Gladys Berejiklian in trouble?

[Donakebab]

I'll say it again, real or perceived conflict of interest.

It absolutely stinks to high hell that she hasn't been booted out yet.

 

[BFew]

I'll say it again, real or perceived conflict of interest.

How can it have been perceived by anyone if Gladys hid it from everyone?

 

[Suspense]

The threshold is reasonable suspicion of corrupt conduct. Depending on what else comes out I can maybe believe she never met that threshold (or at least have enough doubt to be unsure either way).

The threshold of doubt is very low - it is a similar threshold for our mandatory reporting scheme for child abuse in Victoria.

The words suspects on reasonable grounds mean there is a real possibility that corrupt conduct is, or may be, involved. There needs to be more than an idle wondering but there can be less than a firm belief. Proof is not necessary.
...
You can contact the ICAC to discuss particular matters that you may be unsure about or to seek clarification on any issue concerning reporting corrupt conduct. However, as a general rule, if you are unsure about a matter, you are encouraged to err on the side of caution and report it either to the ICAC or to the head of an agency responsible to you.

https://www.icac.nsw.gov.au/Article...1 reporting guidelines for ministers.pdf.aspx

 

[Caesar]

The threshold of doubt is very low - it is a similar threshold for our mandatory reporting scheme for child abuse in Victoria.

The words suspects on reasonable grounds mean there is a real possibility that corrupt conduct is, or may be, involved. There needs to be more than an idle wondering but there can be less than a firm belief. Proof is not necessary.
...
You can contact the ICAC to discuss particular matters that you may be unsure about or to seek clarification on any issue concerning reporting corrupt conduct. However, as a general rule, if you are unsure about a matter, you are encouraged to err on the side of caution and report it either to the ICAC or to the head of an agency responsible to you.

https://www.icac.nsw.gov.au/ArticleDocuments/694/Section 11 reporting guidelines for ministers.pdf.aspx

Sure, which is reasonable suspicion.

I don’t think the fact he was involved in property deals, in and of itself, means she should have had reasonable suspicion. A shocking number of MPs are.

But I think that the attitude “OK you’re doing property deals, I need to totally insulate myself from knowing anything of substance” shows that she’s more worried about avoiding reporting obligations than doing the right thing.

 

[HairyO]

Never said you had it bad there. I told the other chap that cases are climbing in NSW and that he shouldn't be complacent - or words to that effect.

We get betwern 1 and 5 cases each day. And theHealth Dept quickly quarantines it. So far.

The real question is can they keep doing it for a year or more if a vaccine doesnt come.

 

[Suspense]

Sure, which is reasonable suspicion.

I don’t think the fact he was involved in property deals, in and of itself, means she should have had reasonable suspicion. A shocking number of MPs are.

But I think that the attitude “OK you’re doing property deals, I need to totally insulate myself from knowing anything of substance” shows that she’s more worried about avoiding reporting obligations than doing the right thing.

I think a reasonable person would conclude that if said MP is telling you about the personal kickbacks he will receive from said property deals, to the point where you literally have to tell him to STFU, your knowledge of said conduct has passed the point of 'reasonable suspicion'.

I don't think there is any doubt as to whether she has failed in her duty to report corrupt conduct under s11. The question is does that necessarily satisfy the definition of corrupt conduct under s8(1) given the limitations in s9 require it to be one of either:

• a disciplinary offence [any misconduct, irregularity, neglect of duty, breach of discipline or other matter that constitutes or may constitute grounds for disciplinary action under any law]
• in the case of conduct of a Minister of the Crown or a member of a House of Parliament—a substantial breach of an applicable code of conduct
• conduct that would cause a reasonable person to believe that it would bring the integrity of the office concerned or of Parliament into serious disrepute.

 

[Caesar]

if said MP is telling you about the personal kickbacks he will receive from said property deals, to the point where you literally have to tell him to STFU

Look, that’s certainly a valid interpretation of what transpired. Personally? Given the extent and nature of property deals that a lot of MPs are involved in, I don’t think that exchange alone necessarily gives rise to reasonable suspicion.

That’s not to say that I think her handling of the situation was acceptable - it very much was not.

I’m just not sure that I’d say her state of knowledge was sufficient to merit triggering a report to ICAC.

 

[Gough]

Craig Thomson banged a couple of hookers on the union dime, Peter Slipper claimed a dodgy expense and the Libs and media made them out to be Christopher Skase. Now we have the Premier of NSW being slipped one for years by a corrupt MP and all we hear are excuses why she should stay. Draw your own conclusions.

 

[Caesar]

To be clear, at no point have I said she should stay.

I’ll admittedly be disappointed if this brings her down, because I think she’s mostly been a pretty good premier and whoever replaces her will almost certainly do a worse job.

But I think it is hard to make a good argument that she shouldn’t resign.

 

[NSWCROW]

* me has Emma Albericie been abducted by SKRULLS ????

 

[SBD Gonzalez]

How can it have been perceived by anyone if Gladys hid it from everyone?

By the fact that she's behaved like someone with something to hide.

 

[SBD Gonzalez]

Very good article here by Michael Pascoe about the bigger picture.

Forget the 'Daz and Glad Show', this is the real political scandal

The whiff of sex elevates the 'Daz and Glad Show' to more than just a corrupt NSW politician, but it also distracts punters from a much bigger scandal.

thenewdaily.com.au

 

[NSWCROW]

Droopy with the worst take yet





What a miserable miserable campaigner this guy is

 

[Suspense]

Look, that’s certainly a valid interpretation of what transpired. Personally? Given the extent and nature of a lot of the legitimate property deals that plenty of MPs are involved in, I don’t think that exchange alone necessarily gives rise to reasonable suspicion.

I admittedly have no knowledge on this area - but what would be examples of legitimate property deals involving MPs receiving personal commissions for facilitating and "solving" bureaucratic problems in order to get these deals done?

 

[Caesar]

I admittedly have no knowledge on this area - but what would be examples of legitimate property deals involving MPs receiving personal commissions for facilitating and "solving" bureaucratic problems in order to get these deals done?

Unfortunately there’s nothing in NSW that prevents MPs from brokering property deals and accepting commissions, long as they don’t use their position as an MP to further the deal.

That is obviously a rule that has a ton of grey area. It is a pretty fine line between using your personal expertise and contacts to facilitate a deal, and using your position as an MP to facilitate a deal - the former are often pretty closely linked to the latter. It is pretty unsurprising that Berejiklian did not even want to approach the whole mire.

As Jodi McKay quite rightly pointed out yesterday, it is a ridiculous state of affairs - in NSW developers are banned from donating to political parties, but they can quite legally pay fat stacks of cash directly to MPs as commission.

The ALP has introduced legislation to stop all this happening, and hopefully the public pressure means the government is forced to support it.

 

[BFew]

How much was Gladys underlying propensity to not upset her mother, or keep secret anything that might upset her mother, related to Gladys 'keeping mum'
on everything between her and Maguire, never declaring any actual, perceived, or potential conflicts of interest involving Maguire, or ever making a report to ICAC regarding Maguire?

And is her exclusive "first" interview to the Daily Telegraph, where she effectively says she's now given up on love indefinitely and never going to speak to Maguire again, a sign of both immature, juvenile and defeatist behavior.

IMO, it's about time her colleagues gave her a helping hand and the opportunity to find new love elsewhere.
That can probably only happen for her if she gets out of NSW Politics completely. The sooner the better IMO.

Gladys and Daryl: the secret relationship that shocked the state

Premier Gladys Berejiklian's relationship with Daryl Maguire has shocked the state, with friends, colleagues and even political foes asking, 'what was she thinking?'

www.smh.com.au

Berejiklian didn't leave the family home until she was nearly 30, and even then, it was only because she was eyeing off pre-selection and Liberal Party elders told her she needed to live independently.
She moved into a flat in Willoughby that she had bought with money saved from her successful banking career.
Her parents, who raised her in the strict Armenian Orthodox church and discouraged her from dating outside the faith, worried that this would mean she would never marry.
In 2011 Berejiklian pleaded with journalist Shelley Gare, who was writing a Sydney Magazine profile piece: "Can you please not write anything that's going to upset my mother?"

NSW Premier Gladys Berejiklian has 'given up on love'

The New South Wales Premier was forced to unceremoniously sack the Wagga Wagga representative in 2018 after learning he was making dodgy deals.

www.dailymail.co.uk

No Cookies | Daily Telegraph

No Cookies

www.dailytelegraph.com.au

“I’m never going to speak to him again,”

“I can formally say to people I’ve given up on love,” she said. “I’m just going to say I have always put my job first, rightly or wrongly, and that will now continue indefinitely.”

When asked if she fell in love with Maguire, with whom she admits she only had public service work in common, the Premier stiffened: “I did. That’s all I’ll say. I’m embarrassed now, but I did.”

 

[hamohawk1]

fu** me has Emma Albericie been abducted by SKRULLS ????

She personifies the WTF of 2020.

Seriously, wtf is she thinking.

 

[Rob R]

Very good article here by Michael Pascoe about the bigger picture.

Forget the 'Daz and Glad Show', this is the real political scandal

The whiff of sex elevates the 'Daz and Glad Show' to more than just a corrupt NSW politician, but it also distracts punters from a much bigger scandal.

thenewdaily.com.au

Normally Pascoe stuff can be tossed aside as poorly written partisan crap but that article gets to the heart of problems no matter which party is in power.

On SM-G570F using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[SBD Gonzalez]

Droopy with the worst take yet

View attachment 988445

What a miserable miserable campaigner this guy is

Mystifying how any media outlet thinks that soporific drone is going to boost their ratings.

He’s like Mr Logic from Viz comics.

 

[Northalives]

We get betwern 1 and 5 cases each day. And theHealth Dept quickly quarantines it. So far.

The real question is can they keep doing it for a year or more if a vaccine doesnt come.

Friend, a vaccine is not likely at any time going on what has happened in the past when the world's scientists have gone looking for coronavirus vaccines.

I believe sincerely that we need to behave like there will never be a vaccine and if, in the unlikely event one is manufactured, then that's just a huge bonus. We cannot go about taking risks and "pushing the envelope", so to speak, in the hope that a vaccine will come along.

We have to go for eradication and we are nearly there now.

 

[HairyO]

Friend, a vaccine is not likely at any time going on what has happened in the past when the world's scientists have gone looking for coronavirus vaccines.

I believe sincerely that we need to behave like there will never be a vaccine and if, in the unlikely event one is manufactured, then that's just a huge bonus. We cannot go about taking risks and "pushing the envelope", so to speak, in the hope that a vaccine will come along.

We have to go for eradication and we are nearly there now.

Erqdication only works when the world has had it.

So we either go like Sweden or stay away from the world for 5 years.

 

[Northalives]

Erqdication only works when the world has had it.

So we either go like Sweden or stay away from the world for 5 years.

We are an island and we can and should eradicate it so we, on this island, can live a relatively "normal" life.

We must turn this into a border security issue and not a health issue.

We can deal with the rest of the world in a manner which suits our interests as a nation as a whole and not the narrow, vested interests of a few. We have the nous and resources to keep our exports going and, if governments had the will, we could start rebuilding an Australia that is self reliant, just as we once were and not be at the mercy of some trans-national conglomerate or other or, reliant on places like China and elsewhere for our Personal Protection Equipment and medicines, clothing, white-goods and electronics.

To achieve this, we need Federal Government intervention/support, not tax cuts and we certainly don't need the Federal Government acting as if nothing has changed. The world has drastically changed and we need uniquely Australian solutions for Australian problems. Unfortunately, Morrison is doing a "Trump" telling us that a vaccine is around the corner so we can just carry on with business as usual.

The critical part of the equation for a self reliant Australia is energy; that is, cheap, plentiful renewable energy and for this to be achieved, it must necessarily be a function of Government as it was when Australia set up it's current, now outdated and outmoded energy systems. These were set up by Governments and then, in the privatisation fad, sold off to privates whose one and only motivation is profit, and rightly so, but these privates aren't going to spend doe to move their energy production and distribution into the 21st century as a gesture of "goodwill" and who can blame them, their whole reason for being is to make profit!

We were forced to send our industry offshore because Freidmanite policies dictated that money from the wealthy, "civilised" 1st world, be sent offshore to places where you could "buy" desperate 3rd world "stock" and put them to work for next to nothing in oppressive conditions with out having to observe ridiculous things like human decency and occupational health and safety so they could do the work that was once done by those of us in the "civilised" world.

At that time, there was one thing that was the same over here as over in the 3rd world, the cost of energy so in order to maximise profits, the multinationals and those "Australian" Industries that shut up shop here and went "off shore" did so because the only way to maximise profits, was to slash wages.

Now, the world has changed because of the new energy technologies that have emerged and lucky us, we have an incredible abundance of these natural, renewable resources which, if utilised, makes us massively more competitive worldwide without subjecting our workers to the inhumane working conditions and wages that make the stuff that we have in our houses.

It's no use people jumping up and down about the cost of such a Nation building exercise when we are "comfortable" with the current Federal Government lifting the debt ceiling from $300 billion to $1 Trillion in 9 years. Money is really cheap now and if we all went into this as a nation, every dollar generated from the sale of this energy would go straight into Government coffers and which it would dispense some of these moneys to maintain the system, retain a small percentage to repay the initial debt and all the money left over, would be the dividend to Australian Industry and citizens in the form of much smaller energy bills.

Don't laugh, this is what used to happen before privitisation. In other words, the "profits" are retained by every Australian citizen.

Covid-19 means that we won't be able to go overseas or have people coming into the country freely but again, that is something that we can manage well and successfully whilst we lucky bastards that live on this massive island, go about modernising our country without the threat of COVID-19 hanging over our heads.

 

[FRUMPY]

#poorgladys

 

[SBD Gonzalez]

Friend, a vaccine is not likely at any time going on what has happened in the past when the world's scientists have gone looking for coronavirus vaccines.

I believe sincerely that we need to behave like there will never be a vaccine and if, in the unlikely event one is manufactured, then that's just a huge bonus. We cannot go about taking risks and "pushing the envelope", so to speak, in the hope that a vaccine will come along.

We have to go for eradication and we are nearly there now.

Epidemiologist on ABC radio a few weeks ago was saying don't get our hopes up about a vaccine. Absolutely no reason to assume we'll discover one. We haven't found one for the common cold, or for HIV.

But he said the really hopeful area of research is for, like HIV, really good treatments for it.

HIV is no longer a death sentence; people with HIV now lead productive lives and he said he has real hope that same would apply eventually for Covid.

Anyway, probs for another thread...

 

[Baltimore Jack]