Really? I have said consistently that it is not possible to prove either way without access to the books. No definitive statement can be made either way. It cannot be proven, nor equally, can it be falsified. So in effect, all statements (including mine) become "trust me".
The Jetconnect case, however, does demonstrate what has been done in the past, with a QF group company. Can you not concede that its possible in other group entities are utilizing the same methods?
Statements about the financial position of certain internal entities has been used to prosecute an industrial relations agenda, this is why there is such a focus on this accounting issue. That is why it keeps coming back up, because management keep using it as an argument to justify their course of action. It will die when management stop using it as IR tool.
I cannot prove my case, equally, you cannot falsify it either.
It is very easy to create a misleading impression of a situation when you only reveal part of the available information. Some may call it lying by omission. This is why there is discovery in legal proceedings, so all the information is available to both side to form their case. There has been no discovery thus far.
Two things are likely to occur in the following months:
- Some form of government assistance to a private entity.
- Massive industrial turmoil & possibly unilateral imposition of wholesale modification stripping T&C's to legal & valid industrial agreements by a private entity backed by the force of the state.
The basis of these two events? "Trust us" accounting. I contend this is an abuse of the system. In effect the government will possibly authorise the arbitrary direct transfer of wealth from the workforce to the private owners by state sanction, on the basis of "trust me".
Before this were to occur, open the books and let us all see. Then the case can be made either way. But simply to rely on public statements
that have no jeopardy attached to them to justify such heinous & undemocratic actions?
Just a few months ago at the Qantas AGM (see #
2471) both the Chairman & CEO reiterated that everything was on-track. What's changed?
The burden of proof is with those that want something, to make their case, and thus far not enough information has been released to justify what is likely to occur.