PPRuNe Forums

PPRuNe Forums (https://www.pprune.org/)
-   Jet Blast (https://www.pprune.org/jet-blast-16/)
-   -   War in Australia (any Oz Politics): the Original (https://www.pprune.org/jet-blast/477678-war-australia-any-oz-politics-original.html)

allan907 19th Aug 2012 05:26

The tsunami is gathering strength

Prime Minister Julia Gillard is refusing to discuss accusations regarding her resignation from a prominent law firm in 1995, saying it wouldn't stop the "malicious and motivated" commentary.

News Limited is reporting Ms Gillard left her job as a partner at Slater & Gordon as a direct result of a secret internal probe into controversial work she had done for her then boyfriend, a union boss accused of corruption.

The new claims have been made by a former partner at the firm, Nick Styant-Browne.

The prime minister says she refuses to dignify the "scurrilous" attack with a response.

"We are talking about matters 17 year ago which have been dealt on the public record," Ms Gillard told Sky News on Sunday.

"I am not going to get into a circumstance when we've got people blogging malicious nonsense and we're having some of this penetrate into the media.

"This is just nonsense and a distraction from the important work I've got to do as prime minister.

"I did nothing wrong. If you've got an allegation that I did something wrong then put it."

Ms Gillard said she had continuing good relationships with Slater & Gordon, and nothing about the allegations was relevant to her conduct as prime minister.

Manager of Opposition Business Christopher Pyne said there were very serious questions about the prime minister's integrity and she should make a personal explanation to parliament.

Files held by Slater & Gordon should also be released detailing the circumstances surrounding Ms Gillard's resignation.

"In the interest of clearing the prime minister's name, those files should be released," he told Sky News.

But Ms Gillard said she wouldn't make any comment because it would only feed the fire.

"The people who are dealing with this online in their malicious and motivated way would not stop no matter what explanation I gave," she said.

"That is why there is no point in flogging through all the details of this, because the people who are pursuing this malicious campaign will continue to do it. They are not at all interested in the truth."

Defence Minister Stephen Smith played down the issue.

"If people are asking questions about that they should make an allegation about her conduct," he told Network Ten.
"What does something that occurred 17 years ago, with respect to a law firm she was working with that she now has an ongoing good relationship (with), have to do with the big issues of running the economy and running our national security interests?"
It screams "GUILTY" and "CORRUPT".

Captain Sand Dune 19th Aug 2012 05:45

Let's not get personal about it guys. We know where it can lead. That's just what they want.

CoodaShooda 19th Aug 2012 06:44

If the Prime Minister enjoyed the public respect that one holding her office should have earned, this matter would not be gaining legs.

The pressure would be on her detractors to prove their case, rather than on her to defend it.

In that situation, her current response would be sensible.

But the broader public's opinion of her is such that they want her to be guilty.

Sticking to her long established strategy of "ignore the question" is only going to make her seem more guilty.

The genie is now out of the bottle and labor faces yet another crisis of it's own making.

On a side issue, Smith's assertion that events of 17 years ago are too old to warrant further attention brings into question his keeness to pursue 60 year old sexual harrassment allegations against the Defence Force. I think it will be another comment that comes back to haunt him.

Prudent ministers should be refraining from comment on this one; although I expect Julia's Greek Chorus will make strident claims on her behalf. But given the ammunition they've given the opposition's election campaign with their anti-Rudd declamations, I wouldn't classify them as prudent.

I wonder what Robert McClelland will do next.

Andu 19th Aug 2012 08:19

A Tamil "refugee", one of the flood coming to Australia on the daily boat, interviewed on Channel 7 News tonight:

Q: "Why did you leave Sri Lanka?"

A: "To make money."

That really says it all. They see us as such a soft touch that it's not even necessary to come up with a good yarn. Just tell it like it is.

Captain Sand Dune 19th Aug 2012 08:51

Watching the same thing now. Makes your blood boil.:mad:
Surely it must be clear to even a Greens voter that it is the promise - nay, guarantee - of a life on lavish (yep, "lavish"!) welfare payments that lures these poor buggers.
What really stuck in my craw was a senior Sri Lankan Naval officer saying that we need to show more resolve in protecting our borders by deporting them.
However Juliar is more interested in covering up her previous "naivety" to give a fcuk about protecting our borders.:mad::mad:

EffohX 19th Aug 2012 08:57

I think, in what I’ll call "normal circumstances", anyone (like Larry Pickering) attempting to dredge up something scurrilous from almost 20 years ago about a major public figure’s past would be roundly ignored by most people.

However, these are anything but normal circumstances. The Prime Minister’s behaviour and freewheeling style in handling what she sees as “the truth” since assuming the mantle of political power – (way up there with “I did not have a sexual relationship with that woman, Miss Lewinsky”/ “it all depends on the meaning of ‘is’” Bill Clinton for bare-faced, unabashed lying to the voting public when and as often as he/she feels is required) – makes many if not most feel that her lack of honesty so blatantly (and all too frequently) displayed since becoming PM might have roots on a more personal level in her earlier life.

Forget all the red herrings about whether she was at fault enough for her unprofessional behaviour as a lawyer to meet the requirements to guarantee a conviction in a court of law. Also forget whether she was treated shabbily by the other partners in her law firm – a law firm, it should be stressed, that specialised in compensation claims.

Instead, ask yourself this one question: does a PARTNER in a law firm, (not a clerk, nor a secretary, nor a paralegal, but a partner) voluntarily “offer her resignation” without first securing another, usually better job beforehand if that resignation was in fact voluntary? (Julia Gillard was unemployed for six months after her resignation from Slater & Gordon. Long enough to lose her practising certificate.)

Supplementary question: if that partner, who had made a very good living for the last decade or more, (the last eight years as a partner) with a firm specialising in making compensation claims, had felt that in being asked to offer her resignation, she really was being treated “shabbily” by the company, is there anyone out there who doesn’t believe she would have used those skills to sue the proverbial pants off that company within days of being dismiss.. sorry,“resigning”?

prospector 19th Aug 2012 09:17

For another version of the same story Shane Dowling site deals with the same facts but in a much more dignified manner. Some of the comments by Larry Pickering are not relevant to the story, and as he himself admits, he is giving himself a bit of poetic licence.

Some of the salacious prose he is using does nothing to improve the story, and it is quite rivetting by itself without all his embellishments.

parabellum 19th Aug 2012 09:36

On SBS news tonight they quoted, they said, from a Slater & Gordon statement which said Gillard didn't resign until a year after Slater & Gordon completed their investigations, during which they found no fault with her and that she resigned to pursue a political career. Doesn't quite add up though, six months unemployed for example, but S & G probably get a whole lot of business from the unions still, so we can hardly expect S & G to deliver her, can we?

500N 19th Aug 2012 10:28

Captain SD

"Surely it must be clear to even a Greens voter that it is the promise - nay, guarantee - of a life on lavish (yep, "lavish"!) welfare payments that lures these poor buggers."

The Greens are all for the welfare state, support etc, yes they know why they come but they want to give everyone a nice warm home supported by welfare payments. After all, that is how a fair few Greenies live.

The thing is, the Greenies who are so intent on saving everything make a complete pigs arse of any area they go into to save. It just doesn't get publicity.

MattGray 19th Aug 2012 11:26

And yet the Liberals voted en bloc with these same reviled Greens in both the House of Reps and the Senate in the last sitting of Parliament. :rolleyes:

It just doesn't get publicity.
And yet the Liberals were directly responsible for getting Adam Bandt elected. The first and only Green to ever sit in the Lower House. :rolleyes:

It just doesn't get publicity
Maybe it should.

The Party faithful seem to have have conveniently short attention spans.

500N 19th Aug 2012 11:40

The Fed Lib party (and anyone for that matter) would have done
any deal at the last election to get elected.

I think (happy to be corrected if wrong) that the only serious major party to have effed over the Greens in an Election was Baillieu at the last Victorian State Election where he blindsided the Greens two weeks out from voting day.

Luckily for Baillieu he got in and the Greens didn't do as well as expected.

"It just doesn't get publicity"
"Maybe it should."

No way will the media in this country sully the good name of the Greens !!!

Andu 19th Aug 2012 11:41

Nice try, Matt.

But trying - really trying - are your continuing attempts to spin the debate away from the topic at hand.

hellsbrink 19th Aug 2012 11:44

Now you've reached a new low, Matt, unless you can tell us all how the party that got 21% of the vote in Melbourne 2010 is DIRECTLY responsible for the ALP losing the Melbourne seat to someone who was actually a former member of the ALP..........

allan907 19th Aug 2012 11:54

It is quite clear that Matt is living on a totally different political planet from the majority of people in Australia and his "contributions" to this particular discussion are pointless and irrelevant.

I dare say he'll go quiet for a while when:

a. Gillard resigns, is knifed, or charged.


b. When the ALP is kicked so far up the arse in an election they will be able to see Quisling's boots.

I heartily look forward to that day. Our 'loss' is Canada's gain :E

parabellum 19th Aug 2012 12:11

Surprise surprise, another boat off the CoCos Is.:rolleyes:

MattGray 19th Aug 2012 12:23

Not since the Salem witchcraft trials of the late 17th Century have we quite witnessed the spectacle of the religious right in such full hysterical cry as we see today.

"Guilty until proved innocent" they shriek like pubescent public schoolchildren meting out dormitory punishment on their hapless victim after lights out.

The atheist witch not responding to smears is proof positive in their book. What was it cooda? Ahh yes -

is only going to make her seem more guilty.
Reminds me of Giles Corey, an 80-year-old farmer from the southeast end of Salem who refused to enter a plea when he came to trial in September 1692.

The judges applied an archaic form of punishment called peine forte et dure, in which stones were piled on his chest until he could no longer breathe. After two days of peine fort et dure, Corey died without entering a plea.

What's next girls? Dunking stools in Lake Burley Griffin?

Liberals!! :yuk::yuk:

MattGray 19th Aug 2012 12:37

It probably won't mean much to the Party faithful economic numpties who peddle Tony's toxic tax doom and sniff derisively at AAA credit ratings but as of Friday the ASX has risen an impressive 6.7% since the carbon tax started.

The market capitalisation of the ASX has risen by about $74 billion. That should help pay a few bills.

MattGray 19th Aug 2012 13:27

Hat tip to Mike Kelly, MP Federal Member for Eden-Monaro!
One of the few MPs I hold in some regard for his Iraq service which was studiously and disgracefully ignored by the Howard Liberal Government.

Tony Windsor well and truly belled the Abbott cat this afternoon. He told it like it is and he didn't miss

He sure didn't!!

MattGray 19th Aug 2012 13:40

Meanwhile today, outside the British High Commission in Canberra, Australian motorists show their approval to the assembled Julian Assange supporters.

hellsbrink 19th Aug 2012 13:43

But what did the Libs do to DIRECTLY ensure that Bandt was elected, Matt?

You made the statement, so will you back up what you said with any evidence?

All times are GMT. The time now is 21:47.

Copyright © 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.