Tuesday, September 09, 2014 8:39:51 PM
Julia Gillard on now. Australian Royal Commission into Unions, live stream. .. http://commcast.com.au/turc/ .. the link from here ..
The Royal Commission into Trade Union Governance and Corruption.
http://www.tradeunionroyalcommission.gov.au/Pages/default.aspx
Actually the title of the commission says it all.
===
The royal commission into trade unions is a political witch hunt
If ministers have ordered the public service to pursue this anti-democratic frolic, it’s a clear abuse of power. The government is aiming for a union-free Australia
Tim Lyons
theguardian.com, Monday 28 July 2014 16.04 AEST
Jump to comments (406)
Attorney general George Brandis. Photograph: Lukas Coch/AAP
A couple of days ago I was leaked a document from the federal attorney-general’s department. Reading it reminded me of the old gag: “just because you're paranoid doesn’t mean they aren’t out to get you.”
As is widely reported today, all federal departments and agencies .. http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jul/27/disclose-contact-unions-royal-commission-federal-departments .. are being asked to disclose every contact with any trade union for any reason over the past decade in response to a “scoping questionnaire”.
It’s a pretty extraordinary document .. http://www.actu.org.au/Images/Dynamic/attachments/8288/AGD%20document%20into%20unions%20and%20Royal%20Commission.pdf. For one thing, although it’s notionally about the royal commission into unions, it goes well beyond the Commission’s terms of reference and seems to imply that any consultation with unions on public policy matters, and even negotiating a workplace agreement with unions representing public servants is somehow illegitimate. In other words, two of the core roles of unions as representatives of working people are somehow inherently corrupt.
This document confirms what the ACTU has said all along: that the royal commission into trade unions is a political witch hunt. It’s more evidence of the deep contempt the government has for unions, unionists and union members.
The ACTU has today sought access to correspondence and other documentation through Freedom of Information to determine precisely what involvement the attorney-general George Brandis or the employment minister Eric Abetz have had in this process. If ministers have ordered the public service to pursue this anti-democratic frolic it’s a clear abuse of power.
The whole thing is particularly bizarre given that the royal commission has shown no interest in the public sector and doesn’t actually need any help getting information if it wants it. Perhaps the government feels the need to run a parallel royal commission because of the disappointing results from the real one they established.
It’s not like the real commission is lacking in power. It has coercive powers to collect information and to make witnesses attend hearings and give evidence. The commission is conducting “private hearings” out of the public gaze. The government has given it authority to tap phones .. http://www.comlaw.gov.au/Details/F2014L00644. Many of the rules that apply in normal court proceedings don’t apply or are limited at a royal commission, including in relation to self-incrimination, legal professional privilege and the right to cross-examine witnesses.
But so far, it has precious little to show for the public money spent. An archaeological dig into some home renovations in the 1990s and a re-visit of matters already the subject of criminal convictions and civil proceedings have occupied most of its public hearing time. Untested and uncorroborated allegations have been allowed to make their way onto the public record without any right of reply, or serious examination of the facts or the motivations of those giving evidence.
The residents of the right-wing fever swamp on the internet who are following the process obsessively see unionism as a giant conspiracy against the national interest, and union officials as a kind of fifth-column. They are welcome to those views, as misguided as they are, but there is no basis for those views in our democratic institutions. The “scoping questionnaire” and spiteful rhetoric of ministers (Senator Abetz’s go to line is “union thug .. http://tinyurl.com/ky3hqsb”) is evidence of a broader infection.
We have, as the ACTU executive noted last week, a royal commission into trade unions which “appears to be proceeding on the basis of an antipathy or lack of understanding of the basic principle that a union is a collective, industrial, campaigning, political organisation of working people.” What’s absent is any sense of the purpose or function of trade unions, or the motivations of trade union members and officers.
At a deeper level, it seems to reveal a fundamental clash of world views. If workers are commercial providers of "labour units”, then collective action seems like a restrictive trade practice – and trying to take wages out of competition seems like collusive conduct.
Except we aren’t in a bad economics textbook, we are in the real world. Workers are real people living off their labour for wages, and labour law, unions and collective action are a modest attempt to even up the power imbalance of an individual worker and their employer.
The royal commissioner may be technically correct that “the terms of reference do not assume that it is desirable to abolish trade unions .. http://www.tradeunionroyalcommission.gov.au/Hearings/Pages/OpeningRemarks.aspx”, but the conduct of the government certainly leans that way.
Over the last couple of years, state and federal Coalition governments have taken every opportunity to hop into unions, using executive power, legislation and regulations. These governments have restricted or removed the rights of union members to organise, strike, protest, campaign, engage in political activity, bargain, take legal action, and access dependent arbitration. And, as the “scoping questionnaire” implies, the government even wants unions excluded from conversations about our community’s future.
This adds up to a pretty exhaustive list of things union members might want to do. And it’s a pretty good indication that it’s not just their preference, but their intention to see a union-free Australia.
Winning an election means you get to run the machinery of government. It’s not a licence to eliminate your enemies. Parties who take power in coups and revolutions are the ones who play that game, not ones that temporarily triumph in a democratic process.
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jul/28/the-royal-commission-into-trade-unions-is-a-political-witch-hunt
===
What the trade union royal commission means for Julia Gillard
Date May 12, 2014
Anne Davies
insert-text-here
Former prime minister Julia Gillard. Photo: Andrew Meares
Your name is Ralph Edwyn Blewitt?”
“Yes. I am,” replied the bald, middle-aged man sporting a tan and an impressive white beard.
So commenced the evidence before Royal Commission into trade union governance - a royal commission that threatens to unearth the ugly underbelly of practices in the union movement and disinter a scandal that has dogged the former Prime Minister Julia Gillard throughout her political career .
Documents tendered to the royal commission.
Over the next weeks former High Court Judge Dyson Heydon will hear evidence of misuse of members funds, kickbacks and bribes paid by employers to ensure union harmony, and slush funds.
Starting with a 20-year-old slush fund set up by officials of the Australian Workers Union’s WA branch might seem like warped priorities when more contemporary examples of malfeasance involving the Health Services Union and the Construction forestry Mining and Engineering Union have been splashed across the media.
The commission justified starting with Mr Blewitt because he was back in Australia from Malaysia.
But it is undoubtedly the most politically explosive due to the involvement of Ms Gillard in doing legal work to establish the slush fund, and her personal relationship as the lover of the man alleged to be the mastermind behind it, Bruce Wilson.
Mr Blewitt gave evidence that he and Mr Wilson, both then WA officials of the AWU, had been involved in setting up the Workplace Reform Association as a way of channelling money into a fund for union elections.
In 1991 Theiss, now a subsidiary of Leighton Holdings, had won the contract for the then biggest project in WA, the Dawesvill channel project.
The two men came up with a scheme to send invoices to Theiss for “false” health and safety services on the project, a scheme with which Theiss appears to have gone along.
Mr Blewitt said he knew this was a sham arrangement but Mr Wilson was “charismatic” and he simply followed his orders.
But the real interest in the inquiry will be around who knew what of the process of incorporation and who knew what about where the money went.
Mr Blewitt gave evidence that he attended a meeting in April 1992 in the Melbourne offices of Slater & Gordon, where the incorporation documents for the association were prepared. Ms Gillard was at the meeting. He says there was “some hesitation” about what to put down as its purpose, but Mr Wilson said it should be described as body devoted to promoting health and safety. Ms Gillard filled out the forms, but Mr Blewitt signed it.
The question is whether Ms Gillard vouched for the association’s purpose, knowing it was false.
Mr Blewitt has also been giving evidence this morning about where the money went. Mr Wilson had moved to Melbourne to assist with a factional tussle over control of the union. According to Mr Blewitt, Mr Wilson decided to buy a house – a modest terrace known as unit 1, 85 Kerr Street, Fitzroy, but it was decided to put it in Mr Blewitt’s name to disguise his ownership. Mr Blewitt says Mr Wilson instructed him to draw a cheque for $25,000 for the deposit from the Association’s account. Even though the house was bought in Mr Blewitt’s name, Mr Wilson and Ms Gillard attended the auction, he said.
Eventually $93,000 of the Association funds found their way into the house, worth $250,000.
Mr Blewitt also gave evidence that he often withdrew cash from the account and handed it to Mr Wilson.
Suggestions that it was used to undertake alterations at Ms Gillard’s home have been furiously denied by Ms Gillard and she has threatened to sue over media reports.
The media too is heavily invested in this inquiry, not least because Ms Gillard’s denials have cost at least two reporters their jobs.
Outspoken radio host, Mike Smith at 2UE, was stood down after he was blocked from broadcasting an interview he recorded with former AWU president Bob Kernohan. When he made his unhappiness known on air, management sent him on leave.
News Limited columnist Glenn Milne published a column airing similar allegations. After complaints from Ms Gillard it was withdrawn and the newspaper apologised.
How deeply the inquiry will delve into Ms Gillard’s role, if any, remains to be seen.
Ms Gillard did not seek leave to appear at today’s hearing, which means she will not be able to cross examine Mr Blewitt, though Mr Wilson’s lawyer did.
http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/what-the-trade-union-royal-commission-means-for-julia-gillard-20140512-zra6i.html
The Royal Commission into Trade Union Governance and Corruption.
http://www.tradeunionroyalcommission.gov.au/Pages/default.aspx
Actually the title of the commission says it all.
===
The royal commission into trade unions is a political witch hunt
If ministers have ordered the public service to pursue this anti-democratic frolic, it’s a clear abuse of power. The government is aiming for a union-free Australia
Tim Lyons
theguardian.com, Monday 28 July 2014 16.04 AEST
Jump to comments (406)
Attorney general George Brandis. Photograph: Lukas Coch/AAP
A couple of days ago I was leaked a document from the federal attorney-general’s department. Reading it reminded me of the old gag: “just because you're paranoid doesn’t mean they aren’t out to get you.”
As is widely reported today, all federal departments and agencies .. http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jul/27/disclose-contact-unions-royal-commission-federal-departments .. are being asked to disclose every contact with any trade union for any reason over the past decade in response to a “scoping questionnaire”.
It’s a pretty extraordinary document .. http://www.actu.org.au/Images/Dynamic/attachments/8288/AGD%20document%20into%20unions%20and%20Royal%20Commission.pdf. For one thing, although it’s notionally about the royal commission into unions, it goes well beyond the Commission’s terms of reference and seems to imply that any consultation with unions on public policy matters, and even negotiating a workplace agreement with unions representing public servants is somehow illegitimate. In other words, two of the core roles of unions as representatives of working people are somehow inherently corrupt.
This document confirms what the ACTU has said all along: that the royal commission into trade unions is a political witch hunt. It’s more evidence of the deep contempt the government has for unions, unionists and union members.
The ACTU has today sought access to correspondence and other documentation through Freedom of Information to determine precisely what involvement the attorney-general George Brandis or the employment minister Eric Abetz have had in this process. If ministers have ordered the public service to pursue this anti-democratic frolic it’s a clear abuse of power.
The whole thing is particularly bizarre given that the royal commission has shown no interest in the public sector and doesn’t actually need any help getting information if it wants it. Perhaps the government feels the need to run a parallel royal commission because of the disappointing results from the real one they established.
It’s not like the real commission is lacking in power. It has coercive powers to collect information and to make witnesses attend hearings and give evidence. The commission is conducting “private hearings” out of the public gaze. The government has given it authority to tap phones .. http://www.comlaw.gov.au/Details/F2014L00644. Many of the rules that apply in normal court proceedings don’t apply or are limited at a royal commission, including in relation to self-incrimination, legal professional privilege and the right to cross-examine witnesses.
But so far, it has precious little to show for the public money spent. An archaeological dig into some home renovations in the 1990s and a re-visit of matters already the subject of criminal convictions and civil proceedings have occupied most of its public hearing time. Untested and uncorroborated allegations have been allowed to make their way onto the public record without any right of reply, or serious examination of the facts or the motivations of those giving evidence.
The residents of the right-wing fever swamp on the internet who are following the process obsessively see unionism as a giant conspiracy against the national interest, and union officials as a kind of fifth-column. They are welcome to those views, as misguided as they are, but there is no basis for those views in our democratic institutions. The “scoping questionnaire” and spiteful rhetoric of ministers (Senator Abetz’s go to line is “union thug .. http://tinyurl.com/ky3hqsb”) is evidence of a broader infection.
We have, as the ACTU executive noted last week, a royal commission into trade unions which “appears to be proceeding on the basis of an antipathy or lack of understanding of the basic principle that a union is a collective, industrial, campaigning, political organisation of working people.” What’s absent is any sense of the purpose or function of trade unions, or the motivations of trade union members and officers.
At a deeper level, it seems to reveal a fundamental clash of world views. If workers are commercial providers of "labour units”, then collective action seems like a restrictive trade practice – and trying to take wages out of competition seems like collusive conduct.
Except we aren’t in a bad economics textbook, we are in the real world. Workers are real people living off their labour for wages, and labour law, unions and collective action are a modest attempt to even up the power imbalance of an individual worker and their employer.
The royal commissioner may be technically correct that “the terms of reference do not assume that it is desirable to abolish trade unions .. http://www.tradeunionroyalcommission.gov.au/Hearings/Pages/OpeningRemarks.aspx”, but the conduct of the government certainly leans that way.
Over the last couple of years, state and federal Coalition governments have taken every opportunity to hop into unions, using executive power, legislation and regulations. These governments have restricted or removed the rights of union members to organise, strike, protest, campaign, engage in political activity, bargain, take legal action, and access dependent arbitration. And, as the “scoping questionnaire” implies, the government even wants unions excluded from conversations about our community’s future.
This adds up to a pretty exhaustive list of things union members might want to do. And it’s a pretty good indication that it’s not just their preference, but their intention to see a union-free Australia.
Winning an election means you get to run the machinery of government. It’s not a licence to eliminate your enemies. Parties who take power in coups and revolutions are the ones who play that game, not ones that temporarily triumph in a democratic process.
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jul/28/the-royal-commission-into-trade-unions-is-a-political-witch-hunt
===
What the trade union royal commission means for Julia Gillard
Date May 12, 2014
Anne Davies
insert-text-here
Former prime minister Julia Gillard. Photo: Andrew Meares
Your name is Ralph Edwyn Blewitt?”
“Yes. I am,” replied the bald, middle-aged man sporting a tan and an impressive white beard.
So commenced the evidence before Royal Commission into trade union governance - a royal commission that threatens to unearth the ugly underbelly of practices in the union movement and disinter a scandal that has dogged the former Prime Minister Julia Gillard throughout her political career .
Documents tendered to the royal commission.
Over the next weeks former High Court Judge Dyson Heydon will hear evidence of misuse of members funds, kickbacks and bribes paid by employers to ensure union harmony, and slush funds.
Starting with a 20-year-old slush fund set up by officials of the Australian Workers Union’s WA branch might seem like warped priorities when more contemporary examples of malfeasance involving the Health Services Union and the Construction forestry Mining and Engineering Union have been splashed across the media.
The commission justified starting with Mr Blewitt because he was back in Australia from Malaysia.
But it is undoubtedly the most politically explosive due to the involvement of Ms Gillard in doing legal work to establish the slush fund, and her personal relationship as the lover of the man alleged to be the mastermind behind it, Bruce Wilson.
Mr Blewitt gave evidence that he and Mr Wilson, both then WA officials of the AWU, had been involved in setting up the Workplace Reform Association as a way of channelling money into a fund for union elections.
In 1991 Theiss, now a subsidiary of Leighton Holdings, had won the contract for the then biggest project in WA, the Dawesvill channel project.
The two men came up with a scheme to send invoices to Theiss for “false” health and safety services on the project, a scheme with which Theiss appears to have gone along.
Mr Blewitt said he knew this was a sham arrangement but Mr Wilson was “charismatic” and he simply followed his orders.
But the real interest in the inquiry will be around who knew what of the process of incorporation and who knew what about where the money went.
Mr Blewitt gave evidence that he attended a meeting in April 1992 in the Melbourne offices of Slater & Gordon, where the incorporation documents for the association were prepared. Ms Gillard was at the meeting. He says there was “some hesitation” about what to put down as its purpose, but Mr Wilson said it should be described as body devoted to promoting health and safety. Ms Gillard filled out the forms, but Mr Blewitt signed it.
The question is whether Ms Gillard vouched for the association’s purpose, knowing it was false.
Mr Blewitt has also been giving evidence this morning about where the money went. Mr Wilson had moved to Melbourne to assist with a factional tussle over control of the union. According to Mr Blewitt, Mr Wilson decided to buy a house – a modest terrace known as unit 1, 85 Kerr Street, Fitzroy, but it was decided to put it in Mr Blewitt’s name to disguise his ownership. Mr Blewitt says Mr Wilson instructed him to draw a cheque for $25,000 for the deposit from the Association’s account. Even though the house was bought in Mr Blewitt’s name, Mr Wilson and Ms Gillard attended the auction, he said.
Eventually $93,000 of the Association funds found their way into the house, worth $250,000.
Mr Blewitt also gave evidence that he often withdrew cash from the account and handed it to Mr Wilson.
Suggestions that it was used to undertake alterations at Ms Gillard’s home have been furiously denied by Ms Gillard and she has threatened to sue over media reports.
The media too is heavily invested in this inquiry, not least because Ms Gillard’s denials have cost at least two reporters their jobs.
Outspoken radio host, Mike Smith at 2UE, was stood down after he was blocked from broadcasting an interview he recorded with former AWU president Bob Kernohan. When he made his unhappiness known on air, management sent him on leave.
News Limited columnist Glenn Milne published a column airing similar allegations. After complaints from Ms Gillard it was withdrawn and the newspaper apologised.
How deeply the inquiry will delve into Ms Gillard’s role, if any, remains to be seen.
Ms Gillard did not seek leave to appear at today’s hearing, which means she will not be able to cross examine Mr Blewitt, though Mr Wilson’s lawyer did.
http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/what-the-trade-union-royal-commission-means-for-julia-gillard-20140512-zra6i.html
It was Plato who said, “He, O men, is the wisest, who like Socrates, knows that his wisdom is in truth worth nothing”
Join the InvestorsHub Community
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
