In reference to Coalition MP Stewart Robert;

"The Albanese government has ordered an investigation into contracts awarded in the government services portfolio, with Bill Shorten declaring parliamentarians using public office to “enrich private mates” is corruption." Guardian News.

In relation to Robert's behaviour the Minister for government services, Bill Shorten said in parliamentary question time; “I want to say to Australians listening to this, the Albanese government believes the job of an MP is to work for constituents, not your former business partners,” .... “using public office as a politician to enrich your private friends and mates, including political donors, is not a shade of grey”.

If these allegations are proven correct, and there is every possibility they will be, then Robert has no alternative other than to resign from parliament, and a by-election called.

http://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2022/nov/24/labor-orders-investigation-into-government-contracts-linked-to-stuart-robert

"Is This CORRUPTION?"

No.

Next question please.

Dear Paul,

I watched Q and A last night and this case was raised
and the politician replied that he did nothing wrong.
That it was normal practice for politicians to provide
advice when asked and that he himself did not financially
benefit from the advice he gave. In any case seeing as
there is to be an investigation into all this - perhaps
it would be better to wait and see what the investigators
find - and whether any laws had been breached?

Silly question. How would we know if there was any corruption, especially when this is the first most of us have heard of it! There will always be a rush to prejudge by a certain type of person, even a certain ex-Prime Minister. With others, particularly if one of their political "enemies" is involved.

Wait and see.

Apparently there is an investigation going on - and
facts and data are available. Lets wait and see.

Bill Shorten's inquiry seems to be corruption !

Hi Foxy,

Even though Robert was a complete incompetent as a minister, his own side of politics will admit that, we should not prejudge the fella. Whenever a politician says; "Everything I did was LEGAL!" one must be circumspect in their judgement, as it's generally an attempt to negate the moral aspect of the "crime".

Thank you mhaze for your considered opinion, it was rather detailed. ttbn, How would you know anything, as you quietly slumber down there at the "Rest In Peace' retirement home for octogenarians. Wont Nurse Iron Pants turn on the telly for you old fellas, shame on her.

The Virginia Bell report is out on the secret actions of "Fuhrer" Morrison whilst in office. The report labelled Morrison's self-appointment to five ministries as 'corrosive' to trust in government. Of course it was all legal, so were the Nuremberg Laws!

Dear Paul,

I watched Q and A last night and Robert was not very
convincing. Still I think we should wait and see what
Shorten comes up - if anything. I must confess though,
I don't see the point of it all. Why resurrect something
that happened so long ago? I don't think the man has much
influence as a backbencher - and who knows how ling he's
going to keep his job anyway. So why bother with all this
expense on a lame backbencher - whose career is probably
over.

Morrison is now a convenient diversion for Labor's so so performance !

Anyone who believes Q & A is based on integrity doesn't obviously know what integrity means !

Hi Indy,

Look at the alternative to Albo. It's MR POTATO HEAD. I know Albo is a bit of a fruit, but do we deserve a potato running the country?

Paul1405,
I give you 10 out of 10 for not suggesting a Green as an alternative however, this Labor Govt is gradually falling more & more into the hands of the unions. Albo is the second Labor PM since the inception of the party but is already being undermined by the useless parasitic brigade.
Not having an Irish/Scottish heritage clearly shows in his fairly sober thinking.

Dear Paul,

Labor since it came into power has not only met
its expectations - but it has by far exceeded
them. They are showing the country what can be
achieved when you strive for inclusion and unity
rather than divisiveness and exclusion. The
heritage of Albanese has certainly stood him in good
stead thus far and undoubtedly it will continue.
Labor is actually listening to people and communities -
and making policies accordingly. Therein lies the difference.
And it is a big difference - as we can see with the results
in Victoria.

Foxy,
Try to look at these strategies in generational terms not just at the moment !

I'd like to see an investigation by the Albanese Govt into the Public Service costs vs actual value & outcome !
Would the Public Service Union support that ? Does this union view the Peter Principle as corruption ?

Hi Foxy,

Interesting that Millennial's, and those with a tertiary education, are overwhelmingly voting for progressives such as the Greens, teal independents and to a lesser extent Labor. The conservatives of the right led by the Liberals are being left to woo a dying demographic of elderly rusted on conservative voters, while trying to beg the support of right wing extremism from people like Hanson and Palmer.

The progressive agenda is succeeding, and its not down to majority government on our part. Listening to Victorian Greens leader Samantha Ratnam last evening she explained how today's Greens policy becomes tomorrows reality. As a party we have always strove to see our "radical" progressive agenda implemented through reasoned argument and political cooperation with others of the same mind.

Note the word "radical", something I'm proud off, is not used in the negative destructive sense, but as a positive voice for real and lasting change.

Indy, how about an investigation into the total waste that is AGED WELFARE? I suspect the productivity of you lot is zero! How about supporting a Seniors National Service? In that way the taxpayer will save 25 billion bucks in one year. How does that ring with YOU?

Paul1405,
By sorting out the Peter Principle Public Servants i.e. you et al, you'll find the 25 Billion you speak of will pale into petty cash !

Paul, There already is a Seniors National Service. It's just not formalised or known by that name. It's Volunteers. Of course, seniors aren't the only ones to volunteer, but they are often the backbone of volunteer groups.

I once quantified the monetary value of volunteers by computing the cost if we had to pay them. This was to acquit a government grant where their was a required $ for $ input. The volunteer value was five times the actual grant. I think all volunteer organisations should do this.

Of course, you do realise what your suggestion implies? Setting up a formal SNS would mean a whole lot more public servants being paid, and maybe even a new government department.

Good post Cossomby. There are many services that would not exist without seniors volunteering. No point in trying to get through to Paul, though: he hates the elderly, even though he is one himself.

Hi Cossomby,

The wife has been doing her voluntary work this morning, as she does 3 morning a week and then some. I do some myself, next Monday is Xmas lunch for the homeless and needy, we have over 100 signed up already, up from last year where it was 70+. Yes, nearly all our group are over 65 about 30 people, mostly retired church folk. BTW I agree with all you say.

"a whole lot more public servants being paid, and maybe even a new government department." Indyvidual is all in favour of that, with his calls for 95% of PS to be sacked, police, nurses, teachers etc. He is also in favour of a forced national service for young people. I'm only trying to provide some balance.

95% of PS to be sacked,
Paul1405,
Thanks for providing the figure of 95%, I thought you bureaudroids would make up about 35-40% with the rest being useful people !

Indy, you have stated on this forum before that 95% of public servants should be sacked. 95 is your magic number for everything, are you now back tracking on that?

you have stated on this forum before that 95% of public servants should be sacked
Paul1405,
No I What I have repeatedly stated is that Public Servant bureaucrats should be sacked if they don't measure up. If you think that they make up 95% of the Public Service then yes, why should we pay them top salaries ? They're the ones who perpetually give wage earners a tough time. I have also said that bureaucrats should not be allowed to vote for reasons that would even be obvious to you.
Also, what would you propose for those unemployed young who prowl the streets at night & commit criminal offences ? I'd put them into a National Service scheme for twelve or more months or until they obtain employment. Would you prefer to perpetuate status quo ?
I abhor the Peter Principle, your rhetoric suggests you support it !

Indy this from YOU!

just about 95% of public servants are self-interest orientated, should they resign ? My view too is immediately !
Posted by individual, Monday, 11 February 2019 5:13:37 PM

Not you Indy? You are full of it! Am I lying, me thinks not! Are you lying, me thinks so!

You claim 95 is the magic number for everything you oppose.

should they resign ?
Paul1405,
Yes and, those who don't perform should be sacked or at least demoted just like wage earners.
Seeing how you oppose this I can't come to any other conclusion that you are a bureadroid who wants to perpetuate the Peter principle to save your own bacon !
Just to clarify, there are Public Servants who are gainfully employed & then there are the bureaudroids who are simply of no use to anyone except themselves.

Indy,

In the post I quoted, you have arbitrated a figure for the number of public servants you want out, not 50%, or 60% not even 80% Nah 95%. In this case you said they should resign for being self interested, such a crime, there's no one more self interested than you! Elsewhere you have said 95% should be sacked, as you have been saying for years on the Forum. You didn't say "bureaucrats" you added that after I pulled you up on it, you simply said public servants, that includes nurses, coppers, army personnel etc etc. How about we sack the public servants that pay your bloody aged welfare, and have done so for more than 20 years, what a waste of public money, and we pack you off to boot camp, now that's a great idea you wont be in.

Paul1405,
If you think it's ok for useless bureaucrats to be paid $150-500 Grand/year then you'd better lay out what this money is for. By your reaction you're obviously one of those bureaudroids who serve no purpose nor of any benefit to those whom you're supposed to be working for.
Most old age pensioners have served & paid Tax from their pay for over 50 years. What have you contributed & what is your legacy ? I know that my legacy & the legacy of most other pensioners is out there for all to see in the infrastructure we worked at & built. What's yours ?
Playing Solitaire & other computer games on Govt computers is of benefit to citizens of this Nation in what way ? Did you object to us paying Tax for the benefit of your parents' pension ?
And, yes I stand by my earlier claims which I thought would be somewhat exaggerated but you prove that they're not !

No Indy, I don't think any incompetent public servant should keep his or her job, but unlike you I don't believe 95% should be sacked, as you have claimed. Philip Lowe Governor of the Reserve Bank, on $1 million pa. showed himself and his board to be incompetent on interest rates, as the one paid the big buck to take responsibility, Lowe should go!

Paul1405,
If you had a half ounce of integrity you'd have gotten the gist by now that I'd not approve of Lowe's salary nor do I think 700 Grand+ salaries for heads of departments is acceptable when we have people below the poverty line. Nor do think it moral to have youths prowling the streets at night when they should be sleeping in readiness to go to work in the morning. You're one of those opposing any kind of discipline. You're one of those expressing opposition to a National Service for young unemployed people to gain skills to achieve entry level into the work force.
You're the most answer evading poster on OLO who prefers to dig up posts from the past simply because they suit conditions now for criticism. You never once dug up posts that would prove a poster right at the time of the comments..
It is my view that you're about as undesirable a citizen can be ! My bet is you're a bureaudroid !

I'm not sure the nepotism bothers me anymore than the government of the day (whichever that is) wasting billions in poor policies and foolish spending without any oversight and accountability.

I feel like you're targeting a minor part of a spending problem, when there is a much larger spending problem in general.

It's like you're focusing on trying to save $1 a week
- when the bigger problem is costing $1000 a week.

Should I be glad that something is being done to stop the nepotism?;
Or should I think the whole thing is a limited hangout, and hardly even relevant if one is willing to avoid the bigger spending issues?

Something is starting to stink to high heaven in Canberra, worse smell than a pound of prawns in the hot sun, and its name is Coalition MP Stewart Robert, this now involves 100's of millions of dollars in government contracts for mates of Robert.

involves 100's of millions of dollars in government contracts
Paul1405,
Wise or unwise projects ?

Indy,

NDIS rorting under the Coalition is now legendary, with up to 20% of funds possibly misappropriated. To suspect Stewart Robert of something and worthy of investigation is not unreasonable. In August 2022, Australian Criminal Intelligence Commission chief Michael Phelan estimated that as much as 15 to 20 per cent of the service’s annual budget of close to $30 billion might have been misused. An investigation into the action of Robert may find him innocent of any wrong doing, then again it may not.

NDIS rorting was done by citizens of this Nation , not by its Govt.
The Morrison administration is guilty by association for having Labor supporting bureaudroids mishandling it !

Paul1405,
If have to point the finger at someone re NDIS, point at the Public Service Unions who don't allow incompetent bureaudroids to be sacked or removed nor even side-lined ! They're the ones who insist on leaving the Peter principle in place ! Albo will find that a problem too before too long !

Hi Indy,

What you fail to realise is all the social benefits YOU receive, particularly Australia's most expensive social welfare scheme the 'Aged Pension' were all Labor initiatives, and in the main are taxpayer funded. Over the years Conservative governments have worked to lessen the value of your social welfare pension. You have a delusional perception of public servants and their work ethic and abilities. You did say once you had a short stint in the public service, I can only assume you were sacked, and now harbour a unreasonable fixated hate complex for all public servants.

I oppose aged welfare, not because I feel its unjust, no I oppose it because I view it as unsuitable at a reasonable level into the future. I strongly support national superannuation, something along the lines of New Zealand as a minimum.

national superannuation,
Paul1405,
What's the difference between that & the Pension ? None !

Labor may have initiated the old age pension but they also were the first to make the move to remove it ! I still recall the 7.5% coming out my wagfes for the pension, you're obviously too young for it !
People of every generation once reaching 65 should receive income from the Nation which in turn will receive this from the upcoming generations.
It's only bureaudroids like you in Public Service positions who are not required to prove merit to receive handsome benefits who think they won't need the next generation to pull them through their old days !

Watched a cool video the other night on 'Australia's Titanic'
- The SS Waratah, lost off the coast of South Africa in 1909 with 1.3 billion in gold at today's prices.

- Someone in government should offer a contract to go find that.

The Strange Disappearance of the SS Waratah
http://youtu.be/luHyyf9OuN8

you fail to realise is all the social benefits YOU receive,
Paul1405,
You fail to comprehend that dividends are not benefits or are you suggesting Govt simply gives us the pension ?
When you pay Tax (on everything) for over five decades then you're simply putting money into the national & State coffers for national/State use. Much like Superannuation & the old Age pension. If much of the taxes paid are misappropriated/wasted then that is the fault of you bureaudroids, not the Govt or us people ! Show me one Govt that has a policy stating public funding is to be misappropriated.
All misappropriation is the result of incompetence & criminal manipulation on behalf of people deliberately not following the guidelines laid down by Govt.
Dishonesty is the root cause that is heavily supported by the Peter Principle !

Indy I did post this on another thread,

Hi Indy,

Surly you know the difference between a system of direct aged welfare payment of tax today and pay today, and a sustainable national superannuation scheme, when today's investment gives tomorrows returns.

A well managed national superannuation with a safety net provision for unfortunates such as yourself who could not contribute for one reason or another is sustainable, and will deliver far better outcomes for all.

Treasury class the Aged Pension as a direct government welfare payment funded out of taxation. You have created a fantasy that in someway you financed in the past your own pension of today. I assume as you are anti welfare this myth of yours is simply to justify your largesse. In fact under a National Superannuation Scheme your benefits would be greater than you presently receive from direct welfare.

A well managed national superannuation with a safety net
Paul1405,
How many of these "well managed" ones have left people high & dry to-date ?

re;
sustainable national superannuation scheme, when today's investment gives tomorrows returns.
It doesn't matter what name you give it, people have to contribute during their working life, just as my generation did except yours is getting topped-up by Govt contribution of 9%-12%.
Your top-up is almost double than our 7.5%. And, you're not even required to prove merit in your performance.

How many of these 'well managed' ones have left people high & dry to-date ?

- That makes me think of the mentality shown from brokers on 'Wolf of Wall St' I watched on TV the other night.
They don't care if you're making money or not;
They only care that they're making money from you.

Wolf Of Wallstreet - Matthew McConaughey
[Warning - Swearing, Drug use, and Adult content]
http://youtu.be/wM6exo00T5I

Indy,

What I am talking about is investing in Australia, with a National Superannuation Fund, underwritten by a government guarantee, similar to the way bank deposits today are underwritten by government. With a portion of the investment in Commonwealth bonds paying the prevailing market rate that government pays on foreign borrowings.

As for your so called "contribution" of 7.5% into a pension fund, it never happened. I ask, pray tell what was your contribution $1...more...less..how much? If the government needs to top the fund up to support the slackers, drones and genuinely unfortunate, so be it. Obviously the bench mark would be at the present level of the single aged pension. which is $1,026.50 per fortnight today, with all present non contributory super being held privately, presently a 10.5% employer contribution, which would be widened to cover all wages be channelled into the new NSF.

so called "contribution" of 7.5% into a pension fund, it never happened.
Paul1405,
Sadly, I never kept any of my pay slips so I could show it to the likes of you too young to remember !
re;
a National Superannuation Fund, underwritten by a government guarantee.
In that context Superannuation is simply another word for old age pension !