Vic How would you rate Daniel Andrews' performance as Victorian Premier? - Part 7

[tandino]

Possibly corruption will always be an issue, but does that mean a society should turn a blind eye to it? Should gaps be closed? Should corrupt politicians be allowed to have any position or influence in parliament?

Society has all the power they require to set the standard. There's no greater authority.

 

[adogsfan5]

IBAC, who did an extensive review of it said it was neither corruption, nor criminal.
And you are not paying attention if you still think the abc has decent coverage.

Not criminal. Yet still found to be grey corruption and unethical.

The commission found that senior political advisers working for Premier Daniel Andrews and two former health ministers interfered and pressured public servants to award the $1.2-million contract to the Health Workers Union, without a tender process.

"The combined effect of these failings and unethical conduct resulted in a contract that should not have been entered into with the union and an outcome [that] was not in the public interest”

What would you personally consider this as?

 

[Pakenhamsaint]

It is fertile ground for an opposition to ride into government on. I remember when Geoff Shaw's Ford Territory was the biggest issue in the state.

But I don't think it's totally resolvable. I think a future Government will feel entitled to use those same IBAC gaps to find comfort in their conduct.

It requires one side to be the bigger man so to speak.
And lets be honest that's not going to happen any time soon.

 

[Satan]

Not criminal. Yet still found to be grey corruption and unethical.

The commission found that senior political advisers working for Premier Daniel Andrews and two former health ministers interfered and pressured public servants to award the $1.2-million contract to the Health Workers Union, without a tender process.

"The combined effect of these failings and unethical conduct resulted in a contract that should not have been entered into with the union and an outcome [that] was not in the public interest”

What would you personally consider this as?

Red shirts say hi

 

[Romeoh1]

Not criminal. Yet still found to be grey corruption and unethical.

The commission found that senior political advisers working for Premier Daniel Andrews and two former health ministers interfered and pressured public servants to award the $1.2-million contract to the Health Workers Union, without a tender process.

"The combined effect of these failings and unethical conduct resulted in a contract that should not have been entered into with the union and an outcome [that] was not in the public interest”

What would you personally consider this as?

Unethical. Not something I’d like to see happening and be good to see it depart from all spectrums of politics.

 

[hawkman]

IBAC, who did an extensive review of it said it was neither corruption, nor criminal.
And you are not paying attention if you still think the abc has decent coverage.

They couldn't say it was corruption because it didn't meet the criminal standard that it is required to for them to say that in Victoria
If it was in NSW, ICAC would most likely call it corruption

 

[Saint]

I don't have an issue with the IPA comp, but the Business Council is a peak body and often makes news. The comp there is the ACTU.

The new Animal Justice Party MLC has a regular spot on ABC mornings.

All of them appear to be interviewed on the ABC more than Daniel Andrews.

I think you're right about the Business Council/ACTU comparison, but how often do we see Union organisers or officials on TV other than Sally McManus? Who is the head of the organisation with decades of experience and very thoughtful. Much like the heads of the Business Council is.

From the IPA, they get "thoughts" from kids straight out of Uni/Young Libs fronting the IPA with no experience, it's such a waste of time.

You're also right about Andrews, I think he's given up on trying to sell his message direct to the public via interviews. Doesn't seem to have hurt his popularity (until a challenger will emerge).

In this era of least-bad politics, perhaps selling a message isn't so important.

 

[Crankyhawk]

what should happen to corrupt politicians? is my question

Determine damage/ loss to public caused by the corrupt behaviour and restitution
(Note that in the example given - the$1.2 m contract, the liability is only 1.2m if it can be shown that the course “provided” was of zero value

 

[Crankyhawk]

ABC having a swing too. Let’s stop pretending it’s just the same right wing media at fault hey.

This is a good thing in that people are more likely to listen.

 

[Not Important]

Not criminal. Yet still found to be grey corruption and unethical.

The commission found that senior political advisers working for Premier Daniel Andrews and two former health ministers interfered and pressured public servants to award the $1.2-million contract to the Health Workers Union, without a tender process.

"The combined effect of these failings and unethical conduct resulted in a contract that should not have been entered into with the union and an outcome [that] was not in the public interest”

What would you personally consider this as?

'grey' corruption, hey dogsy. are you sure it wasn't charcoal, or marengo, or old silver, or white smoke. relying on the “sky after dark” moronosphere for your commentary isn’t ideal.

the ibac finding was “The evidence gathered in the investigation fell short of establishing that any person had committed corrupt conduct”

bingo, that’s the color you are looking for “sky dark”

 

[Not Important]

This is a good thing in that people are more likely to listen.

there’s a clear difference between reporting the findings and selectively interpreting the findings- add personal attacks - to suit the interests of the audience you’re preaching to. and do it day and night week after week after........

i'm afraid dogsy has some difficulty in distinguishing between reporting the news and distorting the news. although, after becoming a rightist set-up since the libs stacked the board with reactionaries and appointed a reactionary chair the abc occasionally loses its way.

 

[wizcapper]

Determine damage/ loss to public caused by the corrupt behaviour and restitution
(Note that in the example given - the$1.2 m contract, the liability is only 1.2m if it can be shown that the course “provided” was of zero value

assuming the behaviour is corrupt and restitution has been agreed, what should happen to the politician? should they remain in their role?

 

[eddiesmith]

Determine damage/ loss to public caused by the corrupt behaviour and restitution
(Note that in the example given - the$1.2 m contract, the liability is only 1.2m if it can be shown that the course “provided” was of zero value

Which is what they’ve done multiple times, do the wrong thing then the party pays the state back…

Of course it’s hard to find the conduct officially corrupt when the main party offers zero to their questions by claiming ‘amnesia.’

Forgetting the regular corruption, surely a political leader who cannot remember making any decisions should be removed on medical grounds? Who knows what he’s agreeing to when even he doesn’t!!!

 

[kalex6251]

herald $cum have taken down their online 'corrupt dan' section .... and to think they went to all that trouble framing it in a nice deep magenta

not getting the traffic/clicks they expected???

 

[Crankyhawk]

assuming the behaviour is corrupt and restitution has been agreed, what should happen to the politician? should they remain in their role?

I think the only sensible answer is "it depends"

• degree of error (as in size of resitituion needed)
• careless vs intentional (gees, I sound like the MRP)
• repeat offence

 

[Crankyhawk]

there’s a clear difference between reporting the findings and selectively interpreting the findings- add personal attacks - to suit the interests of the audience you’re preaching to. and do it day and night week after week after........

i'm afraid dogsy has some difficulty in distinguishing between reporting the news and distorting the news. although, after becoming a rightist set-up since the libs stacked the board with reactionaries and appointed a reactionary chair the abc occasionally loses its way.

I thought his post was (and feel free to correct if wrong adogsfan5) was that it is not just RWNJ media highlighting the issue - in response to i think earlier claims that only RWNJ media with an agenda are reporting on this corruption or perceived corruption issue.

 

[Pakenhamsaint]

You're also right about Andrews, I think he's given up on trying to sell his message direct to the public via interviews. Doesn't seem to have hurt his popularity (until a challenger will emerge).

It's easier to get your message out via social media. You can control the message you give to people and not rely on the middle man media.

The flip side to it is if your message stinks there's no shortage of people who will call it out for what it is.

 

[wizcapper]

I think the only sensible answer is "it depends"

• degree of error (as in size of resitituion needed)
• careless vs intentional (gees, I sound like the MRP)
• repeat offence

Laughing at the MRP reference.

I don't know, i assume these pricks have had all the corruption training and induction you could poke a stick at and they would (or should as part of the role) be well and truly overly familiar with the right way to behave. Surely, they are not that hopeless.
They are in a role, that requires utmost respect for every penny being spent, decision being made, and if they cross that line through stupidity, deception or otherwise, they have zero sympathy from me and should not be in a position to govern a single person. That is the bare minimum. What other penalties may follow could vary.
Also, I think that they most certainly would not grant you or I the liberties that are being suggested here.

 

[eddiesmith]

Laughing at the MRP reference.

I don't know, i assume these pricks have had all the corruption training and induction you could poke a stick at and they would (or should as part of the role) be well and truly overly familiar with the right way to behave. Surely, they are not that hopeless.
They are in a role, that requires utmost respect for every penny being spent, decision being made, and if they cross that line through stupidity, deception or otherwise, they have zero sympathy from me and should not be in a position to govern a single person. That is the bare minimum. What other penalties may follow could vary.
Also, I think that they most certainly would not grant you or I the liberties that are being suggested here.

Which is why they send out the lackeys in their department to do the work then throw them under the bus when caught out.

 

[eddiesmith]

It's easier to get your message out via social media. You can control the message you give to people and not rely on the middle man media.

The flip side to it is if your message stinks there's no shortage of people who will call it out for what it is.

Especially when you have a large social media team to bombard the posts and share and retweet it with how awesome Dan is, any negative reaction quickly gets drowned out.

 

[Not Important]

I don't have an issue with the IPA comp, but the Business Council is a peak body and often makes news. The comp there is the ACTU.

The new Animal Justice Party MLC has a regular spot on ABC mornings.

All of them appear to be interviewed on the ABC more than Daniel Andrews.

i think you underrate how detrimental the ipa is to your party due to its influence in dragging it further to the right and bc of its often quite loopy policies.


and how is it that a blatant political lobby group has charitable status thereby having deductible gift recipient status?

no wonder gina is so generous.

 

[Not Important]

I thought his post was (and feel free to correct if wrong adogsfan5) was that it is not just RWNJ media highlighting the issue - in response to i think earlier claims that only RWNJ media with an agenda are reporting on this corruption or perceived corruption issue.

i think you’re right which is why i responded in the way I did

 

[adogsfan5]

'grey' corruption, hey dogsy. are you sure it wasn't charcoal, or marengo, or old silver, or white smoke. relying on the “sky after dark” moronosphere for your commentary isn’t ideal.

the ibac finding was “The evidence gathered in the investigation fell short of establishing that any person had committed corrupt conduct”

bingo, that’s the color you are looking for “sky dark”

The IBAC found the behaviour of the advisers constituted "grey corruption", which it defined as "the bending or breaking of rules, even if that might not amount to criminal behaviour, but that unfairly favours the allies, friends and networks of decision-makers".

Integrity experts urge swift action to rein in 'grey corruption' in Victoria

Integrity experts urge the Andrews government to act swiftly to tackle the risk of "grey corruption" by political staffers, after a damning report by the state's anti-corruption watchdog.

amp.abc.net.au

'Grey corruption' in the Andrews government – podcast

Benita Kolovos tells Jane Lee that though the anti-corruption watchdog has cleared Dan Andrews and his ministers of corrupt conduct, its findings could hit the premier’s legacy

www.theguardian.com

Please cut it out with the pathetic sky news drivel, it’s so far from correct.

 

[adogsfan5]

I thought his post was (and feel free to correct if wrong adogsfan5) was that it is not just RWNJ media highlighting the issue - in response to i think earlier claims that only RWNJ media with an agenda are reporting on this corruption or perceived corruption issue.

You are spot on mate. Sadly some just cant come to terms with it.

 

[Theseventhhamster]

Ugh, i'm not sure what to do with this. you've hit the catholic angle well, i'll give you that. But unfortunately, it doesn't really leave folks with a good avenue to diversion. i reckon they'll be thinking "andrews a catholic? is that good? is that bad? ah stuff it, i can't run with this" and they probably won't build on it.
as i just mentioned im pretty sure a certain leader of a certain state party is catholic (hint, hint) so maybe you could divert with that?

Sorry I didn't feed into your catholic persecution complex in exactly the right way. Andrews is a campaigner and a catholic. Seems a good fit to me even if it's not precise. Don't see you going through the rest of your predetermined bingo bard quite the same way.