Lexi,

Your claim of preference of substance over rhetoric is not matched by your posts. Every slogan or phase of Labor is echoed in your posts. Your criticisms are gentle chidings about some of their spectacularly failed policies.

I have openly supported gay marriage, and indicated my displeasure for the paid parental scheme and the capitulation over the Gonski spendathon.

The Cole commission provided a catalog of the corrupt and unlawful practices of the unions and recommended the setting up of the very successful BCC that reduced corruption and improved productivity.

Abbott very clearly indicated to the ex union power broker Shorten, that if he acceded to the re establishment of the BCC, that much of the need for the RC would fall away. Electricity Bill being beholded to the unions refused, and now the RC with a special police task force will be a reality.

The RC is more than a stunt, it is purgative that clean out the faecal matter that infests the unions and the ALP.

Shorten is repeating the protection racket that was run for Thomson by himself and Juliar, even when the evidence is clear.

SM,

I see Mr Abbott and his government having the Trade
Union movement in their sights and they are determined to
disempower the movement and the Royal Commission will be
one step, a way of trying to blemish the trade movement
in this country and drain their resources. Mr Abbott
will firstly go after the unions, then he'll come
for people's rights at work. Isolated allegations of
wrong-doing in one industry should be investigated
by the police and should not be used to justify a full-scale
assault on the union movement.

Obviously, you see things differently. You accuse me of
being _one-eyed. And of course you see yourself as being
objective.

We have reached the point where further discussions will
not achieve anything constructive. Neither one
of us is prepared to modify our judgements.
Fair enough.

See you on another thread.

Foxy,

"Mr Abbott will firstly go after the unions, then he'll come for people's rights at work."

Again simply parroting the Labor party line.

" Isolated allegations of wrong-doing in one industry should be investigated by the police" and systemic law breaking and corruption needs a royal commission.

SM,

The irony is 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 circuits
of money and power.

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 these elite interests to the
investigative intrusions of a Royal Commission.

Mr Abbott's Royal Commission is not about corruption.
It is purely a political strategy.

See you on another discussion.

Foxy,

Are you and this person the one and the same?

sallymcmanus71
Secretary of the Australian Services Union NSW & ACT Branch
http://en.gravatar.com/sallymcmanus71

Your post, @Foxy, Wednesday, 26 February 2014 9:39:12 PM has apparent similarity with what appears on her, your(?), blog:

<My guess is 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 circuits of money and power. The union movement does not represent the rich and powerful, and we are not the rich and powerful. What goes on behind those closed doors is something about which most Australians know little–but we can be assured that a Coalition Government would never subject these elite interests to the investigative intrusions of a Royal Commission.

But, of course, Abbott’s Royal Commission is not about corruption. It is purely political strategy>

http://sallymcmanus.net/2014/01/30/tony-abbotts-royal-commission-unions/

It also bears mentioning that the author(you?) admits to guessing and has no evidence to back up that statement. Musing doesn't count as evidence and many might disagree with her.

Foxy,

OTB has got you there. Have you any evidence to back this up? All the institutions that you mention have a legal requirement to have their books audited, and any malfeasance, is generally picked up quickly and punished.

Unions, thanks to Labor laws, are required only to provide a "report" to FWA, which many unions still fail to do. This enables all types of corruption to go on undetected. The theft of millions by Thomson and Williamson went completely undetected by FWA, and only came to light when the courageous Kathy Jackson blew the whistle. Even then the FWA had no idea what to do and took nearly 4 years to produce a shoddy report that a handful of junior lawyers could put together in a few weeks.

The proposal that unions are required to comply with company standards and submit their books for a full audit annually should expose this underbelly of the Labor movement.