Vic ALP rorted the 2014 Victorian election using taxpayer money

[Lebbo73]

Do you think he could rort the 2018 election as well?

Depends what you can get away with

 

[AM]

Do you think he could rort the 2018 election as well?

With Kennett now on side I'd reckon dodgy Guy will have a fair dinkum crack at it.

 

[Crankyhawk]

Opinion poll before the election had Labor leading 54-46. Libs were always losing

Perhaps public opinion was affected by the work the staffers did. For example do we know if they contacted members of the public or lobbied on behalf of their candidate?

 

[Maggie5]

Perhaps public opinion was affected by the work the staffers did. For example do we know if they contacted members of the public or lobbied on behalf of their candidate?

They would had to contact millions of voters to inluence that margin.

 

[Crankyhawk]

They would had to contact millions of voters to inluence that margin.

They may have sent mass ads or programmed robot calls

 

[nobbyiscool]

It bemuses me that these sorts of issues get so far on the back of a whistleblower without anyone questioning their motive - especially when this all came on the back of 1 single whistleblower.

I know the guy that blew the whistle on this. Not well, but well enough to have spoken to him about this before he went public, and we have some mutual friends that know him well.

Why did he blow the whistle? Because he was attempting to blackmail the ALP into supporting his candidacy and paying for his campaign for a spot in local government in regional Victoria. He went public when they laughed at him. And they did laugh at him, because he thought he was a big shot in his ALP sub-branch, and he thought the fact that his mother did some low-level job with a union would at least result in the ALP finding him a job in the movement.

Much as the use of electorate staff as field organisers came back and bit them in the arse, they did the right thing as it relates to Jake Finnigan, because he's the exact type of scheming, entitled prick that they need to keep out of the ALP and out of the union movement. (I loved his whinging quotes in The Age last week about the personal toll on him. What did the dumb * expect would happen?)

None of this is defend what happened. But let's be honest - politicians of both persuasions rort their entitlements all the time. They get found out, they pay it back, and then the same thing happens again in 5 or 6 months.

No, it's not right, or fair. But the reality is that people already have such low opinions of their politicians that finding out they're liars, cheaters and thieves doesn't surprise anyone, and ultimately doesn't affect their vote very much.

 

[pazza]

It bemuses me that these sorts of issues get so far on the back of a whistleblower without anyone questioning their motive - especially when this all came on the back of 1 single whistleblower.

I know the guy that blew the whistle on this. Not well, but well enough to have spoken to him about this before he went public, and we have some mutual friends that know him well.

Why did he blow the whistle? Because he was attempting to blackmail the ALP into supporting his candidacy and paying for his campaign for a spot in local government in regional Victoria. He went public when they laughed at him. And they did laugh at him, because he thought he was a big shot in his ALP sub-branch, and he thought the fact that his mother did some low-level job with a union would at least result in the ALP finding him a job in the movement.

Much as the use of electorate staff as field organisers came back and bit them in the arse, they did the right thing as it relates to Jake Finnigan, because he's the exact type of scheming, entitled prick that they need to keep out of the ALP and out of the union movement. (I loved his whinging quotes in The Age last week about the personal toll on him. What did the dumb **** expect would happen?)

None of this is defend what happened. But let's be honest - politicians of both persuasions rort their entitlements all the time. They get found out, they pay it back, and then the same thing happens again in 5 or 6 months.

No, it's not right, or fair. But the reality is that people already have such low opinions of their politicians that finding out they're liars, cheaters and thieves doesn't surprise anyone, and ultimately doesn't affect their vote very much.

If that is the case, then I am astounded.

 

[AM]

It bemuses me that these sorts of issues get so far on the back of a whistleblower without anyone questioning their motive - especially when this all came on the back of 1 single whistleblower.

I know the guy that blew the whistle on this. Not well, but well enough to have spoken to him about this before he went public, and we have some mutual friends that know him well.

Why did he blow the whistle? Because he was attempting to blackmail the ALP into supporting his candidacy and paying for his campaign for a spot in local government in regional Victoria. He went public when they laughed at him. And they did laugh at him, because he thought he was a big shot in his ALP sub-branch, and he thought the fact that his mother did some low-level job with a union would at least result in the ALP finding him a job in the movement.

Much as the use of electorate staff as field organisers came back and bit them in the arse, they did the right thing as it relates to Jake Finnigan, because he's the exact type of scheming, entitled prick that they need to keep out of the ALP and out of the union movement. (I loved his whinging quotes in The Age last week about the personal toll on him. What did the dumb **** expect would happen?)

None of this is defend what happened. But let's be honest - politicians of both persuasions rort their entitlements all the time. They get found out, they pay it back, and then the same thing happens again in 5 or 6 months.

No, it's not right, or fair. But the reality is that people already have such low opinions of their politicians that finding out they're liars, cheaters and thieves doesn't surprise anyone, and ultimately doesn't affect their vote very much.

Arguably the most informative post so far in this thread. Kudos!

 

[Frank Bunn]

Arguably the most informative post so far in this thread. Kudos!

I'm waiting for your even more informative post on when the ALP will repay the $1 million in legal fees that the Andrews government spent in the Supreme Court, the Court of Appeal and High Court trying to block the Victorian Ombudsman from investigating. And similar legal costs for the Ombudsman.

 

[AM]

I'm waiting for your even more informative post on when the ALP will repay the $1 million in legal fees that the Andrews government spent in the Supreme Court, the Court of Appeal and High Court trying to block the Victorian Ombudsman from investigating. And similar legal costs for the Ombudsman.

It takes quite a bit to get through to you. You divert attention by asking for repayment of legal fees by Labor but make no comment on the more substantial legal bills taxpayers funded for Brandis and Guy, to name two. Particularly the developers friend as it was a personal lawsuit. Check 'hypocrisy'.

The point is, like it or not, that's the way political parties work. All of them.

As for the Ombudsman, she said herself this was part of her job. Fairly straightforward, even for you.

I appreciate the reasons for your look-over-here bizo as the substantive matter isn't your wheelhouse.

 

[Frank Bunn]

It takes quite a bit to get through to you. You divert attention by asking for repayment of legal fees by Labor but make no comment on the more substantial legal bills taxpayers funded for Brandis and Guy, to name two. Particularly the developers friend as it was a personal lawsuit. Check 'hypocrisy'.

The point is, like it or not, that's the way political parties work. All of them.

As for the Ombudsman, she said herself this was part of her job. Fairly straightforward, even for you.

I appreciate the reasons for your look-over-here bizo as the substantive matter isn't your wheelhouse.

Isn't this a thread about when the ALP rorted the 2014 Victorian Election?

We're all waiting for your even more informative post on when the ALP will repay the $1 million in legal fees that the Andrews government spent in the Supreme Court, the Court of Appeal and High Court trying to block the Victorian Ombudsman from investigating. And similar legal costs for the Ombudsman.

 

[AM]

Isn't this a thread about when the ALP rorted the 2014 Victorian Election?

We're all waiting for your even more informative post on when the ALP will repay the $1 million in legal fees that the Andrews government spent in the Supreme Court, the Court of Appeal and High Court trying to block the Victorian Ombudsman from investigating. And similar legal costs for the Ombudsman.

It certainly is about the broad question of Labor overstepping the mark with the use of electoral staff; why it occurred; and them fulfilling the recommendations of the report of an Ombudsman whose job it is to conduct such investigations. Also of interest to many is why the Libs are so afraid to extend their desire for further investigations to include all political parties.

In the micro, it's about someone who sees it as in their interests to not want to - or isn't able to - process answers and is unwilling to address the hypocrisy of the position they are putting when asked. Or just plain trolling.

Or all the above.

 

[Pessimistic]

I just assume a government can do whatever they want, as long as they have important stuff to do.

Joyce asked another politician to find a job for his girlfriend. That was an outrage to so many here.

Yet 21 jobs were found for people inappropriately and that is fine. Because Labor have to fix schools and hospitals.

I guess Joyce screwed up. He just needed to be building a bridge or something and it would have been okay.

If the Libs didn’t demonstrate last time round that they’ll likely bugger all that stuff up it would be a valid point

 

[HairyO]

If the Libs didn’t demonstrate last time round that they’ll likely bugger all that stuff up it would be a valid point

Right. You can do anything you want as long as the trains run on time.

 

[Pessimistic]

Right. You can do anything you want as long as the trains run on time.

At the rate Melbourne is growing, it’s a very pertinent issue

Governments from all sides have cruelled this states infrastructure. We just can’t afford the program to be even a day late
Ant the corruption in question is low key. Is it the thin end of the wedge? Andrews will probably be voted out in 2022 and the Libs will be better

Matthew Guy seems to be a long history of corrupt behaviour

 

[Darkyprotector]

Perhaps public opinion was affected by the work the staffers did. For example do we know if they contacted members of the public or lobbied on behalf of their candidate?

You always swallow

Ruperts banking on it

Keep clutching at straws

 

[Darkyprotector]

Isn't this a thread about when the ALP rorted the 2014 Victorian Election?

We're all waiting for your even more informative post on when the ALP will repay the $1 million in legal fees that the Andrews government spent in the Supreme Court, the Court of Appeal and High Court trying to block the Victorian Ombudsman from investigating. And similar legal costs for the Ombudsman.

Clutching

Your kidding are t you

Lets talk about using a public holiday to usurp government

Contradiction

Oh and by never ever have I seen a total breach of parliamentary protocol

Bad move bed is , bad move mathew can't you read the tea leaves , people are fed up with this

Great timing NOT

 

[The Delusionist]

It bemuses me that these sorts of issues get so far on the back of a whistleblower without anyone questioning their motive - especially when this all came on the back of 1 single whistleblower.

I know the guy that blew the whistle on this. Not well, but well enough to have spoken to him about this before he went public, and we have some mutual friends that know him well.

Why did he blow the whistle? Because he was attempting to blackmail the ALP into supporting his candidacy and paying for his campaign for a spot in local government in regional Victoria. He went public when they laughed at him. And they did laugh at him, because he thought he was a big shot in his ALP sub-branch, and he thought the fact that his mother did some low-level job with a union would at least result in the ALP finding him a job in the movement.

Much as the use of electorate staff as field organisers came back and bit them in the arse, they did the right thing as it relates to Jake Finnigan, because he's the exact type of scheming, entitled prick that they need to keep out of the ALP and out of the union movement. (I loved his whinging quotes in The Age last week about the personal toll on him. What did the dumb **** expect would happen?)

None of this is defend what happened. But let's be honest - politicians of both persuasions rort their entitlements all the time. They get found out, they pay it back, and then the same thing happens again in 5 or 6 months.

No, it's not right, or fair. But the reality is that people already have such low opinions of their politicians that finding out they're liars, cheaters and thieves doesn't surprise anyone, and ultimately doesn't affect their vote very much.

I think whistleblowers should be protected.
The whistleblower has been validated by Ombudsman Glass, what you've said might be completely fictional. Why should there be a personal toll on him?

None of this is defend what happened. But let's be honest - politicians of both persuasions rort their entitlements all the time. They get found out, they pay it back, and then the same thing happens again in 5 or 6 months.

And they can continue to do so because of this kind of attitude.

You've been sucked into defending inappropriate actions of your teams, by partisan hypocrites on the other team.
Ignore them and discuss the issue.
If you are in the know, why don't you break down what happened and why. Help us to understand the actual issue outside of Fairfax/Murdoch buzzwords.

 

[nobbyiscool]

I think whistleblowers should be protected.
The whistleblower has been validated by Ombudsman Glass, what you've said might be completely fictional. Why should there be a personal toll on him?


And they can continue to do so because of this kind of attitude.

You've been sucked into defending inappropriate actions of your teams, by partisan hypocrites on the other team.
Ignore them and discuss the issue.
If you are in the know, why don't you break down what happened and why. Help us to understand the actual issue outside of Fairfax/Murdoch buzzwords.

My team? Mate, I haven't voted Labor since Richard Marles claimed that Manus Island was an essential part of border protection after an asylum seeker in our care was murdered. (I don't post on this board a lot, but I've made it pretty clear where I stand when I have posted here.)

Why is it Labor voters/members who you expect to change the culture of entitlement rorting? What Bronwyn Bishop did was just as outrageous as this. ******* Dastyari lost his job for doing the same damn thing as Barnaby Joyce has done, except the person paying off Joyce was a white Australian mining magnate, so apparently it doesn't count. We had the previous Liberal Govt in Victoria giving dodgy approvals and re-zonings to benefit their backers. They're all as culpable as each other, and the reason for that is as I said in the post you've quoted - at the end of the day people don't care that much that it affects their vote (much), cos we already know that both sides of politics are full of self-serving pricks.

On the question of why there should be a personal toll? Normally I might agree with you (especially as it relates to whistle-blower protection), and you can choose to believe my knowledge of Tosh Finnigan or not - but inherent in what I know about him and what caused him to blow the whistle (which I explained here) is the reason that he should've expected a(n alleged) personal toll.