SM, are you saying you don't post stuff from 'The Daily Telegraph'? I distinctly recall you doing so on several occasions."

No I never said that, I said "only quote it when segments have been quoted by other papers.... only a few quotes from the telegraph in the last year."

So your statement "Strangely, SM how often you are predisposed to quoting from... 'The Daily Telegraph" Is complete bollocks, and so is your childish tendency to go to extremes.

The thread is about how the unions have reverted to their unlawful activities now the ABCC has been abolished by the union heavy Shorten, and what action is appropriate.

Dear Paul,

I admire your tenacity.

See you on another more reasoned and
intelligent discussion.

This one is simply more of the same from our
resident "..." (you fill in the details).

SM, you ask (Paul1405) Are you illiterate? When it comes to reading and writing obviously based on the fact I can read your posts and write a response I must not be illiterate.
However, illiterate can have other meanings, for example if I was POLITICALLY ILLITERATE I could gain employment as a journalistic hack on the Murdoch gutter press 'The Daily Telegraph' with Old Rupt's blessing I could write an irrational right wing diatribe attacking anything and anybody left of Genghis Khan. You could then dutifully cut and paste that political clap trap of mine onto this very forum!

After all you did post this little gem from Murdoch's trashy publication.

The Daily Telegraph.

"Is this the greens' way of differentiating themselves from the main parties and real issues? Is this the party for whom reality is too hard?"

You say you only quote it when segments have been quoted by other papers. What other paper(s), besides another Murdoch grub sheet, and you, would bother reproducing that bit of journalistic junk?

Paul,

This should help with your literacy problem:

few

determiner, pronoun, & adjective

a small number of.

You said I often I often posted from the Telegraph, I then said I posted references from the Telegraph a few times a year, and finally you then attack me with "SM, are you saying you don't post stuff from 'The Daily Telegraph'?"

Which leads to the illiteracy conclusion. I would offer to use small words, but it seems you have a problem even with them.

To write for the telegraph, you would need to use big words and have more than the tenuous grip on reality that the greens suffer from.

SM, your attempt at ridicule through scorn is noted. However that does not negate the inescapable fact that you constantly dredge the cesspool of journalistic excrement, in search of published political fecal matter in the form of Daily Telegraph diatribes to support your somewhat callow line of argument.
Do you arrive at your local newsagent before the crack of dawn each day in eager anticipation of getting your hand on today's copy of the latest Murdoch tabloided gutter sheet, 'The Daily telegraph'? The "no news newspaper" that features both the latest, and of equal importance, in the eyes of a Telegraph reader, Blockheads footy injury, and will he pack down in the Wombats scrum this weekend, and the ignominious machinations of anyone and everyone who's beliefs are to the left of that good gentleman Rupert (I don't control my newspapers) Murdoch, including the Labor Party and The Greens. As unbiasedly "reported", with uncle Rupts permission, by the likes of the pimply faced teenage "political reporter" Gemma Jones or do you just go straight to the Piers Akerman column to read another diatribe on Labor. Gemma and Piers sure know what side their breads buttered! Which one is it SM?

Paul,

Once again you show a logic deficit. You again claim that I frequently get my material from the daily telegraph, yet in spite of what I suspect is desperate trawling through my posts have only been able to find one reference.

I don't normally purchase any hard copy papers and typically read the Australian and the SMH (Both sides) with doses of the New york times and the BBC.

I guess that the vitriol directed at the main stream media is mostly due to the terror the greens feel at the harsh light of reality, and that the two main media houses regularly expose the greens for the pillocks that they are.

Sorry to come in late, but as for a connection between labor and the unions, even the standing member for Rudds seat was introduced by Shorten as a one time fine union boss.

They (labor) will never get that monkey off their back, and perhaps they have no intention of doing so, because perhaps it's only their supporters who want them to, not them themselves.

We also must remember that most of the turmoil in business being witnessed today has only really festered under the fair work act. Another union/labor body.

My late father was a unionist through and through and while I accept that THEY DID do a great job in protecting workers rights, they have simply gone too far and I think that deep down even they know that but pride won't allow them to loosen up.

I don't recall any of this happening during the second to fourth term of the Howard government, which incidentally was when the country was booming.

It's time for the unions to decide to either pull back, or bury the very industries they perceive to protect.

SM, no desperate trawling required through your posts, I went straight to it. I recalled you had indeed recently started a new discussion with a quote from, you gussed it, your favorite source of political comment 'The Daily Telegraph'. were you quoting the wisdom of Piers Akerman or was it the pimply faced Gemma Jones? No matter, its all the thoughts of Chairman Rupts, anyway!

Paul,

You still don't get it!

You said I often referred to the telegraph, yet have only one example. You were wrong, just suck it up.

It must also hurt especially when the article so clearly exposes the air head nature of the greens.

SM, I don't doubt you do subscribe to 'The Times of London' or some such other lofty publications and read them thoroughly. But the inescapable fact is, I found it east to find where you started a discussion based on trashy journalism from 'The Sydney Daily Telegraph' and I quote you again as you cut and pasted it from 'The Daily Telegraph'

"Is this the greens' way of differentiating themselves from the main parties and real issues? Is this the party for whom reality is too hard?"

You also said "and so only quote it('The Daily Telegraph') when segments have been quoted by other papers. Ho hum, do you so, can you POINT to the above QUOTE of yours from 'The Murdoch Fish Wrapper' that also appears in one of those other respected publications which as you say has also printed this dribble above? You will know it because you CHECKED it out beforehand.

If you fail to do so, I can only assume you are telling a PORKY! and do none of what you claim you do.

Paul,

All I see is you wiggling from admitting you posted a lie.

You claimed that I "often" refer to the telegraph, I said I did so only seldom, and to date you can only find one example, and repeating it several times does not change this. You stuffed up, so just man up and admit it instead trying to change the subject.

Whether I read the telegraph or not is irrelevant. I simply provided some personal background, and you can chose to believe it or not. If you use google news you will find snippets from newspapers all over the world.

SM, I now understand that you and the Mad Monk have another thing in common, not only do you both support failed Liberal Party policies, you both tell PORKIES! Tony Baloney about the poor workers at SPC, so said Liberal Party MP Sharman Stone.

Here is a link to a quality journal 'The Sydney Morning Herald' I don't need to "check it out" with some other newspaper as unlike 'The Telegraph' one can rely on 'The Herald' like the ABC, for fair and unbiased reporting.

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/liberal-mp-sharman-stone-accuses-tony-abbott-and-joe-hockey-of-lying-over-spc-ardmonas-workplace-agreement-20140204-31y52.html

Now, you have FAILED to substantiate you bogus claim about checking 'Telegraph' crap with other newspapers before posting on here. The post I pointed to, by your own omission you admit you told a PORKY! There was none of that claimed checking, was there.

As for posting other cut and paste jobs from 'The Daily Telegraph' you have done, I don't need to substantiate that fact, as "often" is subjective not quantitative. I simply say You "OFTEN" post unchecked material, despite claiming the opposite, from that Murdoch fish wrapper 'The Daily Telegraph' and that can be deemed, like Abbott, as telling a PORKY!

Paul,

You are lying again.

First you lie claiming that I often refer to the telegraph, and I don't.

Next you lie that I claim that I " you bogus claim about checking 'Telegraph' crap with other newspapers before posting on here." Where if you were literate you would see that it is plainly false.

I claimed that because the telegraph is a subscription paper (which you can easily check) and cannot be read or copied on-line that:
a) I seldom use it,
b) when I do it is because its articles, or parts of its articles are referred to by other sources from which I can cut or paste.

I do not feel the need to "check" their information, as what they print is far more likely to be valid than the squalid little blogs the NM or IA, and if I had free access to their articles I probably would quote them more frequently.

Which all boils down to your lie that I "often" quote them.

Paul,

Try this from the same paper:

http://www.smh.com.au/comment/labor-and-greens-shout-no-no-no-to-ending-corruption-20140205-321gu.html

"Labor and Greens shout no, no, no to ending corruption

There are clean unions and dirty unions. Then there is a bikie gang masquerading as a union, which describes elements within the Construction, Forestry, Mining and Engineering Union. Some of its officials belong in jail, along with bikies they employ as enforcers and blackmailers.
In the CFMEU, certain officials receive free building materials, delivered off the back of a truck. In Sydney, some CFMEU officials allowed crime figures to infiltrate big construction projects and start milking funds. In Queensland, some CFMEU officials paid bikies to visit work sites, cause damage, then claim there were health and safety issues, a classic protection racket. In Victoria, intimidation is standard practice for some elements of the CFMEU, with some people well known for their links to the criminal milieu.
If the CFMEU spent all its time looking after construction workers it would not be such a lightening rod for trouble and dirt. Instead, it is the last organisation you would listen to if you wanted to clean up the building industry, while the Australian Building and Construction Commission is the last organisation you would shut down if you wanted to clean up the building industry.
This is exactly what Julia Gillard and her government did, shut down the ABCC after a campaign by the CFMEU and the Greens. Certain CFMEU officials even bragged that the ABCC would not survive.

After the ABCC was eliminated the CFMEU re-established its muscle on construction sites, and bribery, corruption, collusion and intimidation have all spiked up.
It means Australia is seeing a stark divide open up in politics, which should work well for Prime Minister Tony Abbott."

SM, like you often do I to can post a link to 'The Telegraph'. Naturally I am not a subscriber as I don't fish and therefore don't need to wrap them, and at home we use a quality paper in the toilet and therefore have absolutely no use for that 'The Murdoch Mud Sheet'.
Just to prove it here is a link.

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/breaking-news

Add it to your favorites list then you will have easy access when OFTEN you want to link a bit of Daily Telegraph crap on here. Maybe I'm wrong, you most likely already have it.

Paul,

Lying again!

"SM, like you often do I to can post a link to 'The Telegraph'."

Once or twice a year is not often. Here is the single quote that ruffled your feathers so much. The Telegraph has the greens nailed in one:

"THE Greens' campaign to scrap the Lord's Prayer from parliament is so exquisitely boutique, bourgeois and anally introspective that it is hard not to believe it was deliberately conceived in an effort to make the party even more repellent to middle Australia than it already is.

Indeed, it is almost as though the Greens' Marketing Sub-Collective had stumbled across a hitherto undiscovered rock-dwelling hermit who didn't already regard them as a pack of inner city wnkrs and thus determined that they would have to ratchet up their brand messaging."

SM, I see you are taking to quoting from 'The Daily Telecrap' again as you OFTEN do. This is understandable as conservatives find solace in the verbal diarrhea that pours forth from the pens of the raving ratbags that masquerade as journalists at 'The Telecrap'. Your latest quote, who's by-line was that, the obnoxious vomit boy himself, Piers Akerman, or the Pimply Faced Gemma Jones, or was it one of the other Rupert approved 'Wombels'?

Paul,

I just repeated the same one again to show up your lying.

I look forward to you finding more than one reference in the last year.

SM you claim that "I (SM) look forward to you finding more than one reference in the last year from 'The Daily Telecrap'.

Reference 1 6/2/14

"THE Greens' campaign to scrap the Lord's Prayer from parliament is so exquisitely boutique, bourgeois and anally introspective that it is hard not to believe it was deliberately conceived in an effort to make the party even more repellent to middle Australia than it already is.

Reference 2 19/1/14

is this the greens' way of differentiating themselves from the main parties and real issues? Is this the party for whom reality is too hard?

Well, well well, 2 this year already and its only February.

Over to you SM that's another PORKY! At that rate we can look forward to no less than 20 or 30 'Telecrap' quotes from you in 2014. How OFTEN you quote from the 'Telecrap'. I can't be bothered to trawl for them as I don't trawl others posts

Same one repeated Ijit.

SM, unfortunately the juries returned with a guilty verdict. The penalty for this "PORKYNESS" of yours is you are denied access to the Piers Akerman diatribe for a whole year. For a conserve such as yourself this may seem harsh and unreasonable, but it is for your own good. You never known you may start reading quality news from the likes of the ABC. After a years diet of reading good clean unbiased reporting from the ABC, you may even see the light and abandon your PORKY ways, and you never know, you might even join THE GREENS and find true political happiness.

Paul,

Don't be so childish. I have seen more adult behaviour from a teenager.

I also listen to the ABC radio every day, but am not stupid enough to think that they are unbiased. With 80% of staff openly either Green or Labor it is virtually impossible to produce balanced programming.

SM, "With 80% of staff openly either Green or Labor" where did you get that "fact" from 'The Daily Telegraph'? and what are the other 20%, communists!
One thing about conserves, in general they never have a sense of humor!

SHADOWMINOR QUOTE..<<..This toxic trend demonstrates the ways in which unions have morphed into the businesses they so despise.>>

that was tempting..but from respect for bellY..i couldn't JUMP..on that aspect of criminal institution..that has subverted the role of govt ..from regulating trade/defense etc..into sitting ducks..for the mates running the two party and two half parties..that the same backdoor types helped set up.

ITS NOT..that they became that they..despised
they were set up by those disposed..to make it look fair..TO..the disposSed...MANY..Under foreign-occupation..to internationalist intrests

ITS a version of judas goat..[where a 'tame'..critter infiltrates a wild herd of vermin..to lure them to feeding..stations..to be captured[thus the likes of bob brown..trapped..those like him/litle knowing he was working for cia

the minute that got ouT..he left
the judas goat[of itself is quite..sincere..yet will at that 'key time'..dO*..A De-moc/rat rat flip[like that gave us gst]

i like bob..i liked the dems..met many
i like the greens[most my druggie mates vote and did deals with greens..I even allowed them to take 'donations'..when i was receiving govt income[my hemp party has close ties..with the greens..etc

I LOVE AND MOSTLY AGREE WITH PAUL..damm caploc virus]
but..thats the cost of living out my bEliefs.

but it MUST..be clearly exposed..[as the cec did..just who 'runs the scape goat[sorry judas goat..SMALL..party scheme..that sets up an appearance..of fairness..that then allows demon-autocratic govt..to appear..TO BE FAIR..[representative]..when ITS NOT.

SO ITs not what they changed..into..but what they were set up to be[a way to install

..a representative talking judas goat..to betray us trusting..souls..without the heart nor means to bring back true representative governance

sadly..i must speak this as true
and both of YOU..know it.

CTD

one who wants to do real change..must do it..with..a main party
i put it to a few.parties..they are better infiltrating..the main parties..[then becoming a hero-goat..to the people..[a breal one..not the fake ones sadly we got now

like i recall peters garrot..he DID..the main party thing..but fOUND YET AGAIN..the demon-idiosyncratic..of the numbers demo-grap-sic 'numb'-ers [of..the few entrenched sellouts to special interest..able to subvert representing the people[many]..into ongoing perpetual..advantage,,of the elite/few

<<What they’ve spent so long opposing – the ruthless and greedy nature of the big corporates – they are now themselves guilty of,>>

yes..if only you the shadow man..would represent..me
I WOULD vote for you..but not ya party..not any party

the DEMONIC..representation..of corporate special interest must end

but we of the people..are too busy looking for judas goats..in the other parties..in others words..by their wOrks not woRDS will we know theM..but by then the damage=doNE

HOW..to combine..the heart of the belly..with the wiSDOM..of the shadow..with the persistence..of paul..[man we got a new party..here?]

the..MAKE THE WORLD..LIKE OLO PARTY.
we rule*..LIKE WE POst..openly..directly..one to one?

how about it guys?
together we can bring real change.

ITS FUNNY..just as i THINK..how to change/things
i get an offer
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=15996

of one who yet again wants to speak for me

[but do WHAT THEY DO/..ie represent a believable/but fake opposing MINOR VOICE..WHEN IN THE END THEY inevitably..*do the demo-RAT/CRAT/judas goat..*THING.

SEE ITS ALL NUMBERS
AND NUMBERS /MONEY/CONTROL/organization..the two main parties DO HAVE

its likely a good idea..but wont be allowed to work
in fact..if we heard IT..ITS BECAUSE WE CAN WATCH IT...[learn from it]

I get the weekly "newsletter" from my union, and the work being constantly done by the union in support of workers is fantastic. This work goes on day in, day out, without any fanfare, without anything being reported, just known to the union and its membership.

paul..i was in your union
i was in canberra..'stumbled'..upon a meeting of my greenie union
wasnt even allowed in..wasnt allowed nuthin..[i went to my bank and said stop them taking money from my bank]

I BEEN IN THE METAL WORKERS UNION..PLUS 3 OTHER UNIONS
all they did was take..ditto political parties..they all want to speak FOR me

[IM JUST REVENUE AND A NUMBER..that gets them..access to powers

those who send you..your news letter
what did you do.with that info?

i get a daily news letter..[for free]
http://whatreallyhappened.com/

i GET A daily pep talk for free
http://xml.nfowars.net/Alex.rss

JUST TWO OF THESE..reveal more than money can buy
ok..i hate knowing..the info..[here is a sample]
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=6181&page=31

but i get more from them..than any weakly newsletter
that allows the info..to die with my reading it

mate we have TO SHARE..OUR INFO..for free
daily..

or its 'edited'/cleaned up..too..easy to ignore
why use the knowing..if the knowing stops here.

Paul,

"A survey of over 600 Australian journalists, conducted by a senior academic from the University of the Sunshine Coast, Queensland, has cast a revealing light on the political beliefs of Australian journalists.

It shows that over 40 per cent of ABC journalists support the Greens, over 30 per cent support Labor, and just 15 per cent support the Coalition.

While political beliefs do not automatically result in biased reporting, the left-wing dominance suggests that the culture of the ABC is overwhelmingly to the left, so that many journalists are unaware that their views are far to the left of the mainstream, or believe that they are a vanguard who must “educate” the public towards their perceptions of reality."

Sorry, I got the Labor component wrong, but now try to tell me that the ABC is balanced.

P.S. I don't find lies about me funny, and by your hissy fit, I guess that you are not fond of criticism.

forgot the link

http://newsweekly.com.au/article.php?id=5595

SHADOW miner..I LOVE YOUR LOYALTY
how you talk of the talking points.

MAte on the other thread ..you as much as said it all
[re your spORTS EXCUSE FOR RICH SPC..executives]

MATE BOTH ARE A PERVERSION..would you rob a bank if they did/

really..s&m..its no..excuse
then we get to your blast post

mate the talking points are rally GETTING LAME
think mate..you just authoritatively affirmed..lib research

ie you just ppp pointed out
the 'smoking gun'

SM with this little gem and I quote from Professor Sunshine!

"Professor John Henningham is an Australian journalist, educator and director of the journalism college, Jschool, in Brisbane. MORE THAN 20 YEARS AGO he conducted the first national survey of Australian journalists."

More than 100 years ago SM type people had children working down coal mines! So what you ask. I got that also from Professor Sunshine.

SM some relevance please! LOL

Paul,

Are you a masochist? Prof JH did conduct the first survey over 20 years ago. However, if you were literate and read the article:

"recently headed a study which surveyed 605 journalists around Australia between May 2012 and March 2013."

Go back to your weekly union version of Pravda where they tell you what a wonderful job they are doing while they use their union credit cards for prostitutes.

Apparently Craig Thomson thinks it is perfectly normal practice to do so.

SM here we go again another PORKY by you

You said "A survey of over 600 Australian journalists...shows that over 40 per cent of ABC journalists support the Greens, over 30 per cent support Labor, and just 15 per cent support the Coalition." you claim this from a survey conducted between May 2012 and March 2013

In fact Professors Sunshine aka Folker Hanusch

Folker Hanusch, senior lecturer in journalism at University of the Sunshine Coast, Queensland, recently headed a study which surveyed 605 journalists around Australia between May 2012 and March 2013. It found that more than half (51.0 per cent) describe themselves as holding left-of-centre political views, compared with only 12.9 per cent who consider themselves right-of-centre.

Nothing at ALL about voting intentions, just the vague reference to how people describe themselves.
Proof please that a survey conducted between May 2012 and March 2013 of 605 journalists, how many were from the ABC? Showed the ABC journalists of unknown number hold voting intentions to be 40% Green 30% Labor and 15% Coalition. What was the voting intentions of the remainder? One could hold a so called left-of-centre political view and vote for the Christian Democrats or the Socialist Alliance or even The Liberal Party.
One thing is for sure and certain, and you don't need a survey to know 100% of Murdoch's hacks vote for the lunatic right in the form of The Liberal Party!

Paul,

I really hope that you are just pretending to be stupid to throw me. Please just actually read the article before any shred of respect I have for you vanishes.

The first two paragraphs of the article:

"A survey of over 600 Australian journalists, conducted by a senior academic from the University of the Sunshine Coast, Queensland, has cast a revealing light on the political beliefs of Australian journalists.

It shows that over 40 per cent of ABC journalists support the Greens, over 30 per cent support Labor, and just 15 per cent support the Coalition."

This is not my opinion.

SM, lets get to the nitty gritty on you supposed survey. The number of ABC journalists who gave "voting intention" 34, and of that 34 how many report on political matters, how many on gardening etc etc, not stated. the response from the ABC "(they) dismissed it, saying that the number of journalists participating in the survey was too small to draw any conclusions."

"ABC radio presenter Mark Colvin told the Australian that the result was “absolutely meaningless”. He said, “Only a tiny proportion of ABC journalists were prepared to reveal their voting intentions.... You don’t know anything about the much larger percentage of ABC journalists who were not prepared to reveal their intentions.… It’s absolutely ridiculous to draw conclusions from this survey on that subject.” (The Australian, May 21, 2013)."

Much of the article contains the biased opinion of it author Peter Westmore for example.

"While political beliefs do not automatically result in biased reporting, the left-wing dominance suggests that the culture of the ABC is overwhelmingly to the left, so that many journalists are unaware that their views are far to the left of the mainstream, or believe that they are a vanguard who must “educate” the public towards their perceptions of reality.

It also highlights the success of the left’s long march through the institutions, a process formulated by the Italian Marxist, Antonio Gramsci,"

Now we are down to the magic number of "34" can you should anywhere that even one of the 34 is a political journalist for the ABC? Could I not equally say about the 34 in question these journalists may write for the ABC's Gardening Australia.
Do you have another survey that shows 100% of government employed plumbers, who gave their voting intentions, vote One Nation! Would be just as useful!

Paul,

I will congratulate you on actually reading the article. Pity it took so long.

It is a pity that you don't have the back bone to apologise for some of your more spectacular stuff ups such as:

1) "where did you get that "fact" from 'The Daily Telegraph'? 2) "MORE THAN 20 YEARS AGO" and 3)"Nothing at ALL about voting intentions"

Now gives us with no further research "Could I not equally say about the 34 in question these journalists may write for the ABC's Gardening Australia." Yes you could say that, along with claiming the moon is made of cheese. You also forgot that the number of journalists that declared their political sentiments was much higher.

For a more detailed version of the article:

http://theconversation.com/whose-views-skew-the-news-media-chiefs-ready-to-vote-out-labor-while-reporters-lean-left-13995

The co ordinator of the study:

Folker Hanusch
Senior Lecturer in Journalism at University of the Sunshine Coast
"Folker Hanusch does not work for, consult to, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has no relevant affiliations."

Also made this comment:

"If we disregard the 42.8% of journalists who are undecided, refused to answer or would vote for a party or candidate other than the major three, this is a statistically significant result."

To translate for illiterate and innumerate Greens. - The probability that the ABC journalists are balanced politically is very very small.