CFMEU slapped with more than $2 million in fines since ICAC inquiry began

THE key union at the centre of the royal commission into ­corruption has been slapped with more than $2 million in fines since the inquiry began.

And 20 members of the executive are now involved in court hearings over allegations of worksite thuggery.

The Construction Forestry Mining and Energy Union (CFMEU) has been forced to pay $2.29 million in fines since October 2013.

Almost $1 million in fines was tallied up in the last eight months for a variety of breaches, most ­notably the refusal of entry to sites and illegally forcing EBAs on contractors.

Among senior CMFEU ­officials involved in Federal Circuit Court proceedings are national secretary Michael O’Connor, president Joe ­McDonald’ four state and territory secretaries and six state assistant secretaries.

NSW president Rita Mallia is also before the courts.

Mr O’Connor, Mr McDonald and Ms Mallia will defend the charges.

As the government prepares for a double-dissolution election it’s expected to capitalise on the court action as a mandate to clean up the union sector.

The Senate has already blocked the Registered Organisations Bill twice and looks set to block a bill that would restore the Australian Building and Construction Commission.

Mr O’Connor, the brother of Labor frontbencher Brendan O’Connor, is facing Federal Court action over alleged blockades at Sydney’s multibillion-dollar Barangaroo site.

It’s alleged the CFMEU blockaded the Barangaroo site between February 13 and 17 after a concreting firm rejected the CFMEU’s enterprise ­bargaining agreement.

The government has dropped its plans to have a vote on the ABCC legislation in the Senate this week, as a trade-off for Greens support on Senate reform laws.

But Employment Minister Michaelia Cash said the government remained committed to it being passed.

She last week confirmed the Registered Organisations Bill was strong enough for ­Malcolm Turnbull to send Australia to the polls. It will have to be the double ­dissolution trigger because the Senate will not sit before the May budget unless a special sitting is held.

The CFMEU recently had several high profile cases against officials dropped ­because of a lack of evidence.

Construction national ­secretary Dave Noonan said the government is wasting money to fulfil its political agenda of passing the ABCC bill.

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/nsw/cfmeu-slapped-with-more-than-2-million-in-fines-since-icac-inquiry-began/news-story/fc41d8a903001c206b6adf6f3523d07b

CFMEU a union of thuggery as more than 80 officials before federal courts

MORE than 80 officials from the militant CFMEU are involved in matters before federal courts as part of a record 60 cases brought on by the Fair Work Building and Construction commission.

Figures obtained by The Daily Telegraph have lifted the lid on widespread allegations of criminal activity and thuggery on Australian worksites.

Multiple cases before the court ­alleged that construction contractors are breaking workplace laws to buy ­industrial peace on worksites allegedly being targeted by union thuggery.

Fair Work claims some family-based subcontractors have had to remortgage their homes because head contractors have bowed to union pressure and locked them out of sites.

It can be revealed the Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union is involved in 55 of the 60 cases being prosecuted by Fair Work. Opposition Leader Bill Shorten is expected to address the Maritime Union of Australia, which is set to merge with the CFMEU, at a national conference on the Gold Coast this week.

Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull told The Daily Telegraph Mr Shorten had to stand up to union thuggery.

“Under Mr Shorten’s leadership, we have seen the influence of militant ­unions increase, including their refusal to support legislation to re-establish the (Australian Building and Construction Commissioner) and restore law and order to the construction industry,’’ he said.

“The recent royal commission identified­ the bullying, thuggery and industrial­ warfare in the construction industry as a brake on economic growth.”

FWBC director Nigel Hadgkiss said he was concerned about the number of head contractors succumbing to union pressure.

“Sadly, we’ve had cases where families have put everything on the line and mortgaged their home to invest in a business, only to be shut out because head contractors allow the union to dictate who can and can’t work in the industry,’’ he said.

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/nsw/cfmeu-a-union-of-thuggery-as-more-than-80-officials-before-federal-courts/news-story/bf13c9b623bcd0bb32361921ddf58c34

the smellograph must be running out of anti union stories, they're dredging for scraps

CFMEU official’s ‘thuggery’ on Brisbane worksite

A BRISBANE construction union official behaved like a “thug” when he turned up at a worksite uninvited and began loudly abusing non-union workers, a court has ruled.

Scott Vink has been slapped with a hefty $9,000 fine and the CFMEU must pay $48,000 within a month, after both admitted Vink abused non-union workers for using a smoko shed at the Westfield Pacific Fair site in Broadbeach on March 5, 2014.

Federal Circuit Court judge Salvatore Vasta said Vink’s conduct was “sheer thuggery” which “has no place in the Australian workplace”.

In his decision handed down yesterday Judge Vasta said the CFMEU appeared to consider such flagrant illegal acts as an “occupational hazard”.

“The (CFMEU) does have an unenviable history of breaching the Fair Work Act. It seems to treat being caught conducting such breaches or as the present one simply as occupational hazards in the way in which they conduct their business,” Judge Vasta said in his decision.

Vink entered the smoko shed and locked non-union members out in a bid to “intimidate” non union staff and “to reinforce to others at the building site, the notion that non-union membership is not going to be tolerated”.

Vink had earlier gained entry by telling site managers he was exercising his right of entry to investigate workplace safety.

He later admitted throwing workers’ lunches out of the smoko-shed fridge and swearing abuse at workers yelling that “sheds on the project were only for the use of union members”.

Judge Vasta said in his written decision that Vink’s behaviour was “blatant” and nearly the worst he has seen for a “single breach” of industrial law.

“(Vink) fraudulently entered the shed of the … employees. There was never any legitimate reason for (Vink) to enter that shed,” Judge Vasta said.

Judge Vasta imposed fines which almost reach the maximum, saying the large fines were justified to deter others and send a message that “thuggery cannot be tolerated”.

“There has been no apology for such appalling behaviour,” Judge Vasta noted.

Mr Vink pleaded guilty to the charges under the Fair Work Act.

The maximum fine that can be imposed is $10,200 for an individual and $51,000 for a union or company.

And 20 members of the executive are now involved in court hearings over allegations of worksite thuggery.



its good this is coming out.... this needs to be stopped..its blackmail what they do.. and it shouldnt be.....its called ABUSE of POWER..

its a sad day for this country....its almost back in the dark ages....I wonder how many of the real members like what they really do....sadly they have been silenced as well.

When will Bull Shitten reign in these militant unions and tell them they are not above the law? Bull Shitten is weak as piss and a puppet of the unions.

John Smith wrote on Mar 14^th, 2016 at 8:07am:

the smellograph must be running out of anti union stories, they're dredging for scraps

Scraps? More than $2m in fines and at least 20 members of the CFMEU executive before courts is scraps? No, it's very serious. But I can see how you'd think that thuggery and intimidation is okay as far as you're concerned.

Looking after the safety of workers from these maggot bosses is paramount , well done CFMEU, we will continue to pay our dues and a levy to fight any court case, keep sticking it to the carnts .

Its time wrote on Mar 14^th, 2016 at 8:15am:

Looking after the safety of workers from these maggot bosses is paramount , well done CFMEU, we will continue to pay our dues and a levy to fight any court case, keep sticking it to the carnts .

Only it was not issues of safety that lead to these acts of thuggery. It was decisions by managers to give workers the right to choose to be union members or not. It was decisions by managers not to utilise EBA's, as was their right. It was decisions by union thugs to abuse right of entry privileges. You've got no idea how uninformed you are.

Armchair_Politician wrote on Mar 14^th, 2016 at 8:11am:

John Smith wrote on Mar 14th, 2016 at 8:07am: the smellograph must be running out of anti union stories, they're dredging for scraps Scraps? More than $2m in fines and at least 20 members of the CFMEU executive before courts is scraps? No, it's very serious. But I can see how you'd think that thuggery and intimidation is okay as far as you're concerned.

remember the Painter and dockers AP.. cement boots...was for real in those days....

and some in these unions still think its those days... :D :D

did that terrorist Sharrouf work for them??...and then I read where bikies are now running one of the top unions....

come on lefties surely at least one of you  is sick of this...

Armchair_Politician wrote on Mar 14^th, 2016 at 8:11am:

John Smith wrote on Mar 14th, 2016 at 8:07am: the smellograph must be running out of anti union stories, they're dredging for scraps Scraps? More than $2m in fines and at least 20 members of the CFMEU executive before courts is scraps? No, it's very serious. But I can see how you'd think that thuggery and intimidation is okay as far as you're concerned.

yeah scraps ... $2m over 3 years is peanuts. Especially given the govt just spent $70m trying to catch the unions

cods wrote on Mar 14^th, 2016 at 8:19am:

Armchair_Politician wrote on Mar 14th, 2016 at 8:11am: John Smith wrote on Mar 14th, 2016 at 8:07am: the smellograph must be running out of anti union stories, they're dredging for scraps Scraps? More than $2m in fines and at least 20 members of the CFMEU executive before courts is scraps? No, it's very serious. But I can see how you'd think that thuggery and intimidation is okay as far as you're concerned. remember the Painter and dockers AP.. cement boots...was for real in those days.... and some in these unions still think its those days... :D :D did that terrorist Sharrouf work for them??...and then I read where bikies are now running one of the top unions.... come on lefties surely at least one of you  is sick of this...

No wonder union membership is in steep decline.

Its time wrote on Mar 14^th, 2016 at 8:15am:

Looking after the safety of workers from these maggot bosses is paramount , well done CFMEU, we will continue to pay our dues and a levy to fight any court case, keep sticking it to the carnts .

maggot bosses...... can you explain why the unions dont become the construction bosses?????...

wouldnt that stop the maggots?...

well it seems like a solution to me... ::)

then at least there would be no SAFETY ISSUES...

Armchair_Politician wrote on Mar 14^th, 2016 at 8:18am:

Its time wrote on Mar 14th, 2016 at 8:15am: Looking after the safety of workers from these maggot bosses is paramount , well done CFMEU, we will continue to pay our dues and a levy to fight any court case, keep sticking it to the carnts . Only it was not issues of safety that lead to these acts of thuggery. It was decisions by managers to give workers the right to choose to be union members or not. It was decisions by managers not to utilise EBA's, as was their right. It was decisions by union thugs to abuse right of entry privileges. You've got no idea how uninformed you are.

Hmm am i going to believe Armpit and the Dummies Telegraph , i dont think so  :D

Its time wrote on Mar 14^th, 2016 at 8:21am:

Armchair_Politician wrote on Mar 14th, 2016 at 8:18am: Its time wrote on Mar 14th, 2016 at 8:15am: Looking after the safety of workers from these maggot bosses is paramount , well done CFMEU, we will continue to pay our dues and a levy to fight any court case, keep sticking it to the carnts . Only it was not issues of safety that lead to these acts of thuggery. It was decisions by managers to give workers the right to choose to be union members or not. It was decisions by managers not to utilise EBA's, as was their right. It was decisions by union thugs to abuse right of entry privileges. You've got no idea how uninformed you are. Hmm am i going to believe Armpit and the Dummies Telegraph , i dont think so  :D

Okay, off you go back to your flock of sheep. Baaa!

Especially given the govt just spent $70m trying to catch the unions



and they did... more than 70 are being INVESTIGATED..

its a shame lefties cannot see how sad it is that the govt has to go down this road...over and over again..

when are the membership of these unions going to demand more from their so called leaders?....

look at the HSU.... the members are still paying their dues......and they will never get any of that stolen money back......and nobody cares....not one union has spoken up and said...

lets get this money back lets take these thieves to court....it could still be going on...for all those workers know.

cods wrote on Mar 14^th, 2016 at 8:26am:

and they did... more than 70 are being INVESTIGATED..

didn't need to spend 70m for that .... there are many of them were already under investigation. Liberal Govts choose to go down this road because they believe it reflects badly on labor ... you have a look, every time the libs are in govt. they go on about unions.

Don't kid yourself that this is about catching criminals, the system already has the power to investigate and prosecute unions, if the politicians get involved it's for political reasons

John Smith wrote on Mar 14^th, 2016 at 8:30am:

cods wrote on Mar 14th, 2016 at 8:26am: and they did... more than 70 are being INVESTIGATED.. didn't need to spend 70m for that .... there are many of them were already under investigation. Liberal Govts choose to go down this road because they believe it reflects badly on labor ... you have a look, every time the libs are in govt. they go on about unions. Don't kid yourself that this is about catching criminals, the system already has the power to investigate and prosecute unions, if the politicians get involved it's for political reasons

It does reflect badly on labor. At least half of their MP's and Senators are former Union hacks, as is their Dear Leader. Labor are tied at the hip to Unions.

cods wrote on Mar 14^th, 2016 at 8:20am:

Its time wrote on Mar 14th, 2016 at 8:15am: Looking after the safety of workers from these maggot bosses is paramount , well done CFMEU, we will continue to pay our dues and a levy to fight any court case, keep sticking it to the carnts . maggot bosses...... can you explain why the unions dont become the construction bosses?????... wouldnt that stop the maggots?... well it seems like a solution to me... ::) then at least there would be no SAFETY ISSUES...

A lot of delegates become bosses Cods so once again you  have been shot down  :D

cods wrote on Mar 14^th, 2016 at 8:26am:

Especially given the govt just spent $70m trying to catch the unions and they did... more than 70 are being INVESTIGATED.. its a shame lefties cannot see how sad it is that the govt has to go down this road...over and over again.. when are the membership of these unions going to demand more from their so called leaders?.... look at the HSU.... the members are still paying their dues......and they will never get any of that stolen money back......and nobody cares....not one union has spoken up and said... lets get this money back lets take these thieves to court....it could still be going on...for all those workers know.

The matter has been under investigation internally for some months after Mr Kroger raised concerns about apparent overspending on last year’s state election campaign. This is understood to have focused heavily on the spending incurred on communications.

A forensic audit by PBB Advisory at Liberal Party headquarters at 104 Exhibition St uncovered alleged irregularities in invoices lodged with the party for expenses, including for those incurred during the November 2014 election loss.

It is alleged that some of the invoices may have been made out to a company which did not exist.

Mr Kroger said the missing funds were spent on lifestyle and some of it was invested.

“(It was) nothing particularly outrageous, just people funding their lifestyles,” he said.

Sources said some of the money was used to buy shares.

Mr Kroger said checks and balances to ensure this sort of thing didn’t happen had “clearly failed”.

“This is solely the work of one person. it should have been detected a long time ago, it wasn’t, it is regrettable,” he said.

Mr Kroger on Mantach 'misplacing  :D :D :D ' 1.5 million dollars of Liberal money  ;D

Its time wrote on Mar 14^th, 2016 at 8:40am:

cods wrote on Mar 14th, 2016 at 8:20am: Its time wrote on Mar 14th, 2016 at 8:15am: Looking after the safety of workers from these maggot bosses is paramount , well done CFMEU, we will continue to pay our dues and a levy to fight any court case, keep sticking it to the carnts . maggot bosses...... can you explain why the unions dont become the construction bosses?????... wouldnt that stop the maggots?... well it seems like a solution to me... ::) then at least there would be no SAFETY ISSUES... A lot of delegates become bosses Cods so once again you  have been shot down  :D

I beg your pardon????.... delegates become bosses become maggots you mean???..

please explain????>....

Right...so? Private companies have been slapped for poor treatment to workers - 7-11, the supermarkets.  No comments from libs?

Any group has a few bad apples. 

stunspore wrote on Mar 14^th, 2016 at 9:15am:

Right...so? Private companies have been slapped for poor treatment to workers - 7-11, the supermarkets.  No comments from libs? Any group has a few bad apples.

You make it sound as though you think that 7-11 has some kind of influence over the government. How wrong you are. The same cannot be said of union influence over the ALP.

quite a few private businesses rent seek/influence via donations.  You think clive didn't get anything from his previous association with lib party?  Or any other businesses?  Property developers?  etc?

Its time wrote on Mar 14^th, 2016 at 8:21am:

Armchair_Politician wrote on Mar 14th, 2016 at 8:18am: Its time wrote on Mar 14th, 2016 at 8:15am: Looking after the safety of workers from these maggot bosses is paramount , well done CFMEU, we will continue to pay our dues and a levy to fight any court case, keep sticking it to the carnts . Only it was not issues of safety that lead to these acts of thuggery. It was decisions by managers to give workers the right to choose to be union members or not. It was decisions by managers not to utilise EBA's, as was their right. It was decisions by union thugs to abuse right of entry privileges. You've got no idea how uninformed you are. Hmm am i going to believe Armpit and the Dummies Telegraph , i dont think so  :D

you only believe what you want to beleive anyhow. you are an idiot.

longweekend58 wrote on Mar 14^th, 2016 at 11:46am:

Its time wrote on Mar 14th, 2016 at 8:21am: Armchair_Politician wrote on Mar 14th, 2016 at 8:18am: Its time wrote on Mar 14th, 2016 at 8:15am: Looking after the safety of workers from these maggot bosses is paramount , well done CFMEU, we will continue to pay our dues and a levy to fight any court case, keep sticking it to the carnts . Only it was not issues of safety that lead to these acts of thuggery. It was decisions by managers to give workers the right to choose to be union members or not. It was decisions by managers not to utilise EBA's, as was their right. It was decisions by union thugs to abuse right of entry privileges. You've got no idea how uninformed you are. Hmm am i going to believe Armpit and the Dummies Telegraph , i dont think so  :D you only believe what you want to beleive anyhow. you are an idiot.

Leftwingnutjob only believes what his/her comrades at the ALP tell them and doesn't have a mind of their own to decide.

Armchair_Politician wrote on Mar 14^th, 2016 at 10:33am:

stunspore wrote on Mar 14th, 2016 at 9:15am: Right...so? Private companies have been slapped for poor treatment to workers - 7-11, the supermarkets.  No comments from libs? Any group has a few bad apples.  You make it sound as though you think that 7-11 has some kind of influence over the government. How wrong you are. The same cannot be said of union influence over the ALP.

:D ;D ;D ;D ;D
;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

Its time wrote on Mar 14^th, 2016 at 8:15am:

Looking after the safety of workers from these maggot bosses is paramount , well done CFMEU, we will continue to pay our dues and a levy to fight any court case, keep sticking it to the carnts .

But he didn't do anything about the "maggot bosses" did he, other than lie about 'right of entry'?

He did nothing to look after the safety of worker, did he? As it was not what he was there for.

He took the crib meals of workers and through them out on the ground to intimidate those workers and he did so with the full support of people like your good self.

Too bad POS behaviour like that is still considered illegal in this country.

No worse than taking all the taxes of everyone and rorting - those politicians sure know what they are doing.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=--__8ZoLwYg

Stick it to the carnts boys  [smiley=tekst-toppie.gif] [smiley=tekst-toppie.gif]

Good to see the rightards back and posting!    What with all the corruption, theft, sleeping around by the ExPM, backstabbing, power struggles, ICAC hearings, retirements and everything else going on with the Libs, the absence has been noted.  Welcome back for the day!

While I am not going to deny that there are problems with the CFMEU, which appears to be the last bastion of old style union "thuggery", saying that Bill Shorten has to do something about it is about as ridiculous as saying that Malcolm Turnbull has to do something about reining in the excesses of the private sector.

Wolseley wrote on Mar 14^th, 2016 at 2:43pm:

While I am not going to deny that there are problems with the CFMEU, which appears to be the last bastion of old style union "thuggery", saying that Bill Shorten has to do something about it is about as ridiculous as saying that Malcolm Turnbull has to do something about reining in the excesses of the private sector.

Bill Shorten is a former UNion head and not leader of the ALP. Yes, he does have a responsibility to do something about union thuggery.

Wolseley wrote on Mar 14^th, 2016 at 2:43pm:

While I am not going to deny that there are problems with the CFMEU, which appears to be the last bastion of old style union "thuggery", saying that Bill Shorten has to do something about it is about as ridiculous as saying that Malcolm Turnbull has to do something about reining in the excesses of the private sector.

He's the Leader of the ALP. He absolutely can influence the behaviour of the Unions.

longweekend58 wrote on Mar 14^th, 2016 at 3:44pm:

Wolseley wrote on Mar 14th, 2016 at 2:43pm: While I am not going to deny that there are problems with the CFMEU, which appears to be the last bastion of old style union "thuggery", saying that Bill Shorten has to do something about it is about as ridiculous as saying that Malcolm Turnbull has to do something about reining in the excesses of the private sector. Bill Shorten is a former UNion head and not leader of the ALP. Yes, he does have a responsibility to do something about union thuggery.

He is the leader of the ALP.  His prime area of responsibility rests with the ALP.  Anyone who suggests otherwise is an idiot.

And exactly how is the leader of the ALP is supposed to be able to influence the behaviour of the Unions?

Wolseley wrote on Mar 14^th, 2016 at 3:49pm:

And exactly how is the leader of the ALP is supposed to be able to influence the behaviour of the Unions?

Well for a start before they let their next union mate get on the taxpayer funded gravy train as an MP they require that union leader to fix up the behaviour of their scumbag union mates.

Just a suggestion.

Wolseley wrote on Mar 14^th, 2016 at 3:49pm:

And exactly how is the leader of the ALP is supposed to be able to influence the behaviour of the Unions?

when ever the Labor party has a conference...

its full to the rafters with every union delegates and official..... so yes they do have some influence....at least thats the theory  ::) ::)

but then your probably right..

its the other way round.

cods wrote on Mar 14^th, 2016 at 5:34pm:

Wolseley wrote on Mar 14th, 2016 at 3:49pm: And exactly how is the leader of the ALP is supposed to be able to influence the behaviour of the Unions? when ever the Labor party has a conference... its full to the rafters with every union delegates and official..... so yes they do have some influence....at least thats the theory  ::) ::) but then your probably right.. its the other way round.

The unions run the ALP (not the other way around).

This has been explained to you dozens of times.

Labor are the party created for, and by, unions.

Moreover, this has never been a secret - ever.

Why do you struggle to understand this very simple fact?

greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 14^th, 2016 at 5:38pm:

cods wrote on Mar 14th, 2016 at 5:34pm: Wolseley wrote on Mar 14th, 2016 at 3:49pm: And exactly how is the leader of the ALP is supposed to be able to influence the behaviour of the Unions? when ever the Labor party has a conference... its full to the rafters with every union delegates and official..... so yes they do have some influence....at least thats the theory  ::) ::) but then your probably right.. its the other way round. The unions run the ALP (not the other way around). This has been explained to you dozens of times. Labor are the party created for, and by, unions. Moreover, this has never been a secret - ever. Why do you struggle to understand this very simple fact?

You're speaking to the hand with that rusted on , been voting Libtards since granny was around

Its time wrote on Mar 14^th, 2016 at 5:41pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 14th, 2016 at 5:38pm: cods wrote on Mar 14th, 2016 at 5:34pm: Wolseley wrote on Mar 14th, 2016 at 3:49pm: And exactly how is the leader of the ALP is supposed to be able to influence the behaviour of the Unions? when ever the Labor party has a conference... its full to the rafters with every union delegates and official..... so yes they do have some influence....at least thats the theory  ::) ::) but then your probably right.. its the other way round. The unions run the ALP (not the other way around). This has been explained to you dozens of times. Labor are the party created for, and by, unions. Moreover, this has never been a secret - ever. Why do you struggle to understand this very simple fact? You're speaking to the hand with that rusted on , been voting Libtards since granny was around

I just find it strange that cods seems to think that it's some big secret, or that there's something wrong with it.

greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 14^th, 2016 at 5:38pm:

cods wrote on Mar 14th, 2016 at 5:34pm: Wolseley wrote on Mar 14th, 2016 at 3:49pm: And exactly how is the leader of the ALP is supposed to be able to influence the behaviour of the Unions? when ever the Labor party has a conference... its full to the rafters with every union delegates and official..... so yes they do have some influence....at least thats the theory  ::) ::) but then your probably right.. its the other way round. The unions run the ALP (not the other way around). This has been explained to you dozens of times. Labor are the party created for, and by, unions. Moreover, this has never been a secret - ever. Why do you struggle to understand this very simple fact?

It's a bit of both, actually, and if you can't see that, then you're blind AND stupid.

greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 15^th, 2016 at 9:43am:

Its time wrote on Mar 14th, 2016 at 5:41pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 14th, 2016 at 5:38pm: cods wrote on Mar 14th, 2016 at 5:34pm: Wolseley wrote on Mar 14th, 2016 at 3:49pm: And exactly how is the leader of the ALP is supposed to be able to influence the behaviour of the Unions? when ever the Labor party has a conference... its full to the rafters with every union delegates and official..... so yes they do have some influence....at least thats the theory  ::) ::) but then your probably right.. its the other way round. The unions run the ALP (not the other way around). This has been explained to you dozens of times. Labor are the party created for, and by, unions. Moreover, this has never been a secret - ever. Why do you struggle to understand this very simple fact? You're speaking to the hand with that rusted on , been voting Libtards since granny was around I just find it strange that cods seems to think that it's some big secret, or that there's something wrong with it.

Nothing wrong with businesses lobbying and supporting the Coalition then, right?

Armchair_Politician wrote on Mar 15^th, 2016 at 11:51am:

greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 14th, 2016 at 5:38pm: cods wrote on Mar 14th, 2016 at 5:34pm: Wolseley wrote on Mar 14th, 2016 at 3:49pm: And exactly how is the leader of the ALP is supposed to be able to influence the behaviour of the Unions? when ever the Labor party has a conference... its full to the rafters with every union delegates and official..... so yes they do have some influence....at least thats the theory  ::) ::) but then your probably right.. its the other way round. The unions run the ALP (not the other way around). This has been explained to you dozens of times. Labor are the party created for, and by, unions. Moreover, this has never been a secret - ever. Why do you struggle to understand this very simple fact? It's a bit of both, actually, and if you can't see that, then you're blind AND stupid.

Incorrect.

Armchair_Politician wrote on Mar 15^th, 2016 at 11:51am:

greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 15th, 2016 at 9:43am: Its time wrote on Mar 14th, 2016 at 5:41pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 14th, 2016 at 5:38pm: cods wrote on Mar 14th, 2016 at 5:34pm: Wolseley wrote on Mar 14th, 2016 at 3:49pm: And exactly how is the leader of the ALP is supposed to be able to influence the behaviour of the Unions? when ever the Labor party has a conference... its full to the rafters with every union delegates and official..... so yes they do have some influence....at least thats the theory  ::) ::) but then your probably right.. its the other way round. The unions run the ALP (not the other way around). This has been explained to you dozens of times. Labor are the party created for, and by, unions. Moreover, this has never been a secret - ever. Why do you struggle to understand this very simple fact? You're speaking to the hand with that rusted on , been voting Libtards since granny was around I just find it strange that cods seems to think that it's some big secret, or that there's something wrong with it. Nothing wrong with businesses lobbying and supporting the Coalition then, right?

Right.

Next question.

Armchair_Politician wrote on Mar 15^th, 2016 at 11:51am:

Nothing wrong with businesses lobbying and supporting the Coalition then, right?

lobbying? no, nothing wrong ... bribing, yes, something wrong.

John Smith wrote on Mar 15^th, 2016 at 11:55am:

Armchair_Politician wrote on Mar 15th, 2016 at 11:51am: Nothing wrong with businesses lobbying and supporting the Coalition then, right? lobbying? no, nothing wrong ... bribing, yes, something wrong.

So you have proof of bribery, like the irrefutable proof of Gillard and Rudd refunding millions of dollars of taxpayer funds to Unions for their campaign contributions to the ALP in the 2007 and 2010 federal elections?

Armchair_Politician wrote on Mar 15^th, 2016 at 11:58am:

John Smith wrote on Mar 15th, 2016 at 11:55am: Armchair_Politician wrote on Mar 15th, 2016 at 11:51am: Nothing wrong with businesses lobbying and supporting the Coalition then, right? lobbying? no, nothing wrong ... bribing, yes, something wrong. So you have proof of bribery, like the irrefutable proof of Gillard and Rudd refunding millions of dollars of taxpayer funds to Unions for their campaign contributions to the ALP in the 2007 and 2010 federal elections?

proof? sure

http://periodicdisclosures.aec.gov.au/SummaryDonor.aspx

all political donations are bribery ... what do you think they donate for you id iot!

John Smith wrote on Mar 15^th, 2016 at 11:55am:

Armchair_Politician wrote on Mar 15th, 2016 at 11:51am: Nothing wrong with businesses lobbying and supporting the Coalition then, right? lobbying? no, nothing wrong ... bribing, yes, something wrong.

If you think businesses get nothing from donations then BS.

stunspore wrote on Mar 15^th, 2016 at 12:26pm:

John Smith wrote on Mar 15th, 2016 at 11:55am: Armchair_Politician wrote on Mar 15th, 2016 at 11:51am: Nothing wrong with businesses lobbying and supporting the Coalition then, right? lobbying? no, nothing wrong ... bribing, yes, something wrong. If you think businesses get nothing from donations then BS.

that was the point I was making.  :D :D

John Smith wrote on Mar 15^th, 2016 at 12:07pm:

Armchair_Politician wrote on Mar 15th, 2016 at 11:58am: John Smith wrote on Mar 15th, 2016 at 11:55am: Armchair_Politician wrote on Mar 15th, 2016 at 11:51am: Nothing wrong with businesses lobbying and supporting the Coalition then, right? lobbying? no, nothing wrong ... bribing, yes, something wrong. So you have proof of bribery, like the irrefutable proof of Gillard and Rudd refunding millions of dollars of taxpayer funds to Unions for their campaign contributions to the ALP in the 2007 and 2010 federal elections? proof? sure http://periodicdisclosures.aec.gov.au/SummaryDonor.aspx all political donations are bribery ... what do you think they donate for you id iot!

oh really, dipstick?  and all the $100 donations (mine included) get what in return?

idiot.

stunspore wrote on Mar 15^th, 2016 at 12:26pm:

John Smith wrote on Mar 15th, 2016 at 11:55am: Armchair_Politician wrote on Mar 15th, 2016 at 11:51am: Nothing wrong with businesses lobbying and supporting the Coalition then, right? lobbying? no, nothing wrong ... bribing, yes, something wrong. If you think businesses get nothing from donations then BS.

you dont really know much about business do you?

greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 15^th, 2016 at 9:43am:

Its time wrote on Mar 14th, 2016 at 5:41pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 14th, 2016 at 5:38pm: cods wrote on Mar 14th, 2016 at 5:34pm: Wolseley wrote on Mar 14th, 2016 at 3:49pm: And exactly how is the leader of the ALP is supposed to be able to influence the behaviour of the Unions? when ever the Labor party has a conference... its full to the rafters with every union delegates and official..... so yes they do have some influence....at least thats the theory  ::) ::) but then your probably right.. its the other way round. The unions run the ALP (not the other way around). This has been explained to you dozens of times. Labor are the party created for, and by, unions. Moreover, this has never been a secret - ever. Why do you struggle to understand this very simple fact? You're speaking to the hand with that rusted on , been voting Libtards since granny was around I just find it strange that cods seems to think that it's some big secret, or that there's something wrong with it.

well your comprehension never was good.. because thats what I was saying ./.

you have made it loud and CLEAR

that THE TERM ALP...STANDING FOR AUSTRALIAN LABOR PARTY..

IS A FALSE FRONT..


its a bit like the

HELLS ANGELS>.

having the sign

Guardian Angels

over their doorway...


::) ::) ::)


its a false front.. its fake its phony..

well not so much now bills in charge......

everyone knows his credentials..

so we can call it the CFMEU party..

thanks gweg....lets shed some honesty into this..

the Labor party is the UNIONS and it is the UNION leaders that are running the show...

dont kid yourself.. you are not voting in the UNIONS>. 

I am so glad you keep telling us that gweggy.... thanks..

even kruddy tried to distance himself..... ::) ::) ::)another phony

cods wrote on Mar 15^th, 2016 at 3:36pm:

its a false front.. its fake its phony..

No.

The unions control the ALP.

This has been explained to you dozens of times.

Labor are the party created for, and by, unions.

Moreover, this has never been a secret - ever.

It's completely transparent.

Why do you struggle to understand this very simple fact?

cods wrote on Mar 15^th, 2016 at 3:36pm:

... it is the UNION leaders that are running the show...

Yes.

And every single person in Australia (except you) has been aware of this since the very first day that the Labor Party was formed by the unions.

It has never, ever been a secret.

Where have you been hiding all your life, cods?

"The labour movement formed the ALP in the 1890s. It was designed to be the political wing of the movement with the aim of electing members to parliament who would represent the interests of working people. Trade union members were largely responsible for the formation of ALP policy and setting in place an organisation capable of winning elections."

See for yourself.