Vic Why is the Andrews government refusing to co-operate with the police?

[Maggie5]

You claimed you didn't like a half story. But when I filled you in on elements of the story that you had missed and some fairly basic mistruths, you disappeared without making a substantial argument.

You make out like you are even handed and 'expect a higher standard from politicians, no matter which side'. But you continue to act like a one sided ALP shill.

You just don't get it do you? I didn't miss, I dismissed the garble!

My original response to you was only regard the full facts which you omitted of repayment of both the offence and legal fees.

 

[Frank Bunn]

You just don't get it do you? I didn't miss, I dismissed the garble!

My original response to you was only regard the full facts which you omitted of repayment of both the offence and legal fees.

I have responded with facts to all the points you made in your cut and paste from Parliament in post 50.

But you avoid engaging in rational argument as per your usual MO.

Feel free to dispute these facts

• The $388,000 figure that was repaid was a calculated minimum amount based on scant evidence. The actual figure was probably much higher but the Ombudsman was unable to investigate the matter fully because the ALP refused to cooperate with her department.
• The ALP have continued their non cooperation by refusing to talk to the police.
• On 27th July Daniel Andrews lied when he was asked in relation to the police enquiry 'If they ask you to give evidence, will you give evidence'? and replied 'Everybody should cooperate and everybody will'.
• the ALP have not paid the 25% on top of the $388,000 falsely charged to the DPS
• the ALP have not repaid any of the costs incurred by the taxpayer, estimated by the ABC to be $1.3 million
• Daniel Andrews has not apologised to Parliament for misuse of electoral funding.

 

[Maggie5]

I have responded with facts to all the points you made in your cut and paste from Parliament in post 50.

But you avoid engaging in rational argument as per your usual MO.

Is it possible that you can engage without the 'constant' put down? I got your point the first time.

The $388,000 figure that was repaid was a calculated minimum amount based on scant evidence. The actual figure was probably much higher but the Ombudsman was unable to investigate the matter fully because the ALP refused to cooperate with her department.

Any evidence it was higher?

• The ALP have continued their non cooperation by refusing to talk to the police.
• On 27th July Daniel Andrews lied when he was asked in relation to the police enquiry 'If they ask you to give evidence, will you give evidence'? and replied 'Everybody should cooperate and everybody will'.

Have there been any charges? If the Police have a case charge them and they will either answer questions or wait to go to court. Since when are you automatically guilty of a crime because you don't attend a voluntary interview?
I don't have a problem with anyone not going in for a interview.

• the ALP have not paid the 25% on top of the $388,000 falsely charged to the DPS
• the ALP have not repaid any of the costs incurred by the taxpayer, estimated by the ABC to be $1.3 million
• Daniel Andrews has not apologised to Parliament for misuse of electoral funding.

I posted a link where it had been repaid, did you not read it? However if you can show otherwise, link it.

 

[Maggie5]

sorted, an interesting article - October:

The police chief also told radio 3AW that Opposition Leader Matthew Guy, as the complainant in the case, would be advised of the outcome of the investigations.
Police are investigating the scheme which saw about $388,000 siphoned from Labor MPs' Parliamentary budgets and into their campaigns for the 2014 state election.
The Age revealed in September that detectives planned to interview the 21 MPs, including six ministers, caught up in the affair, via questionnaire after 17 former political staffers were arrested in dawn raid in August and one of them strip-searched.
But police appear to have had a re-think, notifying the MPs via their lawyers that face-to-face interviews were being sought, although the timing of the questioning remained unclear.
Mr Ashton told 3AW the inquiry was on track to be completed before the election, depending on legal advice from the Office of Public Prosecutions.
“At this point I’m thinking it could be [finished by the election],” he said.
Mr Ashton said the results would be made public once the investigation was finished but he would not confirm or deny whether ministers had been interviewed.
Mr Ashton said the election and investigation were clearly separate.
“We wouldn’t be stopping an investigation because an election was due. It’s got to run its course like any other investigation," he said.
“The election is the election, it’s separate issues, we wouldn’t be stopping the investigation just because an election is due."

Likely that investigation is either on-going or a decision is yet to be announced. Given that Mathew Guy is the complainant, will be interesting what he decides.

 

[medusala]

You are so wrong its not even worth a proper response, but here's a hint: Corruption, where has it been proved?

ALP takes cash from unions. Then PS gets big pay rise. Just a coincidence Im sure

NB how much was average CFMEU salary on desal project?

re avatar, I'm assuming you are "sorry" over your lack of logic.

 

[Frank Bunn]

Is it possible that you can engage without the 'constant' put down? I got your point the first time.

You were the first one to get personal, claiming I had 'disappeared'. This is another part of your MO. When losing an argument, pick on some small thing to claim victim status.

Any evidence it was higher?

The true figure is not known because the ALP refused to cooperate with the Ombudsman. However from Hansard.

Have there been any charges? If the Police have a case charge them and they will either answer questions or wait to go to court. Since when are you automatically guilty of a crime because you don't attend a voluntary interview?
I don't have a problem with anyone not going in for a interview.

There are allegations of senior police interfering with the investigation so that arrests have not been made and charges laid.

Also, Daniel Andrews was asked a question in relation to the police enquiry 'If they ask you to give evidence, will you give evidence'? His reply was 'Everybody should cooperate and everybody will'. He lied.

I posted a link where it had been repaid, did you not read it? However if you can show otherwise, link it.

Provided in post 65. But I'll copy it here again. From Hansard.

 

[Maggie5]

You were the first one to get personal, claiming I had 'disappeared'. This is another part of your MO. When losing an argument, pick on some small thing to claim victim status.

Disappeared is personal? Wow I must be very gentle in my replies to you in the future then.

The true figure is not known because the ALP refused to cooperate with the Ombudsman.

So no evidence, just an assumption.

There are allegations of senior police interfering with the investigation so that arrests have not been made and charges laid.
Also, Daniel Andrews was asked a question in relation to the police enquiry 'If they ask you to give evidence, will you give evidence'? His reply was 'Everybody should cooperate and everybody will'. He lied.

Again, allegations, no facts or evidence.
Did Andrews make that comment before, during or after the enquiry? I thought it was in July perhaps he did.
Enquiry was completed in Sept/October?

I would prefer to wait and see what action Guy takes given he is the complainant.

• the ALP have not paid the 25% on top of the $388,000 falsely charged to the DPS
• the ALP have not repaid any of the costs incurred by the taxpayer, estimated by the ABC to be $1.3 million

You left this part out of my post? Paid or not?

 

[Frank Bunn]

Disappeared is personal? Wow I must be very gentle in my replies to you in the future then.

LOL. 'Is it possible that you can engage without the 'constant' put down? Was I gentle enough?

So no evidence, just an assumption.

What part of 'The report however identified that there were gaps in the timesheet data available to the Ombudsman suggesting that not all days charged against electorate office entitlements were able to be identified' did you not understand?

Again, allegations, no facts or evidence.
Did Andrews make that comment before, during or after the enquiry? I thought it was in July perhaps he did.
Enquiry was completed in Sept/October?

I would prefer to wait and see what action Guy takes given he is the complainant.

Andrews made that comment on 27th July, before the police investigation had begun.

'If they ask you to give evidence, will you give evidence'? His reply was 'Everybody should cooperate and everybody will'.

Why do you have no comment on this lie by the leading lawmaker in Victoria and his continued refusal to cooperate with the police enquiry?

You left this part out of my post? Paid or not?

Not paid and this is 3rd time I have highlighted this. I don't think you are that thick. You are being disingenuous.

• the ALP to pay an additional 25 per cent of the total amount falsely charged to DPS and to fully repay costs that were incurred by taxpayers on its behalf in its court challenges to the investigation.

It is notable that despite the Labor Government supporting the resolution, none of those actions have occurred.​

 

[Ron The Bear]

Because the election is in four weeks.

That's probably the main reason above all others.

Now that the election's out of the way, I presume they've sat down with police and cleared up any misunderstanding?

 

[Generalissimo]

The election's over and you lost. Obfuscatory nonsense about Labor being crooked has become pointless, and never worked in the first place.

 

[Pessimistic]

Give them somewhere to sook in private

 

[Maggie5]

LOL. 'Is it possible that you can engage without the 'constant' put down? Was I gentle enough?
What part of 'The report however identified that there were gaps in the timesheet data available to the Ombudsman suggesting that not all days charged against electorate office entitlements were able to be identified' did you not understand?
Andrews made that comment on 27th July, before the police investigation had begun.
'If they ask you to give evidence, will you give evidence'? His reply was 'Everybody should cooperate and everybody will'.
Why do you have no comment on this lie by the leading lawmaker in Victoria and his continued refusal to cooperate with the police enquiry?

I understood it okay, could be a number of reasons for the discrepancy in time sheets. I don't see conspiracies everywhere.

Not paid and this is 3rd time I have highlighted this. I don't think you are that thick. You are being disingenuous.

You seem to like 'name calling' which is sad.
Instead of repeating that it is 'not paid'. Supply a link or source that states it remains unpaid. Pretty simple request (for the 3rd time).

Here is the my link again saying they have paid: The party repaid the cash earlier this year.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-07...-face-questions-over-misuse-of-funds/10016510

Andrews made that comment on 27th July, before the police investigation had begun.
'If they ask you to give evidence, will you give evidence'? His reply was 'Everybody should cooperate and everybody will'.
Why do you have no comment on this lie by the leading lawmaker in Victoria and his continued refusal to cooperate with the police enquiry?

I already replied in some detail why I don't have a problem with Andrews or any others not fronting up for voluntary interviews. Maybe he hasn't under legal advice, or maybe because no charges have been laid. Why front up? Because he said he would? No biggie for me, I don't blame him.

 

[borderbarry]

Sorted is like a dog with a bone.

 

[Benny78]

Why does anyone even care? Could this get him kicked out of government early and the liberals in office?

As far as I understand it's Andrews/Labor for 4 more years?

 

[Generalissimo]

Why does anyone even care? Could this get him kicked out of government early and the liberals in office?

As far as I understand it's Andrews/Labor for 4 more years?

Shilly McShillface was hoping it'd be a vote winner for the Liberals, just like the "oh no there's brown people on our streets" scaremongering. It didn't work, they lost the election in an unprecedented thrashing, but he's too invested in it now to let it go.

 

[TheWoodenSlug]

Shilly McShillface was hoping it'd be a vote winner for the Liberals, just like the "oh no there's brown people on our streets" scaremongering. It didn't work, they lost the election in an unprecedented thrashing, but he's too invested in it now to let it go.

What about people that aren't beholden to any of the major parties, but just want our politicians (of all sides) to be more trustworthy and accountable? Surely they exist?

What incentive do our MPs have to act in good faith when they know their base will support/defend them regardless?

 

[Maggie5]

What about people that aren't beholden to any of the major parties, but just want our politicians (of all sides) to be more trustworthy and accountable? Surely they exist?

What incentive do our MPs have to act in good faith when they know their base will support/defend them regardless?

I am not sure if you are referring to me when you write, 'defend'. I just like the the full story told.

On further searching and from a source most would accept: The Australian. March 23, 2018

The Victorian Ombudsman Deborah Glass has found Labor “crossed a line” in the permissable use of MP entitlements during the 2014 state election campaign, when it employed a team of field officers who were paid in part by MPs’ staff allowances.
The report comes at the end of a two-year investigation which the Andrews government has spent more than $1 million challenging in the courts.
Victorian premier Daniel Andrews said ‘absolutely” he apologised for the misuse of the money.
“I’ve made it very clear that I’m sorry this has occurred; the most important thing here is to prove that we’re are sincere in our apology and our response,” he said.
“I very much prefer that this had not occurred,” he told a media conference.
“The full amount has been repaid by the Victorian branch of the Australian Labor Party.”
Mr Andrews noted that the Ombudsman had made no recommendations of any action to be taken against individuals. He said that the party would implement every recommendation from the report.
Ms Glass said she found $388,000 of parliamentary funds were misused, which Labor has now paid back.

The link I posted re repayment was dated July so I have assumed all has been repaid since March.

Now re the police investigation, it is up to Mathew Guy to take it further and I am okay with that.

I too expect more from politicians and for them to act in good faith both State and Federal but I also don't like 'cherry picking".

 

[TheWoodenSlug]

I am not sure if you are referring to me when you write, 'defend'. I just like the the full story told.

On further searching and from a source most would accept: The Australian. March 23, 2018

The Victorian Ombudsman Deborah Glass has found Labor “crossed a line” in the permissable use of MP entitlements during the 2014 state election campaign, when it employed a team of field officers who were paid in part by MPs’ staff allowances.
The report comes at the end of a two-year investigation which the Andrews government has spent more than $1 million challenging in the courts.
Victorian premier Daniel Andrews said ‘absolutely” he apologised for the misuse of the money.
“I’ve made it very clear that I’m sorry this has occurred; the most important thing here is to prove that we’re are sincere in our apology and our response,” he said.
“I very much prefer that this had not occurred,” he told a media conference.
“The full amount has been repaid by the Victorian branch of the Australian Labor Party.”
Mr Andrews noted that the Ombudsman had made no recommendations of any action to be taken against individuals. He said that the party would implement every recommendation from the report.
Ms Glass said she found $388,000 of parliamentary funds were misused, which Labor has now paid back.

The link I posted re repayment was dated July so I have assumed all has been repaid since March.

Now re the police investigation, it is up to Mathew Guy to take it further and I am okay with that.

I too expect more from politicians and for them to act in good faith both State and Federal but I also don't like 'cherry picking".

Nah, not directed at you or even ALP supporters; it happens on all sides. Far too many people are willing to blindly defend their 'team', ultimately to everyone's detriment.

 

[Frank Bunn]

Sorted is like a dog with a bone.

Thank you.

It is frustrating when people don't acknowledge facts when you post them 3 times. Such as the issue of whether the ALP have paid an additional 25 per cent of the total amount falsely charged to DPS - as required by the parliamentary motion they agreed to. And also from the same motion, whether they have repaid the costs that were incurred by taxpayers due to the government challenges to the investigation.

As per my posts 65, 80, 82, they have done neither.

Let's show it for the 4th time. From Hansard.

 

[Maggie5]

Thank you.

It is frustrating when people don't acknowledge facts when you post them 3 times. Such as the issue of whether the ALP have paid an additional 25 per cent of the total amount falsely charged to DPS - as required by the parliamentary motion they agreed to. And also from the same motion, whether they have repaid the costs that were incurred by taxpayers due to the government challenges to the investigation.

As per my posts 65, 80, 82, they have done neither.

Let's show it for the 4th time. From Hansard.

Show it as many times as you like, proves nothing. Date of Hansard, date of ABC link?

Did you notice my previous post where Andrews did apologise? Not that it really matters as apologies after the fact really mean little to me but seems it does to you.

You still have nothing but thanks for the discussion.

 

[Frank Bunn]

Show it as many times as you like, proves nothing. Date of Hansard, date of ABC link?

Did you notice my previous post where Andrews did apologise? Not that it really matters as apologies after the fact really mean little to me but seems it does to you.

You still have nothing but thanks for the discussion.

I thought you might be familiar with Hansard seeing as you have previously posted images from it quoting it but without the links. But here you go. This is the 5th time I've provided this evidence.

https://www.parliament.vic.gov.au/images/LCPC_58-01_Text_WEB.pdf

In return, can you give me the Hansard links to when Andrews apologised to the Victorian Parliament as he was required to by the motion that the ALP supported. Because I don't believe he did.

 

[Maggie5]

I thought you might be familiar with Hansard seeing as you have previously posted images from it quoting it but without the links. But here you go. This is the 5th time I've provided this evidence.

https://www.parliament.vic.gov.au/images/LCPC_58-01_Text_WEB.pdf

In return, can you give me the Hansard links to when Andrews apologised to the Victorian Parliament as he was required to by the motion that the ALP supported. Because I don't believe he did.

You still haven't responded to the ABC link, why? Not sure why you are showing Hansard, more important what came after the report was released.

See post #91, maybe you will accept article from The Australian?

Anyway, I am moving on.

 

[Frank Bunn]

You still haven't responded to the ABC link, why? Not sure why you are showing Hansard, more important what came after the report was released.

See post #91, maybe you will accept article from The Australian?

Anyway, I am moving on.

OK no worries. I've posted Hansard links to the ALP not paying the additional 25 per cent of the total amount falsely charged to DPS - as required by the parliamentary motion they agreed to. And also from the same motion, not paying the costs that were incurred by taxpayers due to the government challenges to the investigation.

I take it that by your inability to provide Hansard links to when Andrews supposedly apologised to the Victorian Parliament as he was required to by the motion that the ALP supported that it didn't actually happen.

 

[Maggie5]

OK no worries. I've posted Hansard links to the ALP not paying the additional 25 per cent of the total amount falsely charged to DPS - as required by the parliamentary motion they agreed to. And also from the same motion, not paying the costs that were incurred by taxpayers due to the government challenges to the investigation.

I take it that by your inability to provide Hansard links to when Andrews supposedly apologised to the Victorian Parliament as he was required to by the motion that the ALP supported that it didn't actually happen.

Whatever... Told you I am over it. I have supplied sufficient links to counteract your position. Not good enough, I really don't care and we are clogging up the thread on a pointless discussion.

 

[Frank Bunn]

Whatever... Told you I am over it. I have supplied sufficient links to counteract your position. Not good enough, I really don't care and we are clogging up the thread on a pointless discussion.

Not really. You refused to acknowledge evidence I provided 4 separate times. You are a disingenuous member of this forum. Enough is enough. Welcome to ignore.