Godwin for Rudd, Badwin for Turnbull

As the second thread for Utegate now has over 300 comments, I think it is time for a new thread. Old thread will now be closed for comments.

Lateline will be great viewing, so who’s gonna be online for live fun.

Update: changed the title of this thread

Advertisements

271 Responses

  1. First. I’ll take a (small) drink every time Tony Jones says Godwin grech.

  2. Wag the dog?

    Notable Queensland background to how this circus may play out. In the past Swan and Rudd never had much time for each other. Swan apparently did not rate Mr Rudd and regularly blocked his progress up the ALP pole.

    When it became apparent during 2006 that Rudd was to be the annointed one, local ‘mates’ orchestrated a ceasefire deal between Rudd and Swan. One of the conditions of this arrangement to secure Swan’s endorsement of Rudd as ALP leader was that then Swan staffer Lachlan Harris was transfered to the Prime Minister’s office. Harris was there to, presumably, keep an eye on what went on inside the Kev, provide second-rate Spin Doctoring and unnecessarily antagonise key stakeholders.

    This highly sensitive arrangement explains why Harris survived demonstrably misleading News Ltd journalists over Rudd’s RAAF tantrum a couple of months ago.

    It also explains why Swan will probably survive the current allegations. PM Rudd owes Swan, the pairs political fortunes are completely tied together, come hell, high waters and parliamentary censure.

  3. I will get a nice vodka on ice ready for the game too.

  4. I don’t know – shots sounds like a bad idea. Imagine how hammered you would have got if you took a shot for every time Malcolm said the word “concocted” in his 7:30 Report interview!

  5. Shots? No – just a single (large – no tax increase) vodka on ice.

  6. #%@*& Roxon!

  7. I will get a thread up on alcopops tomorrow – if we survive tonight.

  8. Interesting, OTT.

  9. Tony, on June 22nd, 2009 at 10:13 pm Said:

    Legion,

    If most of the emails concern John Grant, they are hardly proof of “equal treatment for all”. (Or, if most of them don’t, but the ones that do are specifically calling for ’special’ assistance for Grant, and the others aren’t, then the same applies.)

    Still frame of reference stuff, perhaps. Special, equal, and normal. Who is running the ‘special’ test as starting point, as opposed to a ‘normal’, test which is Gaussian most places, contingent on the stochastics, and not flat-lined? Wayne Swan could have a million emails concerning John Grant Motors and it still not be abnormal in the special sense that ‘special’ is being used as a starting point.

  10. On the Swan thing, what he said was that Grant was treated the same as “everybody” else. Someone from the Opposition asked today about a referral he had made. It was a good question that Swan said he would take on notice. I don’t think that the existence of “others” necessarily discharges the claim of “special” treatment. There can be 5 or even 10 that got “special” treatment. If the, say 500, others didn’t, then the claim against Swan stands.

  11. “Stochastics”? My mind would like a cigarette and cuddle, thanks Legion.

  12. Bugger you joni. First you entice me to read Tom’s posts/rants, and now when I’m about to go to bed you alert me to the fact that Lateline is about to commence.

    I listen to you far too much.

  13. That’s OK fuzzy duck, stay and have fun here. It has the feeling of a finals game where we just do not know who is going to win.

  14. Stochastics: way to big a word for this time of night…. 😯

  15. Legion,

    Wayne Swan could have a million emails concerning John Grant Motors and it still not be abnormal in the special sense that ’special’ is being used as a starting point.

    Actually, I got ‘special’ from some of your comments (I’m not certain who used it originally). ‘Preferential’ treatment would be my choice of ‘frame’.

  16. Game on!

  17. Abbott versus Albanese.

  18. Godwin Grech: Skol!

  19. “A fight about truth, and now justice”…. what about the American way?

  20. Mr Grech: Chug

  21. Tony – slow down – if you get too drunk you might write something you may regret later.

  22. LOL. Wouldn’t be the first time, joni. 8)

  23. Was it just me or was Swan’s voice quavering?

  24. Too funny mate.

  25. Young Godwin: Slurp (x2)

  26. ooo – backbench grumbles….

  27. ‘Preferential’ treatment would be my choice of ‘frame’.

    As largely an intellectual exercise, because Grech has already admitted he’d formed an impression which skews the sample, how would you be measuring ‘preferential’ in relation to things for which there are no measures beyond relative comparison, and which comparison involves comparison of things embodying unique dimensions apart from their similar nomenclature? That is to say, Government is equal, OzCar is equal, but car dealers, their circumstances, requirement for ‘contact’ and follow-up enquiries aren’t equal, nor are outcomes equal (which is why dealers fall within the credit arrangements available through Ford Credit and others are still with GE)? 😉

  28. Wassup my peoples?

  29. nothing happening here – move along… move along…

  30. Legion,

    Ford Credit offering finance to a non-Ford dealer, at a time when Ford dealers themselves weren’t even sure of continuing finance arrangements from Ford Credit (since FC were negotiating finance from OzCar, ostensibly for their very survival), I would classify as preferential treatment*.

    *Assuming various media reports are accurate.

  31. Abbott gets in early to defuse the Rudd/email question – good tactic

  32. Toilethound,

    Just enjoying a light refreshment (or two) while discussing politix and life. You? (Phelpsie?)

  33. Albanese is never convincing for me.

  34. Has been an interesting day in Federal politics. Those of us in SA are also enjoying a resurgence in the SAS Warrior Hamilton-(don’t forget the hyphen)Smith’s stupidgate affair in SA politics whereby the ‘tards also heavily SEEM to rely on “questionable ” sources in desperate attacks on the (less than ideal) government.

    Kudos & a BIG thumbs up to my homies Miglo, Legion N5 et al who have kept it real from inception. Honourable mentions to Al, Brian & many others. I’d much rather read it all unfold here than @ Teh Punch.murdochwhores.com.

    The ‘tother (thanx TB) ‘alf’s B’day today so have been out in public (shock, horror) to eat & am deviated now henceforth.

  35. Yep, Phelpsie, me & Dad Tony. Enjoying reading back over the last few hours now.

    Off topic but I’d be interested in your opinion (posted at Friday Frols, perhaps best answered there) on the CC Lounge music that I posted.

  36. Abbott better be careful that Jones does not have another gotcha question.

  37. As others have said. Turnbull will stay because of the absolute dearth of alternatives. The other (non) options are frightening indeed & lack “mass appeal” for want of a better term.

    Dirty, dishonest political maneuvring all round.

    Very little evidence of an actual “scandal”.

    Compare & contrast….”1992-2007″….”2007-Now”.

  38. Are you referring to ‘The Man on the Land’? That was some (hilariously) unusual stuff. Otherwise, I’m not sure.

  39. Jones is too smart for Inquisitor Abbott.

  40. Is this the gotcha?

  41. No, not the man on the land. The banning of Cannibal Corpse from touring Australia ala the Chaser pisstake.

    HM Farmer was well done though, my bro put me onto that one.

  42. Tony, on June 22nd, 2009 at 10:51 pm

    That makes sense, Tony. I can see how, at a time when everything was up in the air and the Government was trying to get its Special Purpose Vehicle up and running for all motor vehicle dealers, it would be against everyone’s interests to discuss/negotiate if and how Ford Credit might provide a Credit umbrella outside their usual operating territory for non-Ford (perhaps KIA) dealers, like Grant and the several other motor dealer(ship)s discussed at the meeting (as mentioned by Cohen in his testimony at Friday’s Senate shindig). Those kinds of things are likely commercially sensitive, though; they may also have been overtaken by other realities, including negotiations with a variety of credit conduits at the time as those things relate to Ford and non-Ford dealers scrambling for credit and credit providers scrambling for credit to provide it, as you say.

  43. Still the word “handful” – still no actual number.

  44. Heh. I just watched it. Them’s some pretty poetic lyrics right there.

  45. Robbo probably won’t like the diversion so …..back on topic, kinda.

    So….Imran is a legend migs! give me his perpetual suntan anyday, I look like a palid cavedweller from too much nightshift.

    OK, so that wasn’t really on topic either.

  46. “Rolls Royce”?? I thought it was Kia and Ford?

  47. Legion, you’re way ahead of the curve.

  48. Nil all draw I think. Nothing new.

  49. B.Tolputt – “So frankly, I think you can go f#ck yourself.”

    It’s much easier to resort to abuse than admitting that you obviously know nothing about different standards of evidence, ie criminal vs civil, balance of probability vs beyond reasonable doubt.

    And Joni, perhaps you would explain why B.Tolputt pestered me for 3 days on much the same pedantic basis, often with your support.

    I’ve now made 3 or 4 comments, and you’re willing to make a disparaging comment.

    I think there is an element of inconsistency creeping in here.

    I’ve not pressed either of you, at ANY stage, as annoyingly as you both were willing to pester me.

  50. “And now my favourite Cannibal Corps lyric of all: Rape the limbless cadaver.”

    (I have a newfound respect for the Chaser ‘boyz’.)

  51. Fine Tom – if you do not like it here – do not come back. You are a deliberately disruptive poster.

    Am I inconsistent – probably. Does it matter? No.

  52. Tom, I thought you went out for the evening. Don’t tell me you were evicted from wherever you were.

    Hear that everybody? Tom was turfed out the local pub.

  53. Nothing new, but Tony Abbott was disappointing given he was up against Anthony Albanese. Given an equal footing, Tony Abbott would have wiped the floor with him… I think that Abbott is simply doing his bit to limit the damage to the Party, but doesn’t want to actually take any damage himself.

    He wasn’t comfortable

  54. Me too Tony. I didn’t think they’d touch that one with a 2ft pole.

  55. Joni, I think that is a most provocative comment.

    A bit quick off the mark too.

    I’ve highlighted the inconsistency in the commentary and standards of others. That seems to make you uncomfortable.

    I’ll stop posting when I wish, so far I’ve provided about one tenth of the commentary that I received.

    So if you don’t wish to engage, that’s your call, not mine.

  56. I wish someone would cut Abbott’s ears off. They don’t suit him.

    I also wish someone will remind Hockey that he himself is a two-faced liar.

    Tom, were you really kicked out the pub, or was it a restaurant? Did you get too drunk and abuse the lowly paid waitress who denied that she was better off under WorkChoices.

  57. Tough Tom.

  58. Good. Agree to disagree. I don’t like it when someone is advised to ‘get your own blog’ or ‘don’t come back if you don’t like it’. That doesn’t resolve anything, but often leads to (semi?) permanent splits.

    Tom is too good a member to lose over a minor disagreement, so I’m glad he hasn’t spat the dummy. (Who else would do the Friday Footy thread?)

  59. It’s much easier to resort to abuse than admitting that you obviously know nothing about different standards of evidence, ie criminal vs civil, balance of probability vs beyond reasonable doubt.

    Yup. But I pointed out the fact that these differences mean nothing in the current context.

    Funny how the guy who started his previous post with calling me a “pedantic tool” complains about abuse!

    I’ve not pressed either of you, at ANY stage, as annoyingly as you both were willing to pester me.

    *laugh* No, you simply make “jokes” constantly at my expense, call me a tool, and then act outraged that someone calls you on it.

    It’s not my blog, so I can’t make you piss off. But I sure as hell am beyond playing nice whilst you act like a dick. The fact you kept a grudge is what brought this on – I had been “behaving myself” trying to keep threads on topic & somewhat civil.

  60. Sorry Tony – he is deliberately disruptive. I see no reason to have him here. Others who have other opinions are not.

  61. I’ve forgotten most of the hasbeen-alition but I still have a deepseated dislike for Abbott too miglo. I’d proudly wear his ears on my aerial.

  62. I respectfully disagree, Joni. Tom brings a degree of colour, and, dare I say it, humour, to this place that, I, for one, appreciate.

  63. I understand your POV, Tony. But he (IMHO) goes out of his way to insult others.

  64. This one took me a while to conjure up, but . . . Abbott’s ears – are like wabbit’s ears.

    Laughing to self.

  65. “Tom is too good a member to lose over a minor disagreement, so I’m glad he hasn’t spat the dummy.”

    I think Tom is built (& thinks) hard, to last. If he was to leave out of perceived insult then I’ve seriously mijudged his capacity (I doubt it).

  66. (Over-cooma-ing due to over-drinking :oops:)

  67. He may have not spat the dummy, but I have.

  68. He also brings dissention and acts like a petulant child when confronted. Perhaps not ever really reading the fotty thread lowers his appeal to me, but the fact he keeps sniping away whenever I make my opinion known (and even when I haven’t) reduces any appeal he might otherwise have to zero for me.

    I don’t run the blog though – so I’m not kicking him out. I’m simply no longer keeping my mouth shut when he acts like an ass.

  69. fotty = footy

    …but hey – I don’t even read the thread!

  70. I’m (respectfully) with Tony.

    Tom is a cool cat.

    Apart from the pleasure he takes in subtly mindf@cking contributors…he has the undeniable nads that it takes to post his own threads & respond in kind. My fave commenters here are outside of the box & only very marginally aligned. Tomeofmelb is sure one of ’em.

  71. Can we kick reb out too?

  72. “but the fact he keeps sniping away whenever I make my opinion known (and even when I haven’t) reduces any appeal he might otherwise have to zero for me”

    That is a personal interpretation, one that I understand but personal nonetheless.

    Tom has been exquisitely careful about every sentence he’s ever put here. That’s why he trips people up IMO.

  73. I’m off to bed in any case. Work in the morning and all…

    On topic: looks like Labor got their acts sorted out and put together a defence for Swan. They have released a set of emails countering the “special treatment for mates” narrative.

  74. That is a personal interpretation, one that I understand but personal nonetheless.

    Well, it is the interpretation he chooses to make known. After all, he states he’ll “leave B.Tolputt alone now” afterwards… Pretty strange for someone not targetting me in particular wouldn’t you think?

    But I really must hit the sack. ‘Night all.

  75. I understand where you’re coming from, Joni, and I’ve got no reason to defend Tom – we don’t usually engage at all – but I do think you might have misjudged him, as I believe he really does have plenty to offer. (I think Miglo could attest to his unique sense of humour.)

  76. Off to bed myself. Have great UFO stories on my iPod to listen to.

    Will surely wake up in fear of abduction.

  77. Yes Tom – I have had a dummy spit. Let me sleep on it and see how I feel in the morning.

    Update: Tom’s comments are now going into moderation.

  78. Maybe you will get abducted by Duck Dodgers?

  79. Boohoo….off to bed for the daywalkers.

  80. Nice few days worth of intrigue though all.

    None of my observations are to be construed as judgement.

  81. I really feel no compulsion to swing either way now: the compulsion was inversely proportional to bullshit prior.

    Honesty IS THE BEST POLICY.

    Obviously it’s sadly lacking in our “representatives”.

    For this reason alone Tom should be lauded for always being on target.

    I think the Lib’s will suffer.

    Rudd’s levels of support were unsustainable anyway.

  82. Honesty would think multi-generationally, and order the number 18 special from the Chinese takeaway twenty-odd years early, and boast about its incompleteness at the Charity Ball. (And that’s my last mindf*ck for tonight.)

  83. “Honesty would think multi-generationally”

    Do you mean honesty or wisdom?

    I agree, but “self” is overriding for a majority.

    [I’m OK, f@ck you jack] is a very human trait.

    Honesty seems to have blinkers when it comes to extending one’s thoughts beyond…”am I hungry?”….”me, me, me…”…..”I want more…”…….”They act different, I am wary”……

    I wonder sometimes if there is a correlation between breeding your own spawn & thinking beyond your own immediacy.
    Personally I could have given a squirt about the rest of humanity (the biggest cancer ever to be seen to paraphrase Wolverine Blues) before I had a child whose future became my ultimate imperative.

    Like it or not we are pre-programmed-ordained to perpetuate ourselves (genotype, species etc>).

    So, I do try to think multi-generationally these days. F@ck, it can give you a headache. Like trying to play “pick-up-stix” on spongy carpet.

  84. If you go by the gist of this mornings news bulletins then Rudd is absolutely OK, Swan is mostly OK and Turnbull is in deep deep shit.

    Also latest Essential poll taken at a time things were looking really bad for the government over this showed no movement with Labour steady on 57-43.

    This form of attacking the government and individual ministers is not gelling with the public and the quicker the opposition learns this the better. There have been some major policy issues that needed serious debate and close scrutiny that have been let slide because of the nonsense they have engaged in since the last election.

    Maybe it’s because the opposition are so talentless and inept they can’t formulate decent policies themselves nor know how to debate government policies on substance. Whatever the reason the opposition is failing badly and needs to do something.

    On the positive side the sheer stupidity and ineptness of the opposition in their lame attacks on the government is getting Blogocrats and other blogs unprecedented hits and makes for great discussion.

  85. Malcolms up on Sunrise.

  86. Cast of thousands. Hoss rang Gretch on Saturday – to wish him well re: health issues.

  87. Please let us know how he goes brian?

    Several bulletins were going on this morning about how Costello’s timing was out yet again, which shows what they think of Turnbull’s future.

    According to the news the other day Turnbull was going around saying “off the record” there was evidence to bring down Rudd. Not Swan but Rudd, and nearly all Turnbull’s initial attacks were on Rudd, demanding Rudd immediately stand down.

    Now Turnbull has to answer how it is that he stated the first the Liberals knew of the email was when it appeared in the Lewis Tele piece, yet Abetz read it word for word the day before at Senate Estimates and off the record Turnbull was going on about documentation that would be bad for Rudd, not Swan but Rudd.

    I maybe mistaken, but doesn’t that seem to refer to the email that he says he knew nothing about until it appeared in the Tele a few weeks after he had started going on about damning documentary evidence?

  88. B.Tolputt, on June 22nd, 2009 at 11:38 pm

    Ben, interesting, the last email in your link, copied below.
    Now why would Grech think that complaints had been made personally to the PM and recommend that the PM should refrain from reassuring whoever was making them.

    Who exactly did he think/know might be going directly to the PM to complain, and to complain about what exactly? Not getting assistance?
    Who wasn’t getting assistance?

    “Another email dated April 17 from Dr Charlton to Mr Grech reads:

    “Hi Godwin,
    The PM asked this morning for an update on how the car dealer financing vehicle is operating.”

    In the email Dr Charlton goes on to explain that Mr Rudd had heard good reports from some quarters such as the MTAA, which said 500 dealers would have been “lost” without OzCar.

    In his reply to Dr Charlton, sent 20 minutes later, Mr Grech explains how the scheme is progressing and finishes the email with the sentence:

    “I would strongly advise that the PM refrain if possible from making any reassuring undertakings to individual representations that he may receive – try to direct the complaints to Treasury (me).
    Godwin
    17 April 2009.”

  89. Hoss is up. Ch 7 made space for him to have a chat. Made a special trip down to the lawn with Koch after he heard the news. ie no coat, fog in Canberra. Explaining that Godwin worked for him (Hoss) some years back.

    Bet a lot of other PS’s would like get-well calls from Members and ex-bosses.

  90. One thing that sticks in my craw is what and where was Grant’s first contact to secure finance from this scheme?

    So far we’ve seen a paper trail concerning Grant’s case but not the starting point, doesn’t anyone find this odd?

  91. Hmm . . .as an aside. Not much chat on who in Treasury faked the e-mail. Not even speculation.

  92. Did anyone else notice a subtle change in Turnbull’s comments on the emails origin?

    On Saturday he said:

    The email was not composed by anybody in the Liberal Party. It was not composed by anybody in the Opposition.

    Now he is only willing to say:

    The email was not created or composed nor was the text provided to the News Limited journalist Steve Lewis by anybody in the Opposition.

    Also, remember that an email has been used in the past to try and benefit Malcolm:

    Opposition treasury spokesman Malcolm Turnbull has been forced to publicly support leader Brendan Nelson’s proposed cut in petrol tax after a leaked email exposed deep divisions between them on the issue.

  93. scaper, I would like to see some timeline for the whole saga.
    When was the fake email sent?
    Does anyone have a link to it, I haven’t seen it yet.

  94. Turnbull’s stuffed – even Shamahan is having a go now.

    http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25674946-17301,00.html

    YOU could see defeat forming on the faces of Liberal MPs yesterday just when they should have been growing convinced they could secure a chance of winning the next election.

    The Prime Minister is now in the clear, the Treasurer will survive and the Leader of the Opposition’s character and political judgment are being seriously questioned. The Coalition has snatched defeat from the jaws of victory – an overreaching has led to a disastrous shortfall.

    Only days after Peter Costello stilled Liberal leadership destabilisation and sheathed his parliamentary career, only two weeks after a ministerial scalp had been claimed and as the Coalition put forward a seemingly watertight case that Swan had misled parliament, the Coalition looked gutted.

    So did Turnbull….

    But haste, impatience and political inexperience have left Turnbull empty-handed, under siege and in front of backbenchers with defeat on their faces. Something his colleagues do not deny.

  95. It seems Lenore Taylor understands cause and effect (at least, how those things apply in the wonderful world of ‘spin’)…

    The new email evidence does not disprove the allegation that Swan and his office gave Grant special treatment, but it does muddy the case against Swan. That case was also heavily reliant on Grech’s evidence that Grant was a special case, and not just any other constituent, evidence that must now be seen as less credible given that his email was faked.

  96. Mobius Ecko, on June 23rd, 2009 at 7:30 am

    Wednesday’s little bout of fatherly advice at the Mid-Winter Ball is still relevant to that; relevant enough for Glenn Milne to play time-master with it yesterday, as IIRC Possum over at Crikey noted; and suspicious minds do wonder why someone would try to cast doubt over that exchange days after the rest of the circus had moved on.

  97. He seems to have an interesting turn of phrase, does Possum: You’d have to be a lead poisoned crackhead to believe this.

  98. johnd, I don’t think we will learn anything of the email until the AFP investigation is concluded, in fact I feel that the whole truth of the matter will not come out in full but I’m hopeful.

    A while back I mentioned a scandal, this was not it but I did hear whispers of an email but no details that suggests that only a few on the top rung of the Coalition are involved.

    I will reveal the so called ‘scandal’ in the next day or two which compared to this potential saga is relatively mild.

  99. Now why would Grech think that complaints had been made personally to the PM and recommend that the PM should refrain from reassuring whoever was making them.

    Who exactly did he think/know might be going directly to the PM to complain, and to complain about what exactly? Not getting assistance? Who wasn’t getting assistance?

    Could be anyone and/or everyone. You need to be looking at the emails with Liberal-coloured glasses to use that line of questioning seriously.

    To be clear, there is enough evidence to cast aspersions on Swan, but nothing concrete. There is no “smoking gun” like there was with Fitzgibbon, no definite proof that wrong was done.

    If the Liberals had stuck to the aspersions (without the fradulent “smoking gun” email they had been peddling), they would have setup Swan for a fall another one or two “issues” in the future. They just would have needed to keep chipping away.

    I personally wouldn’t have liked it, but that’s how the smart political game is played. they overplayed their hand and now Swan looks to be cleared as the media hyenas crowd in for a real kill…. Turnbull’s career as Liberal Leader.

  100. I will reveal the so called ’scandal’ in the next day or two which compared to this potential saga is relatively mild.

    Is it an anti-Liberal or anti-Labor one? Just curious, as I know there are weasels in both parties.

  101. My head hurts. #@%* Godwin #%$&^@ Grech.

  102. You were playing the shots game with the interviews again weren’t you, Tony? I personally also feel like @#$%, but for me it’s the flu.

    There are only two people in this whole fiasco I feel sorry for. Godwin Grech (who should never have been put into that situation) and myself (who should never have to watched Abbott & Albanese with a flu headache).

  103. bacchus, on June 23rd, 2009 at 8:01 am

    Wow, even when they lose, they win (almost, but for something which deprived them unfairly of their otherwise imminent victory). The clear shot on Swan line only works if there was a clear shot, so repeating that narrative as part of the retreat is kinda Pyrrhic, too. But typical. Perhaps.

  104. It’s funny how even words have their 15 minutes of fame. Take ‘overreaching’. I’ve heard and read that word more in the last 24 hours than I had in total before that.

  105. Godwin’s Law takes on a new meaning. LOL.

    Looks like the Avuncular One has his problems as well. ‘Just rang Godwin to check on his health?’ – ‘Even though I hadn’t spoken to him for a few years’.

    Really?

  106. And while I’m thinking on it, a common complaint about the Rudd Labor Government is that they fail to explain what they’re doing and why. Half the problem for Swan is that the public still don’t know what or why OzCar is; and the media seem equally happy to leave the public record light on detail about that even as they’re waving OzCar around this week and last as if it has some self-evidence of purpose and/or function.

  107. (Came across this one in my travels, N5, in case you hadn’t seen it yet…it seemed to be a start on the techno-informo-particpato-demo project: Wikis to broaden policy debate.)

  108. Legion, on June 23rd, 2009 at 9:04 am Said:

    the public still don’t know what or why OzCar is

    Indeed! Not many understand it has no legislative imprimatur at this point and therefore it is a hypothetical. Not a penny loaned. No beneficiaries.

    But a few casualities. LOL.

  109. This has got to hurt

    Turnbull admits Rudd in clear over OzCar

  110. Legion, on June 23rd, 2009 at 9:09

    Hadn’t seen that article, but I knew things were in the pipeline. Good to see that Gruen from Troppo get the gig. http://clubtroppo.com.au/

  111. B.Tolputt – if you have the flu you shouldn’t be posting and putting us all at risk! Isolation is recommended… 😉

    As for Utegate:

    Game set and match: Rudd & Swan

    Anyone on the Opposition who believes this attack is sustainable needs to go back and re-read The Art of War … political suicide now …

    This will also not help the Independents or Greens …

    As for the Government I’d say seek a reason to call a DD, ASAP, and decimate the Coalition once and for all …

    … the ALP need to retain power (gain in the Senate) for at least a decade to get up most of the current policies, demonstrate that they can get the nation back into the black (and kill that albatross once and for all) and be in power as the infrastructure programs come to completion …

    … really sort out education, health, water (the drought has broken in SE Qld but it will be back …), the Murray-Darling, climate change, alternative energy sources etc

    The ALP also need to sort out the State governments – each one seems to be run by incompetents backed by incompetents …

    Time to move on, seize the moment – run the country!

  112. I looked at my bank balance this morning and it looks like Mrs Walrus raided it yesterday to go shopping.

    Do any of you think it might be worth trying something like the Nigerian Email Scam on Malcolm Turnbull ?

    I think he might fall for it……..!

  113. Very interesting, Legion. Not only does it show Tanner as being ahead of the curve, but that he has made a very astute appointment in Nicholas Gruen, who definitely knows his Web 2.0.

  114. Last night Joni sent me an email advising me that he had banned my ip address from the site, too “disruptive” according to Joni.

    He said he would think about my ban overnight. In my reply, I suggested he not do me any favours.

    But I’ve also thought about it overnight, and I’ve decided that I’m not going to participate on a site where access is available on a whim.

    I also now don’t feel inclined to participate given the inconsistent/random/hypocritical “rules” about who is and who isn’t disruptive, and the arbitrary blocking of access. I think I’ve been on the receiving end of plenty of “disruption”, certainly far more than I’ve distributed and certainly more than over the last week or 2.

    Those that so willingly dish out the ‘disruption” get all sulky and sooky when a similar (though much more modest) standard is applied in return.

    I’ve also pointed out to Joni that this site has lost many good contributors as a result of the ganging up mentality that can occur here. The focus can be very narrow and insular without people that are willing to test. I’ve often sought to take on that testing role.

    I’m not good at complying with the rules that small minded people seek to impose on me. This is probably reflected in my somewhat annoying blogging manner, but then this has probably also made me reasonably successful in my non blogging life.

    So I’ve decided not to play by Joni’s rules, which means I’m off.

    Thanks for fun exchanges I’ve had with many regular contributors; it’s generally been a hoot. I’ve particularly enjoyed the company of Toiletboss, Miglo, reb, N5, Adrian, Min, (perhaps even the Mayor) and most of the other regulars.

    And I’ll leave the last word to the pedants.

    Regards

    TOM

  115. Legion, on June 23rd, 2009 at 9:04 am Said:

    they fail to explain what they’re doing and why.

    That raises several issues. I’ll bet the number of press releases hasn’t declined. Getting them to run is out of Government’s hands of course.

    Second, the level of Government advertising is way, way down. This a consequence of an election promise.

    To some extent this translates to an impression of a ‘do nothing’ government, which is well-wide of the mark.

  116. No dummy spitting here…. just access has been turned off

    joni: Tom – reb thinks (and I agree) that I was too harsh and too rash last night in adding your IP to the spam list…. apologies.

  117. Government 2.0 Taskforce blog.

  118. You know, if I could embed a sneeze emoticon in this post I would 😛

    I think the Opposition (as a whole) knows that this is botched. Their media counterparts will try to salvage their reputation by rewriting history. Some Liberals will keep beating the dead horse, but on the whole – I think the Coalition will try to remove this failure from the public eye.

  119. Blog-press Release

    Last night I acted rashly in putting Tom’s IP address on the spam list. I acted badly, and for this I make an apology to the house (I hope I have not breeched the ministerial code and have to resign).

    Tom – it is a fine line that I have to tread between moderator and commentor. Sometimes I make the wrong calls, and for that I apologise to you.

  120. Sensible call, joni, nicely done …

    (thought you were joking, actually)

  121. Nature 5, on June 23rd, 2009 at 9:23 am

    I was going to add lazy and sensationalist MSM journalism which feigns familiarity with an issue du jour but provides no deep-context or explanatory background for the subjects about which it writes at a furious pace. One would think it wouldn’t be too much to ask, instead of discovering that Grech is a lovely Christian boy with visitors of assorted ages coming and going from his Godwin Scissor-gardening-hands home, what he actually does and was meant to be doing in his job at Treasury.

  122. FIne Joni, nonetheless –

    Last night Joni sent me an email advising me that he had banned my ip address from the site, too “disruptive” according to Joni.

    He said he would think about my ban overnight. In my reply, I suggested he not do me any favours.

    But I’ve also thought about it overnight, and I’ve decided that I’m not going to participate on a site where access is available on a whim.

    I also now don’t feel inclined to participate given the inconsistent/random/hypocritical “rules” about who is and who isn’t disruptive, and the arbitrary blocking of access. I think I’ve been on the receiving end of plenty of “disruption”, certainly far more than I’ve distributed and certainly more than over the last week or 2.

    Those that so willingly dish out the ‘disruption” get all sulky and sooky when a similar (though much more modest) standard is applied in return.

    I’ve also pointed out to Joni that this site has lost many good contributors as a result of the ganging up mentality that can occur here. The focus can be very narrow and insular without people that are willing to test. I’ve often sought to take on that testing role.

    I’m not good at complying with the rules that small minded people seek to impose on me. This is probably reflected in my somewhat annoying blogging manner, but then this has probably also made me reasonably successful in my non blogging life.

    So I’ve decided not to play by Joni’s rules, which means I’m off.

    Thanks for fun exchanges I’ve had with many regular contributors; it’s generally been a hoot. I’ve particularly enjoyed the company of Toiletboss, Miglo, reb, N5, Adrian, Min, (perhaps even the Mayor) and most of the other regulars.

    And I’ll leave the last word to the pedants.

    Regards

    TOM

  123. Well done Joni. (I blame Godwin Grech.)

  124. joni, on June 23rd, 2009 at 9:33 am

    Let me just quote from the illuminato at Troppo about Web 2.0:

    It has been interesting to see reactions so far. Even some of the angry responses have nuggets of useful insight. Hopefully some of the suggestions will be taken on board – a lot of them seem to be in line with Nicholas’s remarks about ‘engineering for serendipity’.

    Serendip is good.

  125. ToM, even your resignation is contradictory …

    At least, joni, was graceful about admitting his mistake …

    Talk about being sooky …

    … you will be missed – but as they say in the boardroom – one pencil breaks you just get another one, or, if a leaf falls from the tree another one will grow …

  126. Tom of Melbourne, on June 23rd, 2009 at 9:42 am Said:
    “I’m not good at complying with the rules that small minded people seek to impose on me. This is probably reflected in my somewhat annoying blogging manner, but then this has probably also made me reasonably successful in my non blogging life.”

    I’ve seen similar situations develop with employees in the workplace. Often the most irritating employee becomes a most valuable employee once given appropriate responsibilty.

    Perhaps Tom should be asked to share the task of moderating.

  127. What to say? I pointed out some time ago that PC has the policy of ‘be nice or be binned’ with the definition of ‘nice’ solely in the hands of PC. Arbitrary? Most certainly but at least one knows what the ‘rule’ is – what the tone should be. It serves as a guide.

    To date there has been no stated policy as to how this site is governed which has its advantages but also has a significant downside which is now apparent. In my opinion, Tom is a contributor who should (must?) not be lost.

    Tom has every right to be aggrieved. He has every right to feel discriminated against in an arbitrary fashion (because he has). The owners of this Blog also have every right to act in any way they see fit but some (many?) will see last night’s action as being arbitrary and unfair.

    When ‘rights’ collide as they have in this instance, then there are only losers all round. Tom won’t be back he says because of his perceived and actual treatment. That’s a great pity. It’s my view that some compromise is possible (not sure what that is) and perhaps is best done out of public view.

    I hope that’s already underway.

  128. You know, one thing we haven’t really touched on is the existence of a person, somewhere out there, known possibly only to Godwin Grech and perhaps the Federal Police, who has drafted up a phony and fraudulent email, for whatever motivation but including the bringing down of a government, and who must be absolutely shitting him or herself right now. I doubt, given his apparent certainty, that Turnbull is connected, but can you imagine what will happen when this person is caught up with? This story is far from finished and whilst I accept that there may be an unhealthy element of voyeurism in my attitude, I am just busting to watch the next instalment.

  129. Interesting, James, and here I was just assuming young Godwin was the mastermind behind this fiendish plot.

  130. Perhaps Tom should be asked to share the task of moderating

    LOL!

    johnd – I’ve practised the promote the “squeaky wheel”, myself and agree sometimes it works – I’ve also had to train/retrain/counsel/discipline and terminate …

    … I’ve had employees resign thinking that it would not be accepted because they had “skills” and “talents” that were irreplaceable … usually they were paid up on the spot – only once did I let a supervisor squirm for a week … unfortunately to demonstrate who had control over the workplace – when he left, producivity climbed …

    … but then this isn’t a workplace is it …

  131. That’s a very good point James.

    Someone or someones is/are most definitely shitting themselves out there right now.

    Also, what is interesting is that Joe Hockey took it upon himself to make a personal phone call to Godwin Grech last night ostensibly to “see how he was doing”.

    An interesting move given that there’s an AFP investigation at the moment.

  132. It could be Godwin (what a great name for a political scandal) but I’m assuming that because the Feds are seeking to interview others, the trail hasn’t ended. Big assumption.

  133. Tony, on June 23rd, 2009 at 10:29 am

    A phantom email deserves a phantom ‘composer’, methinks; which leaves only ‘distributors’ to describe ‘recollections’ of the ghost (in the machine) who walks.

  134. … and for the record – I wholeheartedly, endorse N5’s comments @ 10:24 …

    … under the circumstances its ToM’s call now …

    … monkeys on the back an’ all that …

    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++
    back to topic,

    James and Tony – I agree ($#!t that’s twice in one post!) ’twill be most interesting to see how this finally concludes (or maybe it will just petre out …). Charges (serious) need to be laid against the perpetrators whoever they are … this type of behaviour is an attack not just on the Government (and senior Ministers) of the day but on our Australian heritage of fair play …

  135. Reb, I get the feeling that Godwin might have been played like a saxophone in all of this. Again, I could be totally wrong but he doesn’t strike me as the type to create such a massive fraud.

    I’m not sure there’s anything in Hockey’s call other than what he’s said. It’s pretty clear the Grech is under enormous strain, and has been for days, weeks. Now whether he brought that on himself will be revealed in time but Hockey has been up front about the contact and should be taken on face value until it’s shown otherwise.

  136. How much does the Daily Telegraph have to answer for?

    Lewis is saying he got the email by it being read to him over the phone from an informer he won’t name. Lewis won’t go into the detail of what was read to him such as headers, To: From: CC: etc.

    The Daily Telegraph mocked up an email format of the verbal one read to Lewis to publish in their edition, making it look like a genuine copy of a full email to the average reader.

    If you believe Lewis in his claim he got the email by it being read to him over the phone, then how bad is it for the Tele to make a mock-up to make it look like a genuine electronic email they had received?

    Btw it is now only Pier Ackerman who believes Labor has lost and are in deep trouble with Malcolm looking like a winner. Just about every other right wing opinion writer has abandoned poor Malcolm, but we don’t know about Bolt who has been out of country during all this.

    Someone mentioned time lines, and I posted the link to Possum who is the only one who has attempted any sort of timeline. What is pertinent is that Malcolm Turnbull has been hinting since June 4th about some sort of correspondence he knows exists and he believed to be irrefutable evidence of a Rudd dodgy dealing in relation to a car dealer mate.

    Also Turnbull hasn’t explained the disparity between his statement that the first he and the Liberal Party saw of the email was when it (apparent mock-up) was printed in the Tele on a Saturday, yet Senator Abetz read it out in full in Senate Estimates the day before and used it as a basis for his grilling of Grech.

  137. All Godwin things come in threes…Guy Beres – ‘Utegate’ and related codswallop:

    In any case, now that it has emerged that the email at the centre of the scandal is a “fraud”, it only remains to be seen just who composed the email, if this indeed can be determined by the AFP. It seems to me that there are only really three plausible motives for the hoax:

    1) The “email” was produced by someone with ties to (or sympathy for) the Government who hoped to trick the Opposition into taking the bait and overextending its reach.

    2) The “email” was produced by someone with ties to (or sympathy for) the Opposition who hoped to generate a scandal from the affair.

    3) The “email” was produced as a joke or by someone in a somewhat lighthearted vain and the Opposition and the media have caught wind of it and run with it.

  138. Tom please don’t leave Tom, Tom we need you, don’t go Toooooommmmm, sob sob.

  139. Tom I came back.

  140. “Rudd has no case to answer” concedes Turnbull.

    I reckon the Libs are in serious trouble.

    Even if they continue to pursue Swan, they will have to prove that the QLD car dealer in question received preferential treatment.

    This is a very difficult thing to prove unless that car dealership did materially benefit from the actions of Wayne Swan.

    From what we’ve heard so far, it looks like he didn’t..

    So if if the Libs continue to pursue Swan over this, they are only going to end up with even more egg on their bitter and twisted little faces.

  141. Apologies for O/T,

    But I’ve just been reading my grandfather’s WW1 record from an extremely interesting (and very easy to use) site I got from Mr Tanner’s speech at the Taskforce 2.0 link: Mapping our Anzacs

  142. (I’m going to miss the running – and highly amusing – Tom-Miglo routine.)

  143. I wouldn’t be surprised if there is some common ground between who composed the email and who bought it to the attention of the media.

    TB Queensland, on June 23rd, 2009 at 10:30 am

    I was always on the lookout for those making themselves indispensable. Generally the ones that progressed up the ladder fastest were those who were making themselves dispensable.

  144. James (et al)

    Malcolm is (bizzarly) now maintaining that the Opposition acted on the basis of Godwin’s testimony, which as we all know, Godwin himself confessed that his recollection may not be accurate.

    The Libs have based their entire accusations on the basis of:

    1. an email which they don’t whether they’ve seen or not. Malcolm says “no” but Senator Abetz seems to have a copy of, or at least knows its contents.

    and

    2. The hazy recollection of Godwin.

    They are now in the precarious position of trying to justify that they acted in good conscience based on this “information”

    Up shit creek I reckon.

    Rudd is considering legal action.

    No wonder Malcolm is backing away at a million miles an hour.

    He will know that if he can’t pin anything on Rudd for misleadind parliament (which was his accusation), then he could be up for defamation.

  145. Legion@10:46

    Though I like a conspiracy theory as much as the next man – the simplest explanation is the best.

    The e-mail was written in Treasury by someone to get Grant special attention. The trail leads into Treasury – it may lead to a particular workstation, from there it may lead to a person or persons of interest. The timestamp on the original e-mail may limit it to people working in the vicinity at that time. There is evidence. There will be probabilities. There wont be proof.

    The trouble with the ‘dirty tricks’ angle – is that at any stage it could have become a dud. ie having a hard copy, Godwin not being in front of Senate Estimates, Malcolm not liking it. Too many possible point failures. A very long shot . . . .

    Simplest explanation is that it was written to do what it said it was suppossed to do.

  146. reb, on June 23rd, 2009 at 10:49 am Said:
    “This is a very difficult thing to prove unless that car dealership did materially benefit from the actions of Wayne Swan.”

    On the other hand, if the car dealer felt he was missing out, or going to miss out, on getting assistance, who would he approach.

    A timeline of the all emails, real or fake, would help immensely.

  147. johnd, absolutely!

    …always had a protege, all of them successful (“…what! They’ll just take your job..!” – that was the plan! … quickest way to move on!) … … and in the end the ladder runs out and you work for yourself!

  148. Legal action by Rudd. Is he serious? That, I don’t agree with. Aside from anything else, it could conceivably have a chilling effect on future cases which might rely on a whistleblowers’s information.

  149. I do not agree with the legal action either – all is fair in politics, and Turnbull should just have to live with the consequences of his statements without any threat of legal action.

  150. I have to agree with brian, much as I would like to otherwise. Occam’s Razor suggests that the email was created by someone either trying to get Godwin Grech to give the guy special behaviour or someone trying to get either Godwin Grech or Andrew Charlton into trouble. There are too many risks for it to have been really targeted at Malcolm Turnbull.

    It might have escalated from there as people higher up the ladder got a hold of the email, but I don’t think the initial intent was to catch the Opposition in this type of tangle.

    That said, Malcolm must have been told this was good to go by someone. I cannot believe that the entire Liberal Party was clueless about the email before it blew up.

  151. F**king hell – more bloody screaming offspring in the office today…!!

  152. Get in the gutter reb.

  153. He will know that if he can’t pin anything on Rudd for misleadind parliament (which was his accusation), then he could be up for defamation.

    Oh, did someone make unreasonable and unsustainable claims outside Parliament? And did someone else rehearse their demands for what should occur as a consequence and next in ‘mitigation’ form? Didn’t notice that. And someone has only performed half his mitigation thus far? And we know how much some people like having to say “sorry”, especially if they have to say “sorry” all on their own and not because they made up a fictional mutualiser. 😉

  154. I don’t think legal action is necessary or called for. If Rudd is seriously considering it (rather than simply ramping up the effects of Malcolm’s fuggup in the media) – he needs to be slapped down, hard by someone with more sense (Gillard?).

    And yes, “fuggup” is a nonsense word that just happens to sound right. 😛

  155. Reb, I agree that Turnbull is a lame duck. Assuming no part in any “conspiracy” I kind of feel sorry for Turnbull in that he was probably entitled to rely on Grech’s evidence to some extent and he probably believed the email was genuine. His mistake was not checking its veracity, he was too impatient.

    However, if I were in Rudd’s shoes, I would tread very carefully here. It would be in his interests to keep Turnbull opposite rather than risk someone else who he may not be able to fillet in the next election campaign. I don’t think there’s much doubt really that Treasury acted in its dealings with Grant on the basis that they had better not f$%k it up, he being Rudd’s mate. In the circumstances Rudd could not be in a stronger position. He has some sympathy with the electorate and the media and his opponents could not be more wounded. Legal action can’t achieve anything more than put the focus back onto Rudd’s mateship with a used car dealer. If I were him I would accept the victory gratefully and move on, with a nice ace up my sleeve for the next time my character, integrity, and relationships are questioned.

  156. Legal action might also reinforce the characterisation of Rudd some make – that of the nerdy schoolboy – who, in this case, could be seen to be ‘crying to teacher’.

  157. Legal action? Wrong move … the ALP has the Libs in check right now – legal action will change that – a checkmate move should be political not legal …

    … lets see just how smart the ALP front bench is …

    … sometimes the right decision is to do nothing …

  158. If I were him I would accept the victory gratefully and move on, with a nice ace up my sleeve for the next time my character, integrity, and relationships are questioned.

    That’s the reason that the Opposition cannot keep Malcolm Turnbull around. With the fiction(?) that he was solely responsible for the stuff up and that he has had to resign because of it – they might claw back some credibility for the next time they need to attack the government. If they keep Turnbull, any attacks (solid or not) will be weakened by his delivery of them.

    Labor probably knows this and so are calling for his head so they can claim victory when the Liberals force Turnbull to resign. I don’t think they really want to get rid of him, but know that he is gone regardless and are “trying to make hay while the sun shines” (so to speak)

  159. Rudd WON’T take legal action. The whole MSM would go nuts and Rudd would lose big time.

    It’s a case of – I COULD get heaps but I’m a good fellow and so forgiving.

    My moral high ground will now be even higher (if that’s possible).

  160. Ben, I agree with all of that and I think it is a mistake by the ALP. I remember the Libs had a rule once to not do anything that would cause Simon Crean to lose the leadership. In fact, Rudd could score a lot of points by accepting Turnbull’s invitation for the “mutual apology”. I don’t really think either of them have much to apologise for, it’s politics after all, but an apology from Rudd from an apparent higher moral ground would do a great deal to rid himself of the “ruthless” reputation that he has.

  161. Gee, I go and do a few site visits and come back to find that Tom has left!

    I would have to say that over the years Tom has given me the hardest time on Blogocracy and Blogocrats, there has been another but pissants don’t qualify.

    I have learnt to have a respect for Tom as he calls it how he sees it, although he seems a bit union-centric which is his right I suppose.

    Anyway, I hope he changes his mind down the track as he adds a bit of colour to this blog which is a good thing, being a man of conviction he might not be back but we will have to wait and see.

  162. I wonder if the AFP kept searching once they found the fake email. There couldn’t be a real one hidden behind or underneath the fake one could there?

  163. James of North Melbourne, on June 23rd, 2009 at 11:32 am

    And why would Rudd be apologising for something he never said, James? Because Malcolm says that’s an even break?

  164. Grech’s home egged overnight.

    http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25676856-12377,00.html

    I feel sorry for this guy, his career most probably ruined and being a loner it would not be much that could push him over the edge!

    Oh well.

  165. I wonder if the AFP kept searching once they found the fake email. There couldn’t be a real one hidden behind or underneath the fake one could there?

    *laugh* That’s simply a bit of wishful thinking… Besides, the AFP are not investigating a case of “misleading parliament”, they’re looking into a case of fraud involving federal government computers. Even if they did find a real “smoking gun” email as you suggest, unless if assists them in tracking down the fraud – they’ll be professionally bound to leave it alone.

    Whistle-blowers aside of course. I get the feeling that the men on the ground in the AFP are less politically involved than that though.

  166. Ben@11.11

    Sorry Ben. Why are you sorry about agreeing with me? 🙂

    Not serious. Apologies.
    Its interesting that the Feds. nailed the receiving end e-mail pretty fast. Yet . . . .they’ve been slow revealing the sender. Golly . . . they’d have had the run of Treasury Offices over the weekend surely?

    I sense that the former was politically advantageous – the latter would have re focused media on Swan ie politically bad.

    Hmm . . .anyone want to dust for fingerprints? There’s a short list of probables . . . .

  167. Speaking of what was said and not said: What was Mr Tanner alluding to in parliament yesterday when he warned ‘those opposite’ not to go rushing back to their offices to delete emails? Just being mischievous under parliamentary privelege, or do they really suspect Liberal involvement?

  168. It was just a matter of time..

    Tom-o-Gate

  169. Last night Joni sent me an email advising me that he had banned my ip address from the site, too “disruptive” according to Joni.

    I think that joni may have been somewhat unfair to tom here, considering that there are a couple of others whose commenting behaviour deserves moderation but they just keep on without anything being said.

    I’d like to offer my support of nitpicker tom and his unique humour. Please have a re-think after joni’s apology tom.

    Those that so willingly dish out the ‘disruption” get all sulky and sooky when a similar (though much more modest) standard is applied in return.

    Some people get extremely churlish and childish when challenged on an issue and their response tends to be personal attack rather than defence of argument.

    I’d like to protest at james of north melbourne’s exchange with N5 the other day which I thought was out of line, yet no complaints were made and nothing said.

    The ‘if you want to play with the big boys’ comment was so full of macho bravado and I just thought to myself ‘just who do you think you are james? The constant and crude ‘mindfuck’ references are more suited to timmeh blair’s blog than this one and is quite inappropriate and unnecessary – yet nothing is said even though we’ve previously been asked to self censor our language in deference to others. On the one hand james is extolling the virtues of ‘family values’, the DLP (stuck in the 1950’s right wing christianity) and morals etc, yet his crude posts are at odds with his ‘belief system’.

    I’ve also pointed out to Joni that this site has lost many good contributors as a result of the ganging up mentality that can occur here.

    Yes, one of my complaints too, this type of behaviour that should be stopped as soon as it starts. A comments policy is necessary.

  170. Legion, understand that I am not calling on Rudd to apologise because Turnbull necessarily deserves one, but because I think it would be in his political strategic interests to do so, and remember that I don’t exactly desire a positive outcome for Rudd, I am just engaging in a little commentary from the side.

    Rudd currently holds the high moral ground. But he did imply that Turnbull was a party to a forgery. I am suggesting that in order to keep the focus on Turnbull he should forget legal action and in fact quickly remove that which might tar him with Turnbull’s brush, a false accusation. If he joins Turnbull in a mutual apology he will come out squeaky clean. Turnbull is so covered in dirt he will never get clean again.

  171. RE: Grech’s Home
    That’s terrible… The man does not deserve that.

  172. James of North Melbourne, on June 23rd, 2009 at 11:16 am Said:

    You’re pulling some long bows at the moment.

    However, if I were in Rudd’s shoes, I would tread very carefully here. It would be in his interests to keep Turnbull opposite rather than risk someone else who he may not be able to fillet in the next election campaign.

    Who, the only decent leader the opposition have is Malcolm and with him gone the opposition will flounder around. Labor would like nothing better than a centre leaning conservative leader who can connect with the people gone and replaced by one of those more to the right who can still be tied to WorkChoices.

    I don’t think there’s much doubt really that Treasury acted in its dealings with Grant on the basis that they had better not f$%k it up, he being Rudd’s mate.

    Talking of clutching at straws. Where is your evidence that there isn’t much doubt, you should be able to cite proof of that if it’s that clear cut. The fact is James there is plenty of doubt on the whole matter pertaining to how Treasury treated Grant in relation to how they treated other dealers who had no relationship with anyone in government, and that was they were all apparently treated the same. If that were not the case Swan would be standing down now.

    What has to be answered by Treasury is why they thought this group of dealers should be bought to the attention of the Treasurer, and it appears that it was because they were being particularly adversely effected by the shut down of their lines of credit.

    So the next step I guess is to ascertain is their a formula or criteria for prioritisation of assistance to dealerships in the OzCar scheme and what that criteria is? I would be extremely surprised if there is not something in place.

    Then it can be ascertained if Grant and the other dealers that were treated the same as him met that criteria or if any single one was selected by some other means outside the criteria.

    You are hunting James because this has all backfired and you were really hopeful at best Rudd would go down, but are still as a last grasp attempting to find Swan guilty of the smallest thing you can smear him with or implicate him in.

  173. *privilege

  174. James of North Melbourne, on June 23rd, 2009 at 11:45 am

    Fantasyland stuff, James. Rudd won’t be apologising to Turnbull for a claim Rudd didn’t make in return for an apology from Turnbull for a claim Turnbull did make. That’s precisely why Turnbull couched his offer in the manner in which he phrased it. It’s the equivalent of “I’ll say sorry if you say you are sorry you beat your wife, too?”, from Malcolm.

  175. Sorry Ben. Why are you sorry about agreeing with me?

    Not sorry for agreeing with you – sorry that the story doesn’t involve a deep-seated conspiracy to unseat Turnbull. Just sorry the story isn’t more exciting 🙂

  176. Why the hell is the government assisting car dealers at all???

    Have you guys any idea of the profit margin on a new vehicle?

    If these cowboys after being in business for years needs finance then they are pretty bad operators in my opinion, I’m a firm believer of the “Law of the Jungle” when it comes to business and no government should be interfering.

  177. Legion

    This is a sop by Turnbull. Whenever he has come out second best in a debate or appears to be losing ground, he asks/demands that a mutually beneficial for all sides position be taken and then gets publicly belligerent and highly critical of his opponent for not taking his offer of saving face solely for the benefit of Malcolm.

    On the other hand if Malcolm has or is gaining the upper hand, there is no giving ground and coming to a mutual position, no matter how sincerely it is requested and how much ground the opponent is willing to give up.

  178. AFP are less politically involved than that though

    Not like the good ol’ John Howard & The Private School Bullies days, hey, Ben!

  179. scaper

    Can you tell us how any business can run without the availability of finance, and just how do car dealers offer their customers finance to buy cars if there is none?

  180. Adrian, firstly I am not alone by any stretch in believing that Swan has a case to answer.

    Secondly, there has been a very long running commentary on this whole issue and I think if you take all of my contributions into account you would be hard pressed to conclude any overt bias in what I have written. Certainly there are a number who have taken a far harder conservative line than I. I am sure that Joni and Ben, both self confessed “lefties” will confirm that.

    Thirdly, from the day he was elevated to the leadership, and repeatedly since, I have stated that I have a particularly low opinion of Malcolm Turnbull, including in this saga.

    Fourthly, I concede that I can’t stand Kevin Rudd. My personal opinion of him is that he is a snake, and I hold deep concerns that such a snake is PM of this country. That is my opinion, I don’t give a stuff if you don’t agree with it, I am entitled to it. However I don’t believe that my holding that opinion has necessarily coloured my commentary on this matter. I have taken quite a deal of delight in seeing Turnbull, another snake, sink on this and the sooner he is out of politics the better for the nation.

  181. scaper, do you know how a dealership “floor plan” operates?

  182. Adrian, heard of a finance company or a bank?

    My understanding is the finance was for floor stock, am I mistaken?

    A successful businessman does not rely on finance to run his business, I started with two hundred bucks many years ago and built it up to a nice little amount today.

  183. Well James we have something in common, I thought Howard was the lowest snake this country has ever seen and Rudd is giraffe by comparison.

    Yes you are not alone in trying to pin something on Swan and believe he has something to answer for, and that is mostly drawn along ideological lines and to get attention away from the original insinuations against Rudd, but as it stands at the moment with the evidence proffered he doesn’t. Sorry that is the way it is as much as it pains you and until something new comes out, if something new comes along, then that’s the way it will remain.

    And finally it is very easy to pick an overt bias in your running commentary on this James, your ideology is more deeply ingrained than you might believe.

  184. Actually, TB, I think the leaks from the AFP in the John Howard days came from higher up the ranks than the men on the ground. I have a great respect for our police force (state & federal) and hate it when the bureaucrats at the top start politicising their hard work for their own personal gain.

  185. scaper

    I don’t know the ins and outs of what the OzCar scheme was actually for apart it was to cover financing, like that of Ford Credit, that had shut down.

    Sorry scaper, you might have been able to start a particular type of business with small an amount of money but I would love to see you go out and start a car dealership right now on that much money?

    The company I work for, which is going from strength to strength during the GFC, would never have gotten off the ground without financing and hard work and would not be operating today without it, and that goes for just about every business out there.

    Yours is the exception scaper not the rule.

  186. TB, I don’t know how a floor plan operates and I doubt that has anything to do with the basic business tenets either!

    The first rule that I learnt when I was twelve was to have enough in reserve to operate for six months with no income, without such there is always a risk of going under.

  187. Tony, on June 23rd, 2009 at 10:51 am

    Interesting link, Tony. It reminded me of the importance of the ethos of mateship, up there with egalitarianism, in long Australian tradition.

  188. Adrian, I’ll rephrase my original question, just for you…why does John Grant require finance after being established for decades to run his business?

    It is not like he is expanding as far as I know!

  189. Adrian, I think James is a little biased to the right for sure, but on this subject he is pretty middle of the road. And as he states – I am a self-confessed “leftie”.

    I don’t agree with James that there is enough to indict Wayne Swan, but without the “fake email” clouding the issue – it would have been a great lead-in to something else the Coalition might have on him.

    It is my opinion that the Coalition had decided to run a narrative that there is incompetency & possible corruption amongst the government ministers to avoid debating on policy. Their win against Fitzgibbon made a good lead-in to this attack on Swan. They didn’t need a water-tight case to make it look bad. They didn’t even need to get rid of Swan, just tarnish him some and move on to the next minister.

    The issue is that their credibility on this line of attack is now severely diminished. They have got to be disappointed about more than just this encounter. They probably need to go back and rework their election strategy.

  190. To summarise the above – James has a point. His bias is not overly evident in his opinions about this. He is pretty balanced about it all things considered.

  191. Turnbull is trying to shift blame on Grech.

    http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25676212-601,00.html

    About time that Turnbull is taken down from within, the disgusting person!

  192. Tony, on June 23rd, 2009 at 11:44 am

    Pure speculation on my part, Tony, but the pre-distribution of the ’email’ prior to its ‘discovery’ on Grech’s home computer, or so it has been reported, may contain important clues as to its impersonating source, and certainly Senator Abetz, if no-one else, appears to have had it on-hand to read; and the AFP, with their stronger investigation powers, or the A-G, with their stronger compulsion-to-answer powers, may have an interest in those matters, not including any involvement or non-involvement of those opposite directly in the composition or provision of such email to Steve Lewis or News Ltd operatives, assuming such renderings of the phantom email do in fact coincide in any respect.

  193. Well, Adrian, all I can suggest is that in order to escape your definition of bias one needs to shed ones clothes, retract any statement ever supportive of any Conservative policy or statement, regardless of their bases, adopt without question any and all ALP policies and statements, including but not limited to AGW and Union Rights of Entry, ignore or justify any reports, regardless of the evidence of the truth of them, that may in any way reflect poorly on the ALP, its supporters, or the trade union movement, adopt atheism and the Green religion (ignoring the paradox), and offer, without reservation, to cleanse Kevin Rudd’s rectum (no apologies for offence caused).

    Because I was among the first to declare that Turnbull must resign. I was THE first to raise the issue of gaol time for Turnbull when there was speculation that he may have been involved in a forgery, and there are at least 2 self confessed “lefties”, Joni and Ben, who have agreed with much of what I have said, including Swan’s shaky position. Are Joni or Ben biased?

  194. Thank you, Ben.

  195. A short description of floorplan financing here. It may surprise some to know that the average car dealership in Australia runs on a profit margin as a percentage of sales of between one and two percent.

  196. Sorry Adrian, I feel James is right in this one. He has been pretty straight down the line on this. We all know James leans right, just as we know Joni & myself lean left. That said, he hasn’t been ignoring the facts in this in anyway I can determine.

    The most that can be said is he thinks that the case against Swan is stronger than some of us “lefties” do; but that’s going to remain opinion-based I think due to the Malcolm issue.

    Let’s be fair here, James has not been pushing anything outside the bounds of reason in this thread.

    And James, I, for one, am biased, but it’s just I’m usually biased against your side of the debate 😛

  197. It doesn’t look like the will be a Hansard transcript for last Friday, disappointing!

    http://www.aph.gov.au/Hansard/Hanssen.htm

  198. scaper, take a trip to your local dealership (any make{s}) and count the number of new vehicles in the show room and yard (not second hand they usually operate a little differently) – now multiply the cars you count by about $40000 each (guesstimate for insurance value etc) – you should be in the $100,000’s or millions …

    … if a contract you take is worth say $30,000 – do you wear all that cost until the jobs finished? I suspect you ask for part payment – a dealership still has to pay wages, insurance, rent even if it doesn’t sell any cars for that month – and you need to sell a lot to stay afloat … and you need them on display …

    … if *you* need to borrow for a job – imagine all the banks shutting up shop on you – no materials – no work – that’s what a lot of dealers faced … no finance, no cars, no income …

  199. Well, that was fun.

    My guess is that it will be a while before Mal plays with matches again.

  200. Not that I give online polls much attention (due to self selection of polled persons), but even the one over at The Australian has the public turning strongly against the Coalition attack plan.

  201. TB, I don’t care if the overheads are $1M or $10M a year, I stand by my point that if a person has been in business for decades there is something wrong if it relies on finance to stay afloat.

    I remember you commented on a post of mine in relation to “every man on his own”, something to the tune of “I never got any help from the government or expected such!”

    Was that in relation to your business or across the board???

  202. How do people know how I lean? Have people been sneaking looks at me at the gym? 😯

  203. Lean???

    Have you been on a diet, joni?

  204. Definately not lean, scaper. Put on a lot of kilos while recovering from the shoulder operation. I now have my own gravity.

  205. Scaper – it’s becoming scary how often I am agreeing with you on this topic!

    I personally find the idea that keeping afloat on finance is a scary and fundamentally flawed method of running a business. This may not mean much coming from a guy who is scared witless of a mortgage, but it is something I feel strongly about.

    That said, this is not unusual for businesses dealing with large sums of money but on an irregular basis. This is not limited to car dealerships as I have worked for & contracted to businesses that sell services that run on this model. It is no indicator of guilt in this affair or even unusual business practice. It is pretty standard across the board in middle to large sized businesses.

  206. @joni
    The way I lean depends on how much I’ve had to drink and how fast the room is spinning 😛

  207. scaper, my business was pure cash flow (a consutancy) and I initially invested $10,000 of my own money …

    … if I ran a car dealership I would need some sort of finance unless I was a multi-milionaire …

    … and in life everyone is on thier own (doubt I said every *man*) but that doesn’t mean I haven’t borrowed from a bank or finance company when I was younger and needed to …

    … it did mean that I got on with it when the government decided they needed me in their army and cut my pay in half … life’s dice calls …

    … I know you run your own business but not all businesses are the same … “trade” businesses are particularly easy to set up – but try expanding into building developments and the issues change – including the need to finance the development … my brother in law found that out … from renovations to high rise he needs external finance … and creams the top after paying interest – anyway! This is not a training forum!

  208. Most new vehicles you see at a dealership are floorplan financed. They are not owned by the dealership. It’s what is called wholesale finance.

  209. Seems Hockey is going to be the DH …

    http://www.news.com.au/story/0,27574,25677789-29277,00.html

    Can the Libs dig a deeper hole for themselves?

  210. Tony 12:41 pm.

    *net profit margin

  211. TB, fair enough…I have a builder mate that worked his way up from just over $1M running capital to just about to finish a seven story development near the city on his own capital ($12M) in eight years.

    I suppose there are different levels of success and Grant obviously sits at the lower level!

  212. I suppose there are different levels of success and Grant obviously sits at the lower level!

    Possibly, but what that has to do with whether or not he got preferential treatment is beyond me.

  213. scaper, he’s not really clever if he takes all the risk himself at that level! BTW where did the $1M “running capital” come from?

  214. Tolputt, why any government should assist any industry is beyond me!

    If the market was left to its own devices I’m sure it would of found its own finance as is the case in this situation.

    If some business failed I’m sure the demand factor would have been fulfilled.

  215. TB – re Hockey’s call – it’s just dumb.

    All Swan has to do is show that at least 1 other car dealer got at least as good a treatment as what Grant got. I haven’t read the emails he’s released yet but it looks to me like they back up Swan’s defence.

    As for the Ford Credit thing (ie,an impled pressure on them to help Grant to get their financial backing), there is nothing in the emails that have been released so far (including the ones the Opposition claim are so incriminating) that indicates that Swan directed Treasury to take this path – I can’t for a minute believe that Swan would direct this sort of action because it is something that could come back to haunt you. Pretty sure Ford Credit didn’t say that they felt pressured to take on Grant or that the line of credit was condition on them taking on Grant either – this line of questioning was certainly open to the opposition when the had the Ford Credit block fronting the senate inquiry last week.

  216. TB, from home renovations, then houses, then six packs, townhouses that involved hard work and dedication for over ten years.

    Self made from his limited schooling to this day!

    Top level!

  217. I haven’t read the emails he’s released yet but it looks to me like they back up Swan’s defence.

    Dave, call me pedantic, but how can you say that if you haven’t read them? 8)

    (BTW, are they published anywhere?)

  218. On the evidence that has now been provided, I think that the case against Wayne Swan is now fairly weak. The opposition are probably going to continue to go hard against him to deflect criticism against Malcolm Turnbull. Turnbull hasn’t come out well in all of this. My own opinion is that no one has done anything that warrants a resignation. Public opinion may change that in reality though.

  219. (Oops. First sentence above quote from Dave55.)

  220. Sounds like my b-in-l but his old man was a millionaire … I suspect your mate had some help along the way … if not a very, very exceptional person …

    +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    Dave,

    Said earlier (and so did others) that some would be too dumb to know when its over – my business mentor was an expert at this “office politics” crap, knew when to hold ’em etc.

    … as I posted yesterday(?) these guys really are amateurs – in many ways …

  221. Tolputt, why any government should assist any industry is beyond me!

    If the market was left to its own devices I’m sure it would of found its own finance as is the case in this situation.

    I don’t doubt that the market would work itself out. The issue is that the market would work itself out by dropping jobs left, right, & centre in order to maintain the business owner profits. That is the nature of capitalism. The government tries to cushion the impact of pure capitalism by making it easier for business owners to keep their employees employed.

    But I’ll leave the discussion of my issues with capitalism to another thread.

  222. AI

    That sounds just like the Party line …

    Re resignations:

    In business it would.

    In Parliament, I doubt it and I would much sooner have a lame duck Opposition Leadeer than, erm, than, erm, bugger … er … can anyone help me out here? Who would you put into the Leadership?

  223. Tony, on June 23rd, 2009 at 1:47 pm

    http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/files/emails.pdf

  224. “That sounds just like the Party line …”

    Really? Which party’s that? Both Labor and Liberal want resignations.

  225. Tony,

    Sorry, i should have indicated the irony key was on. 😉

    I’ll read them when I find them on the net but the fact he’s released them at all is suggestive (but not conclusive) that they will back up his argument.

    I still think the Libs badly played this one from the start – it really isn’t a ‘big’ issue and only became an issue when Swan and Rudd were forced to put something on the record and then the issue became the record. Seriously, the underlying issue is a nothing and has no traction in the real world. Even Ackerman is getting 50/50 comments on his blog about this (when he himself finds himself alone on the sinking Rudd is guilty raft while the rest of the media are frantically cutting it lose or racing away on speedboats..

  226. Thanks Legion 1:57 pm. (I suppose I’d better read them now.)

  227. Tony,

    They are the original emails released to the Senate inquiry last week. This is what the Libs are basing their attack on swan on (ie, that’s it).

    Personally I don’t think they are as damning as they make out. It’ll be interesting to compare them to the emails released today.

  228. Hockey’s moved on since then…he wants ALL the emails released, not just the ones Swan released. I doubt it will happen. That’s what the Auditor General is for. 😉

  229. Oh, ok. I haven’t read them either, then.

  230. I believe now that Nigerian email scam artists are now peppering parliament house but they are only getting a response from the Member for Wentworth 😀

  231. So when do the exciting redactified administrivia from Swan get released into the boiling oceans of rampant augury? Hmmm.

  232. Does anyone else get the feeling that the Libs and the media just see this whole thing as a big game rather than a very serious accusation/ demand levelled at the highest elected public officials in this country. Sort of like- oh well, we lost this one but lets move on to the next game.

    I really get the shits that this is being treated so casually by most observers. The issue at the base of it is, as I keep saying, a complete nothing, but as soon as it escalated to a demand for a resignation from the PM, it reached a stage where the evidence had to be damn good. This issue is eating up huge amounts of money and Government time when there are more pressing things to deal with. I can understand why Rudd is very pissed off with Turnbull over this.

  233. Well, that was a wild-goose chase. 😉

  234. I can understand why Rudd is very pissed off with Turnbull over this.

    Darn right, Dave. I’m sure Mr Rudd is saying he’s ‘furious’.

  235. Sorry. I am an ass…and assumed it was new because it was a new link, but it’s just new-old. On the bright side, that link has now disappeared on the page over at the Oz, so maybe they will replace it with the new-new.

    I can, however, report that this piece is both interesting, and on its face misreporting Turnbull as Hockey for contact with Grech, unless something else has occurred: Rudd hounds Turnbull for resignation over OzCar affair

  236. Legion

    That link does say that Turnbull contacted Grech!!! but it must be a mistake – isn’t it?

  237. This is all I can find on the emails.

    http://www.smh.com.au/national/new-emails-show-other-car-dealers-helped-too-20090622-cu0s.html

    Darn right, Dave. I’m sure Mr Rudd is saying he’s ‘furious’.

    Turnbull’s obviously tougher than the airline hostie though – he hasn’t erupted into tears yets.

  238. Tony, on June 23rd, 2009 at 2:23 pm

    I watched one of the Spiderman movies the other night. A quotable was words to the effect: “Never wound what you can’t kill”. Somehow it seems apt. Rudd’s and Turnbull’s relationship, and by implication the dynamic of Parliament, can’t be the same again, with or without apologies.

  239. Turnbull’s obviously tougher than the airline hostie though – he hasn’t erupted into tears yets.

    Well, that gives him a small leg up over Brendan Nelson then. That guy always looked like he was about to collapse into a sobbing wreck.

  240. joni,

    I heard the ABC reply Turnbull saying it. He hasn’t said when he did it.

    Albo going on about it in QT now.

  241. D55/Legion – oh dear – that will probably sink Malcolm now….

  242. joni

    You mean sink him deeper …

  243. Wasn’t he on the raft with Piers?

  244. joni
    LOL – frantically cutting the rope as well.

    Actually I wouldn’t want to be stuck on a raft with only Piers for company and couldn’t wish that on anyone. I might think Turnbull is an arrogant twit but I don’t wish his such a misfortune.

  245. Al, on June 23rd, 2009 at 1:58 pm

    Both Labor and Liberal want resignations.

    Yep, and by looks neither of them much appear to want to settle for anything less. Rudd’s repeated his call; and The Punch reports that Turnbull has gone Captain Ahab and will not rest.

  246. “Actually I wouldn’t want to be stuck on a raft with only Piers for company and couldn’t wish that on anyone.”

    I would, I reckon I could live off his flesh for a week at least…that’s if he doesn’t eat himself first!

  247. scaper…, on June 23rd, 2009 at 12:17 pm Said:
    “The first rule that I learnt when I was twelve was to have enough in reserve to operate for six months with no income, without such there is always a risk of going under.”

    scaper, a couple of decades back I was involved in the startup of a now very successful company. One of the criteria for selecting our main contractor was that he have enough financial backing of their own to keep working even if we were unable to pay them for 12 months. Of course we never told them that.
    They did have to draw on their own resources to that extent, and then had no choice but to hang in. Their loyalty, and our owners vision and commitment paid off and both party’s are now enjoying the well deserved dividends having done the hard yards when the only option left was to make it succeed.

  248. Joni..it was Hockey who contacted Grech…re Grech’s ‘health problems’.

  249. Due to duties, I haven’t had time to keep up. Anyone prepared to attempt a timeline??

  250. Not so sure – it seems that Turnbull might have too – or that seems to be what D55 says…. it’s all so confusing…

  251. Abbott gets up and says there is no need for a grubby smear concerning an attack on Turnbull in relation to his rain scheme!

    Amazing!

  252. I was waiting for Turnbull’s rain making scheme to come back to haunt him in the ute affair.

    It is why Malcolm has to be so careful to make sure he has his facts 100% correct before making any accusations against the government or any government minister. There is some very dirty linen in Malcolm’s cupboard that he doesn’t want aired.

  253. Mr Swan: Fax to Swan’s home at 5:15pm on a Friday proves this government works weekends, and the previous one didn’t. Que?

  254. That’s hilarious Scaper!

    Tony Abbott lecturing people on grubby smear campaigns.

    The irony is completely lost on these morons…

    LOL!

  255. If Katter was speaker I reckon he would have tasered Abbott for that remark!

  256. Turnbull took a large donation last year from a US ‘vulture company’!

  257. I am thinking that the Libs are up shit creek without a paddle. How many emails have the Libs received lobbying for their consituents. How many on this blog have lobbied their local representatives..if you haven’t, then you should have.

    For example, our local person state is Nat Don Page who has done some wonderful things for kids with disabilities. But the contra argument would be that those who have contacted Don Page have received ‘special consideration’.

  258. Fortress vulture group $76,000 and Turnbull was a share holder.

  259. Dave (remembering that it is my opinion that Turnbull should now resign),

    I don’t think the Libs went into this just playing a game. I think that they thought they were onto something pretty big. Their theory was that the Govt were holding Ford Credit over a barrell and getting favours for mates from them at the same time. Now this, if it were true, is a pretty serious matter. I have said all along that I applaud helping out a mate in trouble. I didn’t understand until now the Ford Credit angle. My issue with Swan was, and still is, that he denied “special” treatment to Parliament. I’m not going to get into further debate about it, my opinion remains that Grant got a better ride than others, but I never had a problem with that.

  260. So far, moi at 3.02pm..no one is game to try a time line.

  261. The latest:

    Wayne Swan calls Liberal MP Rowan Ramsey “a moron” as he attacked a question over his dealings with car dealer John Grant and how many dealers he had spoken with personally.

    “Of course they weren’t all dealt with by me you moron,” Mr Swan said before withdrawing the insult.

    http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,25675904-662,00.html

  262. Calling a MP a moron is pretty childish!

  263. Min at 3.13, I must ask you to be careful with your language. A poster has expressed concern about offensive language and I am sure it’s the language rather than the person who was using the language that was offensive to her.

    As to the timeline, perhaps we could use one of your family trees as a template because there are that many side issues and twists and turns, as well as a few historical gaps, that it would take quite an effort to create.

  264. I’m not going to get into further debate about it, my opinion remains that Grant got a better ride than others, but I never had a problem with that.

    That may be so James, but what the Liberal party need to prove is that Grant got a better result because of Wayne Swan’s actions.

    It’s already clear that Grant didn’t get a handout in the end, so the Libs can cry shrill to their heart’s content that Swan might have made a phone call, or received a fax, but the fundamental heart of the matter is – did the dealer in question ultimately benefit by Swan’s alleged intervention.

    The answer is no, yet the Libs are still hellbent on pursuing this angle.

    The Libs are seriously floundering over this entire sordid affair. Their credibility is in tatters and they’re trying desperately to pin something on someone, anyone, but ultimately they’re rooted.

    It’s just a matter of time…

  265. Sure is scaper, but I think the whole fiasco is childish now. Turnbull thinks that if he just applies alot of pressure without leverage – he’ll get what he wants (his reputation restored and Swan vilified).

    I recall a certain CEO with the same attitude… Sol Trujillo. I wonder if Turnbull will leave the Liberal Party in a similar state to Telstra when Sol was booted?

  266. If Turnbull leave the conservatives in a worst state we will have to start a new party to uphold democracy.

  267. Agree with all of that, Reb, my main point in that post to Dave55 was that I don’t think the Libs necessarily started out to take the piss, they genuinely thought they were on to something big.

    I think politically, regardless of whether Swan should go or not, that they need to pursue him for another day at least to project that they at least think it’s serious. Remember most people just watch the news and don’t watch the blow by blow account that we do.

    A weeks is an age in politics and we haven’t seen the last twist in this yet.

  268. RIP Tom.

  269. For the benefit of mobile users, let’s continue the discussion here…

  270. Hockey is up again bringing up old points, he should just write them on his belly…next to the complete works of Shakespeare!

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: