http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-01-14/jamie-clements-resigns/7088372

New South Wales ALP general secretary Jamie Clements has resigned from his role amid federal pressure over accusations of sexual harassment.

Earlier on Thursday Mr Shorten said he had "stepped in" to help resolve the continuing scandal.

"I have no tolerance for workplace harassment in any set of circumstances," he said.

"This morning I have contacted the state president of the NSW Labor Party and asked him to provide a report to my national secretary on matters relating to NSW.

"The NSW branch has been handling this matter, it's a party matter ... I have now stepped in."

Mr Clements also released a statement on the deal reached yesterday, saying it was not an admission of guilt on his part.

"I have cooperated fully through this process and am pleased it has reached a resolution which allows all involved to move forward," he said.

"I have always contested the version of events which has been publicly reported and the agreement reached today is without admission on my part."

Maqqa wrote on Jan 15^th, 2016 at 7:56am:

Earlier on Thursday Mr Shorten said he had "stepped in" to help resolve the continuing scandal.

well its dirty work but someones gotta do it.. ::) ::)

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/nsw/nsw-labor-leader-luke-foley-missing-in-action-as-jamie-clements-scandal-unfolds/news-story/d1f4b029989b7dfdfe9a932fbfb0649b


sure as hell Foley isnt..

I don't like Clements at all, nor the ALP as a whole. But it seems to me that this is a case of "he said, she said" with no corroborating witnesses for either him or her and therefore a very difficult case to prove one way or the other. It's essentially her word against his. We've seen women make false allegations in the past and seen men have no choice other than to cop it because the woman is believed instead of the man. I'm not saying Clements is innocent or guilty of these allegations, but what happened to "innocent until proven guilty"?

I agree to a certain extent.... we have twisted everything now to the point where some men must be afraid to be alone with a women in an office.....


lets face it.. the work place in politics must be toxic.. I couldnt stand it to be honest..... its like a huge ant hill all climbing over each other to outdo the next guy...

so someone kisses you you didnt ask them or invite them or want them.. to do so..

BIG BLOODY DEAL...its not the end of the world..

yes if he keeps coming back after you have made it known youa re not happy even after you have kneed him in the crotch..

sure I get it..

but we have turned something not nice into trivia where we all have to stand 3 feet apart or we are invading someones space.. its total rubbish..

and these women are making the glass ceiling even harder to break through.

Everyone with red blood knows that women have all the power when it comes to pvssy - every red-blooded man wants to exercise her asset to its fullest extent... and therefore it is obvious where the controlling power in the relationship truly lies.

What we've seen here is a past consensual one nighter - followed by the woman not getting her career moves in return (not being elected into the warm and fuzzy comfy seat with all the perks and power that she feels she deserves - politics is like that sometimes) - then using  the threat of exposing that past one-nighter as a lever to get something she wanted - then being told that is a very bad idea - followed by what reads like an attempt at reconcilation by the dope concerned, which -since he allegedly holds power in the relationship (read above) - means he was harassing her.

A fine warning to all dopes who think the office staff are there for the plucking, especially in Labor politics where the ambitions of women know no bounds and no boundaries of civilised behaviour, and they will stoop (sic) at nothing to get what they want.

And they wonder why the electorate won't vote for them unless they are forced on the electorate by quota.... Jayzuz.

Also a good bell ringer for understanding the true power in male/female relationships and time to stop painting the little girlies as victims of rampant penises when they willingly and enthusiastically engage in sexual behaviour (even when it is out of bounds with 'family' men).

A man has a brain and a penis.. but only enough blood to control one at a time...

Sir Grappler Truth Teller OAM wrote on Jan 15^th, 2016 at 8:51am:

A man has a brain and a penis.. but only enough blood to control one at a time...

well I am glad that piece of trivia is out there..

and we all know which gets the priority dont we.. ;) ;)

you know grap just because someone slept with someone doesnt give that person special rights from then on.....

cods wrote on Jan 15^th, 2016 at 8:55am:

Sir Grappler Truth Teller OAM wrote on Jan 15th, 2016 at 8:51am: A man has a brain and a penis.. but only enough blood to control one at a time... well I am glad that piece of trivia is out there.. and we all know which gets the priority dont we.. ;) ;) you know grap just because someone slept with someone doesnt give that person special rights from then on.....

... including the right to use that past shag as a lever to get something from the other person......  review your studies on power within relationships....

One fine argument for not having women in politics, I'm sorry to say.. everyone must be getting sick of this by now.....

A man has a brain and a penis.. but only enough blood to control one at a time... and a woman has total control over the dispensation of what that penis seeks..... now THAT'S Power!

The only reason bull shitten stepped in is because his polls are already bad enough and that its an election year...

What a grub...

President Elect, The Mechanic wrote on Jan 15^th, 2016 at 9:21am:

The only reason bull shitten stepped in is because his polls are already bad enough and that its an election year... What a grub...

hes gotta protect the 40% quota.... shall we forget what he did to gillard????????

Armchair_Politician wrote on Jan 15^th, 2016 at 8:27am:

I don't like Clements at all, nor the ALP as a whole. But it seems to me that this is a case of "he said, she said" with no corroborating witnesses for either him or her and therefore a very difficult case to prove one way or the other. It's essentially her word against his. We've seen women make false allegations in the past and seen men have no choice other than to cop it because the woman is believed instead of the man. I'm not saying Clements is innocent or guilty of these allegations, but what happened to "innocent until proven guilty"?

Yes, I'd agree with that.

Surely Mal Brough must be behind it.

bogarde73 wrote on Jan 15^th, 2016 at 9:31am:

Surely Mal Brough must be behind it.

yes him or Abbott...looks very suss..maybe that why shortarse got involved..... another weapon for him to use in his.debate.

If he is in the labor party and he's trying to chat up a chick, he would probably fail and creep her out.

Women only respond favourably to confident, centred and successful men with appropriate self esteem and a direction in life.

Such men would not be found in the party of the beta male

aquascoot wrote on Jan 15^th, 2016 at 10:42am:

If he is in the labor party and he's trying to chat up a chick, he would probably fail and creep her out. Women only respond favourably to confident, centred and successful men with appropriate self esteem and a direction in life. Such men would not be found in the party of the beta male

http://www.smh.com.au/content/dam/images/1/1/u/a/q/q/image.related.articleLeadwide.620x349.11yieh.png/1416968427945.jpg

Bravo mr Shorten in acting like a true leader and stepping in , unlike the notorious 'no nuts' Turdbull with the briggs affair.

macman wrote on Jan 15^th, 2016 at 12:06pm:

Bravo mr Shorten in acting like a true leader and stepping in , unlike the notorious 'no nuts' Turdbull with the briggs affair.

Maybe he was protecting his turf. ;)

macman wrote on Jan 15^th, 2016 at 12:06pm:

Bravo mr Shorten in acting like a true leader and stepping in , unlike the notorious 'no nuts' Turdbull with the briggs affair.

knifing yet another person in the back.  is this shortens ONLY skill?

macman wrote on Jan 15^th, 2016 at 12:06pm:

Bravo mr Shorten in acting like a true leader and stepping in , unlike the notorious 'no nuts' Turdbull with the briggs affair.

A true leader like Turnbull took action without asking for acknowledgement

A loser like Shorten who at 14% continually looking for validation with self adoration - look at me I made him quit

Maqqa wrote on Jan 15^th, 2016 at 5:31pm:

macman wrote on Jan 15th, 2016 at 12:06pm: Bravo mr Shorten in acting like a true leader and stepping in , unlike the notorious 'no nuts' Turdbull with the briggs affair. A true leader like Turnbull took action without asking for acknowledgement A loser like Shorten who at 14% continually looking for validation with self adoration - look at me I made him quit

REALLY WHAT ACTION DID HE TAKE SPECIFICALLY? 

ohhh, you meant hiding behind the curtains hoping it would blow over ... yes, Turncoat didn't acknowledgement of that.  :D :D :D :D