Vic Daniel Andrews and the Statue of Limitations

[Hornberger]

In August now Premier Allan claimed the decision to cancel the Commonwealth Games was made 24 hours before the public announcement.

New documents tabled in state parliament have revealed legal firm Arnold Bloch Leibler was contracted in June 2023, up to a month before the former premier, Daniel Andrews, called a snap cabinet meeting and delivered the news to the Victorian public on July 18, that the games would be cancelled.

Why the lies?

I really am confused as why you consider this to be some sort of revelation, let alone newsworthy in way.

Government is considering making a decision.
Government seeks advice about the decision.
Government receives the advice requested.
Government considers the advice received.
Government makes the decision.

Making the decision is the final step in the decision-making process. The process is not instantaneous. Saying that a decision made yesterday does not mean that the idea was first concieved yesterday, and to suggest otherwise is ridiculous.

 

[Carn The Berries]

I think the schools are up against it at the moment with staff shortages and bureaucracy making life more difficult, so dealing with any Covid impacted kids /hangovers is going to be a bridge too far?
It will take a number of years before we can really assess the consequences on all areas of society- and it’s always going to be difficult to measure it all accurately, but it hasn’t been good!

Completely agree here. It will be almost impossible to identify the root cause(s) of any decline in performance. There are still hundreds, if not thousands of teaching vacancies across the state. Who could possibly have predicted this would happen when you sign an EBA that reduces the hours that teachers are required in the classroom?

 

[Gralin]

Completely agree here. It will be almost impossible to identify the root cause(s) of any decline in performance. There are still hundreds, if not thousands of teaching vacancies across the state. Who could possibly have predicted this would happen when you sign an EBA that reduces the hours that teachers are required in the classroom?

you really think the only reason there are so many vacancies is the EBA that they all agreed to?

 

[Carn The Berries]

I really am confused as why you consider this to be some sort of revelation, let alone newsworthy in way.

Government is considering making a decision.
Government seeks advice about the decision.
Government receives the advice requested.
Government considers the advice received.
Government makes the decision.

Making the decision is the final step in the decision-making process. The process is not instantaneous. Saying that a decision made yesterday does not mean that the idea was first concieved yesterday, and to suggest otherwise is ridiculous.

It may not ACTUALLY be true, but it's certainly what is implied by saying that the decision was only made 24 hours ago. It seems the lawyers were engaged only a couple of weeks (at best) after the budget, which included the lower costed games.

 

[Golden_6]

Lawyers hired weeks before Commonwealth Games cancellation announcement, documents show

Lawyers the Victorian government hired to negotiate the cancellation of the Commonwealth Games weeks before it officially made the announcement cost taxpayers more than $1 million, documents show.

www.abc.net.au

I'm not sure that article is saying what you think it's saying.

The final decision as a cabinet to cancel the games likely only happened 24 hours before. Do you think those running the show just wake up one day and decide to make the final decisions without going through the implications and consequences of making such decisions?

 

[MarcMaverick]

I'm not sure that article is saying what you think it's saying.

The final decision as a cabinet to cancel the games likely only happened 24 hours before. Do you think those running the show just wake up one day and decide to make the final decisions without going through the implications and consequences of making such decisions?

Given who it is, yep.

 

[Satan]

I'm not sure that article is saying what you think it's saying.

The final decision as a cabinet to cancel the games likely only happened 24 hours before. Do you think those running the show just wake up one day and decide to make the final decisions without going through the implications and consequences of making such decisions?

the budget in may had no funding for the games

Victoria state budget ignores 2026 Commonwealth Games as concern grows

The Victoria 2026 Commonwealth Games has not received itemised funding allocations in the latest state budget.

www.insidethegames.biz

 

[Carn The Berries]

the budget in may had no funding for the games

Victoria state budget ignores 2026 Commonwealth Games as concern grows

The Victoria 2026 Commonwealth Games has not received itemised funding allocations in the latest state budget.

www.insidethegames.biz

Not having itemised spending is not the same as having no funding.

 

[Sttew]

I really am confused as why you consider this to be some sort of revelation, let alone newsworthy in way.

I guess the government lying to us and being unashamedly secretive is not newsworthy as it has gone on for 9 years.

But what is newsworthy is the revelation that the Andrews government spent $1.3 million sending lawyers to London to cancel the Games contract one month before we the public heard about it. That's fine, as I understand decisions like this take time. So why lie and say the decision was made 24 hours before the public announcement. Why couldn't Allen simply say we have been deliberating for a month? And the answer is because the government knew for some time - pre Budget at minimum - that the Games were not viable.

 

[MC Extra Dollop]

I guess the government lying to us and being unashamedly secretive is not newsworthy as it has gone on for 9 years.

But what is newsworthy is the revelation that the Andrews government spent $1.3 million sending lawyers to London to cancel the Games contract one month before we the public heard about it. That's fine, as I understand decisions like this take time. So why lie and say the decision was made 24 hours before the public announcement. Why couldn't Allen simply say we have been deliberating for a month? And the answer is because the government knew for some time - pre Budget at minimum - that the Games were not viable.

It's gone on forever and not just in Government. I'd say it's a daily fact of professional life for most of us. Everyone wants to be transparent - but only to a point.

If you're the head of a large organisation do you consider the decision to axe 100s of staff to be made as soon as you start getting legal experts to look at what it's going to cost?

Some of you must think a project has been green lighted as soon as someone starts putting together the business case.

 

[Satan]

It's gone on forever and not just in Government. I'd say it's a daily fact of professional life for most of us. Everyone wants to be transparent - but only to a point.

If you're the head of a large organisation do you consider the decision to axe 100s of staff to be made as soon as you start getting legal experts to look at what it's going to cost?

Some of you must think a project has been green lighted as soon as someone starts putting together the business case.

The difference is thats its our money

 

[MC Extra Dollop]

The difference is thats its our money

The decision's not made until it's made. And taking sufficient time and getting expert advice on the impacts of making a decision or not making a decision is a prudent use of money. It's the only way to do business.

 

[Bombermania]

The difference is thats its our money

Nothing to do with whose money it is. Good policy work takes time and there can be a lag between when the idea is first considered and when its decided upon, and that's why we see new governments do things that were initiated by the previous government.

 

[Satan]

Nothing to do with whose money it is. Good policy work takes time and there can be a lag between when the idea is first considered and when its decided upon, and that's why we see new governments do things that were initiated by the previous government.

There was budget of 1mil for consultants , blew out to 21m

 

[Sttew]

The decision's not made until it's made. And taking sufficient time and getting expert advice on the impacts of making a decision or not making a decision is a prudent use of money. It's the only way to do business.

Seriously? "Getting expert advice on the impacts of making a decision" is that a euphemism for "sending a lawyer to London to find out the cost of reneging"?

And what if the lawyers had come back and said "It will cost you $1.5 billion" to get out of the contract? Would we have proceeded with the Games? Of course not. The Games were never going to happen because the business case by the consultant was a sham. Even Dan said so. - "hardly the greatest piece of work ever done".

 

[MC Extra Dollop]

Seriously? "Getting expert advice on the impacts of making a decision" is that a euphemism for "sending a lawyer to London to find out the cost of reneging"?

And what if the lawyers had come back and said "It will cost you $1.5 billion" to get out of the contract? Would we have proceeded with the Games? Of course not. The Games were never going to happen because the business case by the consultant was a sham. Even Dan said so. - "hardly the greatest piece of work ever done".

It all seems like very standard business to me: due diligence would be another description for it.

You get experts in their field to give it a thorough review and they advise you of their recommended course of action and you can choose to follow the recommendation or ignore it. And if you choose the latter, you'll have some pretty serious questions to answer if it goes balls up.

Presumably, the recommendation here was to cut their losses. Which seems sound, since the only people who are really losing sleep over it are people who already hated Andrews and his government.

 

[Sttew]

It all seems like very standard business to me: due diligence would be another description for it.

You get experts in their field to give it a thorough review and they advise you of their recommended course of action and you can choose to follow the recommendation or ignore it. And if you choose the latter, you'll have some pretty serious questions to answer if it goes balls up.

Presumably, the recommendation here was to cut their losses. Which seems sound, since the only people who are really losing sleep over it are people who already hated Andrews and his government.

We all agree cutting losses was the only way out of a debacle we should never have been in. That's not what is being questioned.

Were you aware that on 13 June 2023 the then Minister for the Comm Games assured a Parliamentary Committee that she was delighted with the progress being made in delivering the Games. At the same time the government was secretly sending lawyers to London to extricate Victoria from the Contract.

Lying to a Parliamentary Committee is akin to lying in Court. It is an offence. "Serious penalties, including imprisonment, can apply for intentionally providing false or misleading information to a Parliamentary Committee."

Guidelines for appearing before and producing documents to Victorian inquiries

These will help you if you work for a government body and are required to appear before or produce documents to Victorian parliamentary committees, royal commissions or boards of inquiry.

www.vic.gov.au

 

[Crankyhawk]

In August now Premier Allan claimed the decision to cancel the Commonwealth Games was made 24 hours before the public announcement.

New documents tabled in state parliament have revealed legal firm Arnold Bloch Leibler was contracted in June 2023, up to a month before the former premier, Daniel Andrews, called a snap cabinet meeting and delivered the news to the Victorian public on July 18, that the games would be cancelled.

Why the lies?

She might have been (deliberately) kept in the dark.

 

[MC Extra Dollop]

We all agree cutting losses was the only way out of a debacle we should never have been in. That's not what is being questioned.

Were you aware that on 13 June 2023 the then Minister for the Comm Games assured a Parliamentary Committee that she was delighted with the progress being made in delivering the Games. At the same time the government was secretly sending lawyers to London to extricate Victoria from the Contract.

Lying to a Parliamentary Committee is akin to lying in Court. It is an offence. "Serious penalties, including imprisonment, can apply for intentionally providing false or misleading information to a Parliamentary Committee."

Guidelines for appearing before and producing documents to Victorian inquiries

These will help you if you work for a government body and are required to appear before or produce documents to Victorian parliamentary committees, royal commissions or boards of inquiry.

www.vic.gov.au

Even if that timeline is correct (I understand that Allan is disputing that lawyers had been engaged when she made that appearance), it's a pretty difficult task to prove that someone was lying in a statement where they said they were delighted about the progress of something.

Even if you think this whole situation stinks, even if you're sure Andrews and Allan were up to something here, wouldn't it make sense for them to at least wait until after the parliamentary inquiry had been held to kick off their exit strategy? Plausible deniability and all that.

 

[Sttew]

She might have been (deliberately) kept in the dark.

Always a possibility, even for the minister responsible for the games

 

[Satan]

Always a possibility, even for the minister responsible for the games

Particularly if andrews knew he was going to quit and didnt want Allan to be informed of his decision to pull the plug

 

[HurleyHepsHird]

All the haters and losers are still obsessed.

Dan Andrews, undefeated.

 

[Carn The Berries]

It's gone on forever and not just in Government. I'd say it's a daily fact of professional life for most of us. Everyone wants to be transparent - but only to a point.

If you're the head of a large organisation do you consider the decision to axe 100s of staff to be made as soon as you start getting legal experts to look at what it's going to cost?

Some of you must think a project has been green lighted as soon as someone starts putting together the business case.

I totally understand that, but when you get caught with your fingers in the cookie jar... Just come clean. The government are still sticking to this story that the decision was made 24 before it was announced, with the implication that it was a quick discussion to reach a decision.

Just be honest and say "yep, we started reviewing it a few months ago because we were concerned about potential cost blowouts. We didn't make any changes in the Budget as we hadn't yet formed a conclusion about potential costs."

If the revised costings are to be believed, the right decision was reached. But the government has so badly botched the way the entire thing has been handled that people are angry with them... for doing the right thing.

 

[Carn The Berries]

We all agree cutting losses was the only way out of a debacle we should never have been in. That's not what is being questioned.

Were you aware that on 13 June 2023 the then Minister for the Comm Games assured a Parliamentary Committee that she was delighted with the progress being made in delivering the Games. At the same time the government was secretly sending lawyers to London to extricate Victoria from the Contract.

Lying to a Parliamentary Committee is akin to lying in Court. It is an offence. "Serious penalties, including imprisonment, can apply for intentionally providing false or misleading information to a Parliamentary Committee."

Guidelines for appearing before and producing documents to Victorian inquiries

These will help you if you work for a government body and are required to appear before or produce documents to Victorian parliamentary committees, royal commissions or boards of inquiry.

www.vic.gov.au

This is the bit that people are p155ed about. The government were then, and are still trying now, to tell people that everything was hunky dory until a day or 2 before they announced that they were pulling the pin. It just BS, nothing more, nothing less.

 

[Sttew]

This is the bit that people are p155ed about. The government were then, and are still trying now, to tell people that everything was hunky dory until a day or 2 before they announced that they were pulling the pin. It just BS, nothing more, nothing less.

The Herald Sun, so often mocked by Danfans, is today reporting that Dan did in fact keep all plans to can the Comm Games secret from his Cabinet. So when Jacinta says she didn't know anything about lawyers being sent to London, it is being reported this is accurate.

It is hard to believe, though, that the then Minister responsible for delivering the games had no idea things were dire.