**BREAKING: The Senate just voted in favour of a Federal Corruption Watchdog.**

Which means we have a huge opportunity to stamp out political corruption on both sides.

We need just ONE MP to vote for this to make it a reality. But with only two weeks until a Bill comes before the lower House, we need to act fast.

Join the fight for a Federal Corruption Watchdog today. Sign our petition now.

This is just another populist whinge.

Gosh won't it be rushed off its feet investigating the non-stop Labor scandals and corruption.

What will the next election losing Labor SCANDAL be ?

juliar wrote on Nov 19^th, 2018 at 10:57am:

Gosh won't it be rushed off its feet investigating the non-stop Labor scandals and corruption. What will the next election losing Labor SCANDAL be ?

If there was really a problem with Labor and corruption, the Coalition couldn't pass this fast enough.

The Coalition's refusal to crack down on corruption shows quite clearly who the real guilty parties are. It isn't Labor.

'We will not wait': Shorten to test government on corruption watchdog

Quote:

Bill Shorten has written to Scott Morrison asking for a bipartisan deal, while warning the crossbench and Labor could roll the government on the issue in the ‘coming weeks’.

ScoMo has got Shorty with his back to the wall and Shorty is trying any dumbo trick he can think of.

With Labor's record of incompetence, scandals and salacious union control the last thing Labor would want is a Corruption Watch Dog.

Shorty is trying to get ScoMo to reject it so he can squawk his usual lying Socialist rubbish.

All ScoMo has to do is delay it or take it to the election.

juliar wrote on Nov 19^th, 2018 at 12:00pm:

ScoMo has got Shorty with his back to the wall and Shorty is trying any dumbo trick he can think of. With Labor's record of incompetence, scandals and salacious union control the last thing Labor would want is a Corruption Watch Dog. Shorty is trying to get ScoMo to reject it so he can squawk his usual lying Socialist rubbish. All ScoMo has to do is delay it or take it to the election.

I see the comic relief is here, trying to derail a topic the Liberals find very uncomfortable.

The Coalition will crumble to the inevitable under public pressure....What possible argument can Morrison make against a Federal anti-corruption body???

:-? :-? :-?

philperth2010 wrote on Nov 19^th, 2018 at 4:16pm:

The Coalition will crumble to the inevitable under public pressure....What possible argument can Morrison make against a Federal anti-corruption body??? :-? :-? :-?

That it will kill off half the coalition mps?

stunspore wrote on Nov 19^th, 2018 at 4:25pm:

philperth2010 wrote on Nov 19th, 2018 at 4:16pm: The Coalition will crumble to the inevitable under public pressure....What possible argument can Morrison make against a Federal anti-corruption body??? :-? :-? :-? That it will kill off half the coalition mps?

The Mad Katter is worried and is making up his excuses already in case the Coalition cave to pressure....Katter argues a corruption body is a two edged sword which punishes punitive crimes in his opinion....What about the crimes that are not punitive Mr Katter....What a dickhead!!!


Quote:

Katter warns Shorten: corruption watchdog will bite you Mr Katter, who could provide one of the two extra votes needed to force Opposition legislation through, said he would be “sitting on the fence on this one until the last minute” because a Federal ICAC could be a “two-edged sword”. He said the Criminal Justice Commission set up after the Fitzgerald inquiry into Queensland Police in the 1980s had led to four Cabinet ministers who misused their ministerial allowances being jailed for “pedantic, petty irrelevancies”.

::) ::) ::)

https://thewest.com.au/politics/federal-politics/katter-warns-shorten-corruption-watchdog-will-bite-you-ng-b881025036z

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2018/nov/19/labor-threatens-to-use-coalitions-minority-status-against-it-in-federal-icac-push

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-06-12/fitzgerald-inquiry-files-reveal-inner-workings-of-corrupt-cops/8600046

philperth2010 wrote on Nov 20^th, 2018 at 11:07am:

Katter argues a corruption body is a two edged sword which punishes punitive crimes in his opinion...

How would it punish non-punitive crimes? Could it even examine non-punitive crimes?

What is a an example of a non-punitive crime? If there is no punishment available - is it a crime?

lee wrote on Nov 20^th, 2018 at 11:24am:

philperth2010 wrote on Nov 20th, 2018 at 11:07am: Katter argues a corruption body is a two edged sword which punishes punitive crimes in his opinion... How would it punish non-punitive crimes? Could it even examine non-punitive crimes? What is a an example of a non-punitive crime? If there is no punishment available - is it a crime?

Can't you read....Or are you being deliberately stupid and pedantic???


Quote:

Katter warns Shorten: corruption watchdog will bite you Mr Katter, who could provide one of the two extra votes needed to force Opposition legislation through, said he would be “sitting on the fence on this one until the last minute” because a Federal ICAC could be a “two-edged sword”. He said the Criminal Justice Commission set up after the Fitzgerald inquiry into Queensland Police in the 1980s had led to four Cabinet ministers who misused their ministerial allowances being jailed for “pedantic, petty irrelevancies”.

Katter claims an anti corruption body will prosecute "pedantic, petty irrelevancies” (Katter's words) which may be correct however it will also address very serious criminal crimes and hold Federal politicians too account....What crimes that are not punitive would you like too see ignored dickhead???

:-? :-? :-?

philperth2010 wrote on Nov 20^th, 2018 at 3:12pm:

Can't you read....Or are you being deliberately stupid and pedantic???

philperth2010 wrote on Nov 20^th, 2018 at 3:12pm:

He said the Criminal Justice Commission set up after the Fitzgerald inquiry into Queensland Police in the 1980s had led to four Cabinet ministers who misused their ministerial allowances being jailed for “pedantic, petty irrelevancies”.

So punitive action was taken because they broke the law, that is committed a crime. Even if the offences were “pedantic, petty irrelevancies".

The law said that punitive actions were available to them. Therefore there were no non-punitive crimes committed.


philperth2010 wrote on Nov 20^th, 2018 at 3:12pm:

What crimes that are not punitive would you like too see ignored dickhead???

The question still stands - if there is no punishment available is there a crime?

You do understand punishment and punitive have the same root?

The very last thing scandal prone union controlled Labor wants is a Corruption Watch Dog. Just think of Labor's vast cesspool of corruption!!!!

This is just a dumb GetUp! ploy to try to trap ScoMo who is already way ahead of slow Shorty.

All ScoMo has to do is delay it and suggest taking it to the election as there are much more urgent tasks to be done now such as cut immigration.

And ScoMo will be fully occupied throwing election winning dirt at Shorty.

lee wrote on Nov 20^th, 2018 at 4:10pm:

philperth2010 wrote on Nov 20th, 2018 at 3:12pm: Can't you read....Or are you being deliberately stupid and pedantic??? philperth2010 wrote on Nov 20th, 2018 at 3:12pm: He said the Criminal Justice Commission set up after the Fitzgerald inquiry into Queensland Police in the 1980s had led to four Cabinet ministers who misused their ministerial allowances being jailed for “pedantic, petty irrelevancies”. So punitive action was taken because they broke the law, that is committed a crime. Even if the offences were “pedantic, petty irrelevancies". The law said that punitive actions were available to them. Therefore there were no non-punitive crimes committed. philperth2010 wrote on Nov 20th, 2018 at 3:12pm: What crimes that are not punitive would you like too see ignored dickhead??? The question still stands - if there is no punishment available is there a crime? You do understand punishment and punitive have the same root?

You have the horse before the cart....If an offence has been committed weather punitive or not it would have a punishment relative to the crime committed....The point is punitive action may be taken but it in no way diminishes (or excuses) the need to address more serious misconduct does it???

:-? :-? :-?

this is the bit I didnt like...


Quote:

Mr Shorten, who announced plans for such a commission in January, said he had discussed Labor’s model with crossbench MPs ahead of the last sitting fortnight of Parliament for the year. He believed there was an “appetite” across party lines for a national integrity commission, which he described as a “down payment” to ensure that Australians could have confidence in the political process. “We will work with the coalition, but we will not wait for them,” Mr Shorten said.

does he actually think HE IS THE PM 

philperth2010 wrote on Nov 20^th, 2018 at 4:59pm:

.If an offence has been committed weather punitive or not it would have a punishment relative to the crime committed...

Do you understand what you have written?

"If an offence has been committed weather punitive or not" - If there is no punishment how can there be an offence?

"it would have a punishment relative to the crime committed." - Therefore there is a crime and a punishment.

"punitive adjective
uk ​ /ˈpjuː.nɪ.tɪv/ us ​ /ˈpjuː.nə.t̬ɪv/
​

formal or specialized law intended as a punishment: "

https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/punitive

But perhaps you can show a law for which no punishment is invoked? Not even a sentence until the "rising of the court"?

Or perhaps you mean no custodial sentence should be imposed instead of jail for “pedantic, petty irrelevancies” .

cods wrote on Nov 20^th, 2018 at 5:18pm:

this is the bit I didnt like... Quote: Mr Shorten, who announced plans for such a commission in January, said he had discussed Labor’s model with crossbench MPs ahead of the last sitting fortnight of Parliament for the year. He believed there was an “appetite” across party lines for a national integrity commission, which he described as a “down payment” to ensure that Australians could have confidence in the political process. “We will work with the coalition, but we will not wait for them,” Mr Shorten said. does he actually think HE IS THE PM

He doesn't need to be the PM when the government is a minority government. One day you'll learn the ramifications of this.

juliar wrote on Nov 20^th, 2018 at 4:20pm:

The very last thing scandal prone union controlled Labor wants is a Corruption Watch Dog. Just think of Labor's vast cesspool of corruption!!!! This is just a dumb GetUp! ploy to try to trap ScoMo who is already way ahead of slow Shorty. All ScoMo has to do is delay it and suggest taking it to the election as there are much more urgent tasks to be done now such as cut immigration. And ScoMo will be fully occupied throwing election winning dirt at Shorty.

Poor juliar is still persisting with the delusional fantasy that Labor's got all the corruption and the Coalition are squeaky clean. Juliar is in for a very, VERY nasty shock after the next election.

If there was really a problem with Labor and corruption, the Coalition couldn't pass this fast enough. If a Coalition in an election-losing position could turn it around by nailing Labor's hypothetical corruption, they would do so, surely? Why aren't they passing this, juliar? Too much Coalition corruption, perhaps?

cods wrote on Nov 20^th, 2018 at 5:18pm:

this is the bit I didnt like... Quote: Mr Shorten, who announced plans for such a commission in January, said he had discussed Labor’s model with crossbench MPs ahead of the last sitting fortnight of Parliament for the year. He believed there was an “appetite” across party lines for a national integrity commission, which he described as a “down payment” to ensure that Australians could have confidence in the political process. “We will work with the coalition, but we will not wait for them,” Mr Shorten said. does he actually think HE IS THE PM

he will be soon- he is just getting in some practice

Poor Little Bammy's chooks have come home to roost as another LABOR stuffup occurs!!!!!

During their six sick years of Socialist insanity the Labor ghouls stuffed up repeatedly and they have not improved.



Labor to face pressure on environment policies after embarrassing stuff-up
Katharine Murphy Political editor Mon 19 Nov 2018 04.00 AEDT Last modified on Mon 19 Nov 2018 04.02 AEDT

Exclusive: Party members vow to step up push for national environment protection authority at ALP conference.

https://i.postimg.cc/SsgbXjBW/5184.jpg
Tony Burke wants the environmental commitments deleted from Labor’s draft policy platform before the December conference, and says they will now be debated on the conference floor. Photograph: Mike Bowers for the Guardian

Labor’s Environment Action Network (Lean) has warned the ALP it will not give up on securing a significant overhaul of federal environment laws in the first term of a Shorten government, and a national environment protection authority to police the framework, despite an embarrassing process stuff-up with the draft policy platform.

A draft policy platform signed off by the ALP national executive and circulated to conference delegates last month suggested both policy commitments and a national environment commission would be adopted by the party’s national conference in December – but the shadow environment minister, Tony Burke, has now put the brakes on.

Read the rest of the disintegrating Labor and its stuffups here

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2018/nov/19/labor-to-face-pressure-on-environment-policies-after-embarrassing-stuff-up

lee wrote on Nov 20^th, 2018 at 5:29pm:

philperth2010 wrote on Nov 20th, 2018 at 4:59pm: .If an offence has been committed weather punitive or not it would have a punishment relative to the crime committed....The point is punitive action may be taken but it in no way diminishes (or excuses) the need to address more serious misconduct does it??? Do you understand what you have written? "If an offence has been committed weather punitive or not" - If there is no punishment how can there be an offence? "it would have a punishment relative to the crime committed." - Therefore there is a crime and a punishment. "punitive adjective uk ​ /ˈpjuː.nɪ.tɪv/ us ​ /ˈpjuː.nə.t̬ɪv/ ​ formal or specialized law intended as a punishment: " https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/punitive But perhaps you can show a law for which no punishment is invoked? Not even a sentence until the "rising of the court"? Or perhaps you mean no custodial sentence should be imposed instead of jail for “pedantic, petty irrelevancies” .

Editing my posts again to avoid the question dickhead....Already answered in the text you omitted....You are a deceitful prick aren't you???

WTF does it matter....A federal anti-corruption commission will investigate any crimes or wrong doing regardless of their nature!!!

Let me explain it too you!!!

Katter was claiming MP's were jailed for pedantic, petty irrelevancies (during the Fitzgerald enquiry) as an excuse not to back the federal corruption commission....This of course means a federal corruption commission would also be unable to investigate any corruption no matter how serious....If MP's are caught doing wrong they need to be held too account!!!

:-? :-? :-?

philperth2010 wrote on Nov 20^th, 2018 at 9:05pm:

Editing my posts again to avoid the question dickhead....

I have no power to edit your posts. Silly bugger. I can however parse it for you.


philperth2010 wrote on Nov 20^th, 2018 at 4:59pm:

If an offence has been committed weather punitive or not it would have a punishment relative to the crime committed...

If there is no punishment available there is no offence. There has to be a law.


philperth2010 wrote on Nov 20^th, 2018 at 4:59pm:

The point is punitive action may be taken but it in no way diminishes (or excuses) the need to address more serious misconduct does it???

If there is no law there is no punishment.

Why do you have difficulty understanding something so basic?

Please show us one of these offences that is not punitive. It is your claim. Back it up.

lee wrote on Nov 20^th, 2018 at 9:33pm:

philperth2010 wrote on Nov 20th, 2018 at 9:05pm: Editing my posts again to avoid the question dickhead.... I have no power to edit your posts. Silly bugger. I can however parse it for you. philperth2010 wrote on Nov 20th, 2018 at 4:59pm: If an offence has been committed weather punitive or not it would have a punishment relative to the crime committed... If there is no punishment available there is no offence. There has to be a law. philperth2010 wrote on Nov 20th, 2018 at 4:59pm: The point is punitive action may be taken but it in no way diminishes (or excuses) the need to address more serious misconduct does it??? If there is no law there is no punishment. Why do you have difficulty understanding something so basic? Please show us one of these offences that is not punitive. It is your claim. Back it up.

Not interested in playing this pathetic word game with you mate....Punitive was the wrong word for me to use so lets call the crimes “pedantic, petty irrelevancies" using Katter's word's and comment on the topic!!!

::) ::) ::)

philperth2010 wrote on Nov 20^th, 2018 at 9:44pm:

Punitive was the wrong word for me to use so lets call the crimes “pedantic, petty irrelevancies" using Katter's word's and comment on the topic!!!

Fair enough. Just could have happened sooner.

juliar wrote on Nov 20^th, 2018 at 7:39pm:

Poor Little Bammy's chooks have come home to roost as another LABOR stuffup occurs!!!!! During their six sick years of Socialist insanity the Labor ghouls stuffed up repeatedly and they have not improved.

Posting offtopic deflections to dodge the question again.

If there was really a problem with Labor and corruption, the Coalition couldn't pass this fast enough. If a Coalition in an election-losing position could turn it around by nailing Labor's hypothetical corruption, they would do so, surely? Why aren't they passing this, juliar? Too much Coalition corruption, perhaps?

lee wrote on Nov 20^th, 2018 at 9:51pm:

philperth2010 wrote on Nov 20th, 2018 at 9:44pm: Punitive was the wrong word for me to use so lets call the crimes “pedantic, petty irrelevancies" using Katter's word's and comment on the topic!!! Fair enough. Just could have happened sooner.

Stop trolling then dickhead!!!

::) ::) ::)

philperth2010 wrote on Nov 20^th, 2018 at 9:53pm:

Stop trolling then dickhead!!!

Oh dear. poor phil. makes a mistake, gets caught and it is my fault. ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

lee wrote on Nov 20^th, 2018 at 10:06pm:

philperth2010 wrote on Nov 20th, 2018 at 9:53pm: Stop trolling then dickhead!!! Oh dear. poor phil. makes a mistake, gets caught and it is my fault. ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

Still trolling....Still no comment about the topic I see....Dickhead???

::) ::) ::)

philperth2010 wrote on Nov 20^th, 2018 at 10:14pm:

Still no comment about the topic I see....Dickhead???

I did demolish what you had to say on the topic. Dick. ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

oh god another.. tit for tat thread...

when will they ever grow up.... >:( >:( >:(

lee wrote on Nov 20^th, 2018 at 10:18pm:

philperth2010 wrote on Nov 20th, 2018 at 10:14pm: Still no comment about the topic I see....Dickhead??? I did demolish what you had to say on the topic. Dick. ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

Were....You never commented on the substance of the topic???

:-? :-? :-?

do you guys realise you complain about stooopid Pollies and here you are being just as stoooopid.. >:( >:( >:(

philperth2010 wrote on Nov 20^th, 2018 at 10:30pm:

You never commented on the substance of the topic???

What was there to say? That I agree with it? That both Labor and the Coalition have skeletons that might not enjoy the light of day?

Poor little Bammy just does not want to understand that this Corruption bulldust is just a sick ploy by GetUp! to try to ensnare ScoMo.

ScoMo just has to delay it by saying there is much more urgent stuff to do now and ScoMo might take it to the election and say if we are re-elected we will implement an appropriate Corruption Watch Dog.

This Watch Dog would then be flat out all day long like a lizard drinking investigating Labor and the union's endless scandals.

ScoMo is far too smart to be caught by a sick little childish GetUp! plot. He might sool the new Advance Australia Good Guys on to them.

Wonder what Labor's next scandal will be ?

Things is collapsing big time down Victoria way as Labor's Black African Terrorists bring mayhem and catastrophe on the populace much to the Extremist Greenies delight.

Things is looking blacker by the day for Labor.


https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/a7/Scott_Morrison_2014_crop.jpg/220px-Scott_Morrison_2014_crop.jpg
ScoMo the Shorty killer

cods wrote on Nov 20^th, 2018 at 10:30pm:

oh god another.. tit for tat thread... when will they ever grow up.... >:( >:( >:(

Yes, it's a worry.

I'm just wondering why the Coalition won't get on board.

Something to hide, perhaps? A Coalition corruption thread that has over 40 examples of the Coalition's misconduct? Scullion's misappropriation of taxpayers' money? Parakeelia? GBR Foundation? Indue? Foxtel? Several other examples of grants going to organisations that haven't asked for it that happened to have Liberals or their donors as directors?

Hmm. No wonder the Coalition don't want this.

juliar wrote on Nov 21^st, 2018 at 7:46am:

Poor little Bammy just does not want to understand that this Corruption bulldust is just a sick ploy by GetUp! to try to ensnare ScoMo. ScoMo just has to delay it by saying there is much more urgent stuff to do now and ScoMo might take it to the election and say if we are re-elected we will implement an appropriate Corruption Watch Dog. This Watch Dog would then be flat out all day long like a lizard drinking investigating Labor and the union's endless scandals. ScoMo is far too smart to be caught by a sick little childish GetUp! plot. He might sool the new Advance Australia Good Guys on to them. Wonder what Labor's next scandal will be ? Things is collapsing big time down Victoria way as Labor's Black African Terrorists bring mayhem and catastrophe on the populace much to the Extremist Greenies delight. Things is looking blacker by the day for Labor.

A delusional fantasy from the Liberal party whackoes.

Now for the TRUTH.

The Liberals and Nationals do not want to go anywhere near a National Integrity Commission because they would get nailed. HARD. They're in too deep.

Some names to investigate: Parakeelia, Indue, Serco, Foxtel, Sydney Water, Great Barrier Reef Foundation. Any one of these would produce damaging headlines for the Coalition if investigated, which is why they do not want this.

I do think Katter has a point    what in actual fact do these Watchdogs find.. or more to the POINT prevent happening  over again???? ::) ::) ::)

seems to me very little.....

and what exactly is CORRUPT.....people fudging their expenses   has been going on since federation....its not really corrupt....well not what I call corrupt.....

you seem to believe this NET will only catch libs..

good luck with that thought bam...

so not forget it will also cost unknown amounts of money..........

what exactly will they be searching for???.....do we have any idea?......


Corruption
/kəˈrʌpʃ(ə)n/Submit
noun
1.
dishonest or fraudulent conduct by those in power, typically involving bribery.
"the journalist who wants to expose corruption in high places"
synonyms:      dishonesty, dishonest dealings, unscrupulousness, deceit, deception, duplicity, double-dealing, fraud, fraudulence, misconduct, lawbreaking, crime, criminality, delinquency, wrongdoing, villainy; More
2.
the process by which a word or expression is changed from its original state to one regarded as erroneous or debased.
"a record of a word's corruption"
synonyms:      alteration, falsification, doctoring, manipulation, manipulating, fudging, adulteration, debasement, degradation, abuse, subversion, misrepresentation, misapplication; rarevitiation
"these figures have been subject to corruption"


it covers an awful lot........but I am not sure our Govts   have crossed these lines.... ::) ::)

bam you do forget about the C hinese making huge donations to Labor   for information supplied by Dastyari..  ::) ::)... the Libs are not alone

cods wrote on Nov 21^st, 2018 at 10:01am:

I do think Katter has a point    what in actual fact do these Watchdogs find.. or more to the POINT prevent happening  over again???? ::) ::) ::) seems to me very little..... and what exactly is CORRUPT.....people fudging their expenses   has been going on since federation....its not really corrupt....well not what I call corrupt..... you seem to believe this NET will only catch libs.. good luck with that thought bam... so not forget it will also cost unknown amounts of money.......... what exactly will they be searching for???.....do we have any idea?......

No, I don't think that. Not for a second.

However, the Coalition has been in government for the last five years and it has engaged in dubious conduct that warrants investigation. And not just this government either. Some of the dealings of the Howard government could do with investigation.

As for Labor, let's get something straight first. Every time the Liberals get in - every single time - they have gone after the Labor party and the unions with Royal Commissions to try to uncover corruption. Menzies did it. Fraser did it. Howard did it. Abbott did it. They didn't find much last time. No, Labor hasn't much to fear because anything that may have been uncovered has already been uncovered.

So far, Labor hasn't returned the favour in government, so any misconduct by the Coalition hasn't been uncovered. That's about to change, with the impending establishment of a permanent National Integrity Commission, and it's got the Coalition very worried. What's remained hidden for decades - misconduct in public office by the Coalition - will no longer remain hidden.

So while a National Integrity Commission's dragnet won't make Labor immune to the possibility of misconduct by a Labor government being uncovered, on the simple balance of probability, it's certain that more examples of misconduct by Federal Coalition government will be uncovered. Why? The Coalition has been in government for 14 out of the last 20 years, Labor's already been investigated and the Coalition has not. If you think Labor has more instances of misconduct to fear being exposed than the Coalition, frankly, you're kidding yourself.

Future Labor governments may provide new examples, but existing examples? Sorry, the Coalition's got a lot more misconduct waiting to be investigated.

We need a National Integrity Commission. Having such a commission will stop future misconduct.

It seems that at this point here is not even legislation.

So how would the Commission work?

Will it, should it become law, be prospective or retrospective?

If it is to be retrospective how far back should it extend?

So much froth and bubble currently.


"Australia continues to be perceived as one of the least corrupt countries in the world. Its score of 79/100 in Transparency International’s latest Corruption Perceptions Index gave it a ranking of 13 out of 168 countries. However, its decline on this index in recent years (from a score of 85 and a rank of seven in 2012), and continued revelations of corrupt conduct in the public and private sectors and some unions, highlight the need for continued attention to Australia’s anti-corruption and integrity framework."

https://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Parliamentary_Library/pubs/BriefingBook45p/CorruptionIssues

Who cares if the Coalition, Labor or any other politician is caught by an anti-corruption body and prosecuted for their crimes....I fail to see how pointing out one side or the other will be caught by the new watchdog in any way diminishes the need to hold the bastards too account....I have not seen one valid argument against the establishment of a Federal anti corruption body....Apart from partisan bullshit from the usual suspects why wouldn't anyone support this reform???

::) ::) ::)

Bam wrote on Nov 21^st, 2018 at 11:23am:

Having such a commission will stop future misconduct.

Dream on. It will merely make dishonest politicians try harder to conceal their actions.

It may to some extent limit their involvement.

philperth2010 wrote on Nov 21^st, 2018 at 11:29am:

Who cares if the Coalition, Labor or any other politician is caught by an anti-corruption body and prosecuted for their crimes...

"Public sector and parliamentary integrity

Unlike each of the Australian states, which have established dedicated standing anti-corruption agencies, the Commonwealth has taken a multi-agency approach to combating corruption within or affecting the public sector. Within this system, a range of agencies have complementary roles. These include promoting integrity across the public service and investigating misconduct (Australian Public Service Commission), detecting and investigating law enforcement-related corruption issues (Australian Commission for Law Enforcement Integrity (ACLEI)) and preventing, detecting and investigating serious corruption that may constitute an offence under Commonwealth law (Australian Federal Police (AFP))."

https://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Parliamentary_Library/pubs/BriefingBook45p/CorruptionIssues

So it seems you want to take it from a multi-agency approach to a single agency approach.

Doesn't seem to change much.

WTF would take the advice of a Government who is opposed to a Federal corruption body and any added scrutiny....Geez some people are thick???


Quote:

Do we need a federal anti-corruption commission? In one word: yes. All states have anti-corruption bodies that have brought to light many indiscretions by politicians that would have otherwise remained hidden. The federal government is lagging behind in this crucial area. At the federal level, there is no transparency in backroom dealings by those in power, coupled with lax rules that can be abused. In these circumstances, corruption can take root without us knowing about it. An anti-corruption agency would be a powerful deterrent against improper behaviour. There is strong public support for a federal anti-corruption body in the Griffith University survey, with two-thirds (67%) of Australians in favour of this. The Labor Party has pledged to introduce a federal integrity commission if it wins the next election.

::) ::) ::)

https://theconversation.com/australians-think-our-politicians-are-corrupt-but-where-is-the-evidence-101822

philperth2010 wrote on Nov 21^st, 2018 at 11:29am:

Who cares if the Coalition, Labor or any other politician is caught by an anti-corruption body and prosecuted for their crimes....I fail to see how pointing out one side or the other will be caught by the new watchdog in any way diminishes the need to hold the bastards too account....I have not seen one valid argument against the establishment of a Federal anti corruption body....Apart from partisan bullshit from the usual suspects why wouldn't anyone support this reform??? ::) ::) ::)

so what is your idea of CORRUPTION IN GOVT phil?>..

I will be honest  I have no idea what this watchdog will be looking at.

so you lefties seem hysterical about having one..

fine  good for you.... just say what you are expecting them to be FINDING....

thus far when it come to ICAC....all I have seen is two ex labor ministers in JAIL for CORRUPTION...the rest may have lost a job or position over what I dont know...was it corrupt though....the list of what is considered corruption   is very LONG.....

if they catch many pollies with those charges    then I for one will give up on this countries ability to pick good people to run it..

indiscretions by politicians  ::) ::) ::)


seriously is that corruption on a grand scale..worthy of an inquisition like a corruption watch dog..at enormous cost......

whatever happened to INTEGRITY.....when someone crosses the line why are they not SACKED ON THE SPOT?.... wouldnt that be the correct thing to do?..

philperth2010 wrote on Nov 21^st, 2018 at 11:43am:

WTF would take the advice of a Government who is opposed to a Federal corruption body and any added scrutiny....Geez some people are thick???

I don't know. Who would phil?

cods wrote on Nov 21^st, 2018 at 11:58am:

philperth2010 wrote on Nov 21st, 2018 at 11:29am: Who cares if the Coalition, Labor or any other politician is caught by an anti-corruption body and prosecuted for their crimes....I fail to see how pointing out one side or the other will be caught by the new watchdog in any way diminishes the need to hold the bastards too account....I have not seen one valid argument against the establishment of a Federal anti corruption body....Apart from partisan bullshit from the usual suspects why wouldn't anyone support this reform??? ::) ::) ::) so what is your idea of CORRUPTION IN GOVT phil?>.. I will be honest  I have no idea what this watchdog will be looking at. so you lefties seem hysterical about having one.. fine  good for you.... just say what you are expecting them to be FINDING.... thus far when it come to ICAC....all I have seen is two ex labor ministers in JAIL for CORRUPTION...the rest may have lost a job or position over what I dont know...was it corrupt though....the list of what is considered corruption   is very LONG..... if they catch many pollies with those charges    then I for one will give up on this countries ability to pick good people to run it..

Maybe you should educate yourself then and stop using your ignorance to argue against a Federal Anti-Corruption Commission....What is your argument against a Federal  Corruption Commission as you have failed to articulate what the problem is with keeping the bastards honest....Why are you right wing supporters so hysterical about having a Federal Anti-Corruption Commission you claim will expose Labor's corruption....What is your argument against it???

Educate yourselves you dolts....Is it any wonder the Coalition are dodging this with everything they can muster....What argument is there against a Federal Anti-Corruption Commission....That it will catch Labor politicians....Bullshit???

Coalition corruption thrives under Turnbull: No shame whatsoever

https://independentaustralia.net/politics/politics-display/coalition-corruption-thrives-under-turnbull-no-shame-whatsoever,10365

Overwhelming majority of Australians believe federal politicians are corrupt

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2018/aug/21/overwhelming-majority-of-australians-believe-federal-politicians-are-corrupt

Budget’s $45m slush fund for MPs is an unethical use of public money

https://theconversation.com/budgets-45m-slush-fund-for-mps-is-an-unethical-use-of-public-money-42116

::) ::) ::)

philperth2010 wrote on Nov 21^st, 2018 at 1:51pm:

What argument is there against a Federal Anti-Corruption Commission.

Re-inventing the wheel? Another bloated bureaucracy. that may not achieve anything, at great cost to the taxpayer.


lee wrote on Nov 21^st, 2018 at 11:35am:

the Commonwealth has taken a multi-agency approach to combating corruption within or affecting the public sector.

Good left-wing links though. ;)

BTW - I do support a Corruption Commission. They are just two different questions.

lee wrote on Nov 21^st, 2018 at 2:01pm:

philperth2010 wrote on Nov 21st, 2018 at 1:51pm: What argument is there against a Federal Anti-Corruption Commission. Re-inventing the wheel? Another bloated bureaucracy. that may not achieve anything, at great cost to the taxpayer. lee wrote on Nov 21st, 2018 at 11:35am: the Commonwealth has taken a multi-agency approach to combating corruption within or affecting the public sector. Good left-wing links though. ;) BTW - I do support a Corruption Commission. They are just two different questions.

The current system is not working as shown in the links I provided....Ignoring the problem does not make it go away....If you support a Federal Corruption Commission then why are you agitating against one???

:-? :-? :-?

philperth2010 wrote on Nov 21^st, 2018 at 2:10pm:

..If you support a Federal Corruption Commission then why are you agitating against one???

Where have I agitated against one?

You asked what argument. I gave you a couple.

The independent link. "corporate taxes were avoided on a massive scale" That of course suggests it also didn't occur under Labor. Not even a cursory look. ;)

The Guardian - "New survey shows 85% believe most or all MPs corrupt, and two-thirds support the creation of a federal anti-corruption body"

So now perceptions are the same a fact. ;)

The Conversation - "The 2015-16 Commonwealth budget’s “Stronger Communities” slush fund for every lower house MP raises serious questions. The allocation of $150,000 a year to every MP’s electorate risks seducing and trapping MPs into unethical behaviour that conflicts with new benchmarks for parliamentary codes of conduct."

You do understand every lower house MP includes Labor? If it is available to all - is it corruption? Or only corruption of the Coalition? ;)

"Because Tony Abbott’s Coalition government has more MPs – they occupy 90 of the 150 seats in the House of Representatives – more of the money will go to government-held electorates. "

If Labor were in Government more sitting Labor sitting members would mean they would get more. Or do you think they would somehow repeal the legislation before an election?

cods wrote on Nov 21^st, 2018 at 11:58am:

philperth2010 wrote on Nov 21st, 2018 at 11:29am: Who cares if the Coalition, Labor or any other politician is caught by an anti-corruption body and prosecuted for their crimes....I fail to see how pointing out one side or the other will be caught by the new watchdog in any way diminishes the need to hold the bastards too account....I have not seen one valid argument against the establishment of a Federal anti corruption body....Apart from partisan bullshit from the usual suspects why wouldn't anyone support this reform??? ::) ::) ::) so what is your idea of CORRUPTION IN GOVT phil?>.. I will be honest  I have no idea what this watchdog will be looking at. so you lefties seem hysterical about having one..

Why are you rightards not keen on cracking down on corruption? Afraid of seeing how many Coalition MPs would end up in prison? Do you think Barnaby Joyce's political career would survive an investigation into his dealings with water allocations?


cods wrote on Nov 21^st, 2018 at 11:58am:

fine  good for you.... just say what you are expecting them to be FINDING.... thus far when it come to ICAC....all I have seen is two ex labor ministers in JAIL for CORRUPTION...the rest may have lost a job or position over what I dont know...was it corrupt though....the list of what is considered corruption   is very LONG..... if they catch many pollies with those charges    then I for one will give up on this countries ability to pick good people to run it..

And you think Liberals aren't corrupt? How many NSW Liberals have fronted ICAC in the last five years? Why isn't O'Farrell Premier anymore?

And don't give me crap about ICAC being independent. The NSW Liberal government have been threatening ICAC's independence by weakening it. The NSW Government - a Liberal government - and the Federal Government - a Liberal government - control the agencies that can bring actions against individuals. If ICAC had been allowed to act with impunity, Sinodinos would have been jailed. He was involved with Sydney Water and he had a case to answer.

Bam wrote on Nov 21^st, 2018 at 4:10pm:

How many NSW Liberals have fronted ICAC in the last five years?

Gone from federal to state politics in one foul swoop. So does that mean that Vic Labor should be investigated?  What was it 21 MPs or something using a slush fund?

"21 Labor MPs misused taxpayer funds for 2014 election campaign"

https://www.theage.com.au/politics/victoria/21-labor-mps-misused-taxpayer-funds-for-2014-election-campaign-20180321-p4z5du.html

A Fairfax publication. It must be true.

Bam wrote on Nov 21^st, 2018 at 4:10pm:

cods wrote on Nov 21st, 2018 at 11:58am: philperth2010 wrote on Nov 21st, 2018 at 11:29am: Who cares if the Coalition, Labor or any other politician is caught by an anti-corruption body and prosecuted for their crimes....I fail to see how pointing out one side or the other will be caught by the new watchdog in any way diminishes the need to hold the bastards too account....I have not seen one valid argument against the establishment of a Federal anti corruption body....Apart from partisan bullshit from the usual suspects why wouldn't anyone support this reform??? ::) ::) ::) so what is your idea of CORRUPTION IN GOVT phil?>.. I will be honest  I have no idea what this watchdog will be looking at. so you lefties seem hysterical about having one.. Why are you rightards not keen on cracking down on corruption? Afraid of seeing how many Coalition MPs would end up in prison? Do you think Barnaby Joyce's political career would survive an investigation into his dealings with water allocations? cods wrote on Nov 21st, 2018 at 11:58am: fine  good for you.... just say what you are expecting them to be FINDING.... thus far when it come to ICAC....all I have seen is two ex labor ministers in JAIL for CORRUPTION...the rest may have lost a job or position over what I dont know...was it corrupt though....the list of what is considered corruption   is very LONG..... if they catch many pollies with those charges    then I for one will give up on this countries ability to pick good people to run it.. And you think Liberals aren't corrupt? How many NSW Liberals have fronted ICAC in the last five years? Why isn't O'Farrell Premier anymore? And don't give me crap about ICAC being independent. The NSW Liberal government have been threatening ICAC's independence by weakening it. The NSW Government - a Liberal government - and the Federal Government - a Liberal government - control the agencies that can bring actions against individuals. If ICAC had been allowed to act with impunity, Sinodinos would have been jailed. He was involved with Sydney Water and he had a case to answer.

gawd bam   you do beat a strange druim   O.,Farrell was a mug he should never have stepped down it was a GIFT a birthday gift   and he lied about it big deal.. now if you want to talk detail of real CORRUPTION  how about WE TALK JACKSON   who did deals with CRIMINALS  and gave them a lower sentence  and he ended up in  JAIL AS WELL....then there is OBEID and McDonald...still in JAIL FOR YES THATS RIGHT REAL CORRUPTION>>.

if accepting a bottle of wine is corruption by your standards bam   then boy are you in for a few surprises....

we obviously have differing opinion on what is CORRUPTION 

I am still waiting for an explanation   of what we can expect.......then to be looking for????>.


tell me this bam why didnt Labor sort all this out when they had POWER FOR ^ LONG YEARS?????....

why did they miss that chance to get the libs... ::) ::)

just a plain old every day answer will do..

cods wrote on Nov 21^st, 2018 at 4:51pm:

why did they miss that chance to get the libs.

They had more important things to do?

cods wrote on Nov 21^st, 2018 at 4:51pm:

Bam wrote on Nov 21st, 2018 at 4:10pm: cods wrote on Nov 21st, 2018 at 11:58am: philperth2010 wrote on Nov 21st, 2018 at 11:29am: Who cares if the Coalition, Labor or any other politician is caught by an anti-corruption body and prosecuted for their crimes....I fail to see how pointing out one side or the other will be caught by the new watchdog in any way diminishes the need to hold the bastards too account....I have not seen one valid argument against the establishment of a Federal anti corruption body....Apart from partisan bullshit from the usual suspects why wouldn't anyone support this reform??? ::) ::) ::) so what is your idea of CORRUPTION IN GOVT phil?>.. I will be honest  I have no idea what this watchdog will be looking at. so you lefties seem hysterical about having one.. Why are you rightards not keen on cracking down on corruption? Afraid of seeing how many Coalition MPs would end up in prison? Do you think Barnaby Joyce's political career would survive an investigation into his dealings with water allocations? cods wrote on Nov 21st, 2018 at 11:58am: fine  good for you.... just say what you are expecting them to be FINDING.... thus far when it come to ICAC....all I have seen is two ex labor ministers in JAIL for CORRUPTION...the rest may have lost a job or position over what I dont know...was it corrupt though....the list of what is considered corruption   is very LONG..... if they catch many pollies with those charges    then I for one will give up on this countries ability to pick good people to run it.. And you think Liberals aren't corrupt? How many NSW Liberals have fronted ICAC in the last five years? Why isn't O'Farrell Premier anymore? And don't give me crap about ICAC being independent. The NSW Liberal government have been threatening ICAC's independence by weakening it. The NSW Government - a Liberal government - and the Federal Government - a Liberal government - control the agencies that can bring actions against individuals. If ICAC had been allowed to act with impunity, Sinodinos would have been jailed. He was involved with Sydney Water and he had a case to answer. gawd bam   you do beat a strange druim   O.,Farrell was a mug he should never have stepped down it was a GIFT a birthday gift   and he lied about it big deal.. now if you want to talk detail of real CORRUPTION  how about WE TALK JACKSON   who did deals with CRIMINALS  and gave them a lower sentence  and he ended up in  JAIL AS WELL....then there is OBEID and McDonald...still in JAIL FOR YES THATS RIGHT REAL CORRUPTION>>. if accepting a bottle of wine is corruption by your standards bam   then boy are you in for a few surprises.... we obviously have differing opinion on what is CORRUPTION  I am still waiting for an explanation   of what we can expect.......then to be looking for????>. tell me this bam why didnt Labor sort all this out when they had POWER FOR ^ LONG YEARS?????.... why did they miss that chance to get the libs... ::) ::) just a plain old every day answer will do..

It's hard wading through that rubbish you post when your punctuation skills are nonexistent. If you actually cared about what you wrote, you would make it more readable.

A Federal anti-corruption commission wasn't on the political agenda before 2014. Why didn't the Coalition pass one during the 11 dreadful years of the Howard government? Same reason.

With the multiple threads on coalition corruption on this forum, it will take a few elections for fed ICAC to clear all of it.

stunspore wrote on Nov 21^st, 2018 at 6:00pm:

With the multiple threads on coalition corruption on this forum, it will take a few elections for fed ICAC to clear all of it.

Won't that depend on the enabling legislation? ;)

Bam wrote on Nov 21^st, 2018 at 5:40pm:

A Federal anti-corruption commission wasn't on the political agenda before 2014.

No corruption before then? A lack of will?


Bam wrote on Nov 21^st, 2018 at 5:40pm:

Why didn't the Coalition pass one during the 11 dreadful years of the Howard government?

If the Howard Government was so corrupt that negates your first comment. I guess it was a lack of will. ;)

Labor will wedge Liberals in about thirty seconds over this

The Polly Waffle VIRUS strikes again with more Fake News - his speciality.

Its time wrote on Nov 21^st, 2018 at 10:31pm:

Labor will wedge Liberals in about thirty seconds over this

It will be interesting seeing the Coalition and it's scum bag supporters trying to justify not supporting a Federal Corruption Commission when Labor and the Greens are all for it....What argument can the Coalition use to prosecute such a position....Is it not necessary because Federal Politicians can be trusted and only the left are corrupt anyway....How do you right wingers justify a complete lack of scrutiny and accountability....Over to any right winger to answer this question???

:-? :-? :-?

philperth2010 wrote on Nov 22^nd, 2018 at 12:47pm:

Over to any right winger to answer this question???

I guess that makes me not a right winger, despite claims by some. Bugger. Not of the left, not of the right - I must be a centrist. ;)

lee wrote on Nov 22^nd, 2018 at 3:24pm:

philperth2010 wrote on Nov 22nd, 2018 at 12:47pm: Over to any right winger to answer this question??? I guess that makes me not a right winger, despite claims by some. Bugger. Not of the left, not of the right - I must be a centrist. ;)

No you are just a dickhead in denial....If you do not want to answer the question why bother pretending your opinion is at all relevant....You have nothing to offer any debate apart from bullshit....You are also very deceitful when you cut out the context of people's post and address irrelevancies whilst ignoring the main point in people's posts....Says a lot about you dickhead!!!

:) :) :)

philperth2010 wrote on Nov 22^nd, 2018 at 3:59pm:

No you are just a dickhead in denial....If you do not want to answer the question why bother pretending your opinion is at all relevant...

Poor phil. Showing his lack of comprehension AGAIN.


lee wrote on Nov 21^st, 2018 at 2:01pm:

BTW - I do support a Corruption Commission. They are just two different questions.

Question answered.


philperth2010 wrote on Nov 22^nd, 2018 at 3:59pm:

You have nothing to offer any debate apart from bullshit.

Sorry. I posted rebuttals to your posts. Did you bother to read past the headlines?


philperth2010 wrote on Nov 22^nd, 2018 at 3:59pm:

You are also very deceitful when you cut out the context of people's post and address irrelevancies whilst ignoring the main point in people's posts.

You mean like when you talk a crime weather (sic) punitive or not? The whole point of your post seemed to be about punitive actions. How can that be irrelevant?


philperth2010 wrote on Nov 22^nd, 2018 at 3:59pm:

Says a lot about you dickhead!!!

Says more about your grasp of the English language. Or lack thereof. ;)

lee wrote on Nov 22^nd, 2018 at 5:26pm:

philperth2010 wrote on Nov 22nd, 2018 at 3:59pm: No you are just a dickhead in denial....If you do not want to answer the question why bother pretending your opinion is at all relevant... Poor phil. Showing his lack of comprehension AGAIN. lee wrote on Nov 21st, 2018 at 2:01pm: BTW - I do support a Corruption Commission. They are just two different questions. Question answered. philperth2010 wrote on Nov 22nd, 2018 at 3:59pm: You have nothing to offer any debate apart from bullshit. Sorry. I posted rebuttals to your posts. Did you bother to read past the headlines? philperth2010 wrote on Nov 22nd, 2018 at 3:59pm: You are also very deceitful when you cut out the context of people's post and address irrelevancies whilst ignoring the main point in people's posts. You mean like when you talk a crime weather (sic) punitive or not? The whole point of your post seemed to be about punitive actions. How can that be irrelevant? philperth2010 wrote on Nov 22nd, 2018 at 3:59pm: Says a lot about you dickhead!!! Says more about your grasp of the English language. Or lack thereof. ;)

Why bother trying to justify your bullshit mate.....If you do not oppose a Federal Corruption Commission what are you arguing about....You are a deceitful prick aren't you???

:-? :-? :-?

philperth2010 wrote on Nov 22^nd, 2018 at 5:36pm:

If you do not oppose a Federal Corruption Commission what are you arguing about...

You were the one asked about arguments against a Federal Corruption Commission. I gave you a couple. Gee I am bending over backwards to help you.


philperth2010 wrote on Nov 22^nd, 2018 at 5:36pm:

You are a deceitful prick aren't you???

Ooh, I am a deceitful prick because I answered your question? You have totally lost the plot. ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

lee wrote on Nov 22^nd, 2018 at 5:26pm:

philperth2010 wrote on Nov 22nd, 2018 at 3:59pm: No you are just a dickhead in denial....If you do not want to answer the question why bother pretending your opinion is at all relevant... Poor phil. Showing his lack of comprehension AGAIN. The question was general not aimed at you which you failed to answer anyway despite responding with bullshit....Lack of comprehension would by your problem dickhead!!! lee wrote on Nov 21st, 2018 at 2:01pm: BTW - I do support a Corruption Commission. They are just two different questions. Question answered. No....The question was how do right wingers justify opposing a Federal Anti-Corruption Commission....If you do not oppose it then why did you respond dickhead??? philperth2010 wrote on Nov 22nd, 2018 at 3:59pm: You have nothing to offer any debate apart from bullshit. Sorry. I posted rebuttals to your posts. Did you bother to read past the headlines? You rebutted nothing....Apparently you agree which would make rebuttal impossible!!! philperth2010 wrote on Nov 22nd, 2018 at 3:59pm: You are also very deceitful when you cut out the context of people's post and address irrelevancies whilst ignoring the main point in people's posts. You mean like when you talk a crime weather (sic) punitive or not? The whole point of your post seemed to be about punitive actions. How can that be irrelevant? Already answered and done with troll boy....Trying to dodge because you are a dickhead!!! philperth2010 wrote on Nov 22nd, 2018 at 3:59pm: Says a lot about you dickhead!!! Says more about your grasp of the English language. Or lack thereof. ;)

Says a lot about your lack of integrity and nothing else....You are a deceitful prick!!!

If you agree with a Federal Anti-Corruption Commission WTF are you arguing about troll boy....You are a flake mate!!!

::) ::) ::)

lee wrote on Nov 22^nd, 2018 at 5:48pm:

philperth2010 wrote on Nov 22nd, 2018 at 5:36pm: If you do not oppose a Federal Corruption Commission what are you arguing about... You were the one asked about arguments against a Federal Corruption Commission. I gave you a couple. Gee I am bending over backwards to help you. philperth2010 wrote on Nov 22nd, 2018 at 5:36pm: You are a deceitful prick aren't you??? Ooh, I am a deceitful prick because I answered your question? You have totally lost the plot. ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

Were did you provide any argument about a Federal Corruption Commission....I will give you the benefit of doubt and accept you argued against it when you post the text too back it up....Over too you???

:-? :-? :-?

philperth2010 wrote on Nov 22^nd, 2018 at 7:34pm:

I will give you the benefit of doubt and accept you argued against it when you post the text too back it up

Where did I say I argued against a  Commission? I wrote that I agreed.

That doesn't mean there can be no argument against one. I gave you an example.


lee wrote on Nov 22^nd, 2018 at 5:26pm:

lee wrote Yesterday at 12:01pm: BTW - I do support a Corruption Commission. They are just two different questions.

You seem to think because I  agree that I can't express an opinion on why someone may have a different one. That is really simplistic thinking.

philperth2010 wrote on Nov 22^nd, 2018 at 7:30pm:

If you agree with a Federal Anti-Corruption Commission WTF are you arguing about troll boy..

I am not arguing for or against. I offered an opinion on why someone might not agree.

You could of course attempt to rebut my rebuttals from your links.

That's the way debates generally work.