-
In the context of covid management, I couldn't care less if she's as corrupt as Rex Jackson.
-
I am going to suggest like other politicians ego had a large part to play.
-
@rotated said in Aussie Politics:
Three good premiers, no convictions (and none likely here). Why is a Federal ICAC a good idea again?
On the other hand: why has Gladys quit if she's got no case to answer? 🤷♂️
"Oh no! The ineffective commission that has apparently found nothing is onto me for nothing! I'd better quit.... "
-
@nostrildamus said in Aussie Politics:
@rotated by 3 Premiers, do you include Baird? Did he resign because of ICAC? I thought he said his children were bullied?
The three would be Greiner (who set it up), O'Farrell (winegate)and now Gladys (dodgy boyfriend).
-
-
@nta said in Aussie Politics:
@rotated said in Aussie Politics:
Three good premiers, no convictions (and none likely here). Why is a Federal ICAC a good idea again?
On the other hand: why has Gladys quit if she's got no case to answer? 🤷♂️
"Oh no! The ineffective commission that has apparently found nothing is onto me for nothing! I'd better quit.... "
Nah, that's not fair Nick. There is no way she can mount a proper ICAC defense and continue to work this hard as Premier, just impossible. She may well lose the case, but stepping down as Prem to defend it is in no way an admission of guilt
-
You can't have a Premier under active investigation by ICAC, no matter the charges.
Two things can be true: she was a good, hard-working Premier, and she also made a few bad decisions in relation to the seat of Wagga Wagga given her relationship with the local MP.
Now the question is does the punishment fit the crime. I'd argue it does not, but it's hard to find any middle ground these days between complete denial and resignation.
-
i saw some of the talking heads on the news make a valid point.
if she successfully defends and charges...will she come back as premiers, of course not, so in that case shes effectively "lost" her job for no reason
I should say i have no idea how true the allegations are, will be interesting to follow
-
@barbarian said in Aussie Politics:
You can't have a Premier under active investigation by ICAC, no matter the charges.
Two things can be true: she was a good, hard-working Premier, and she also made a few bad decisions in relation to the seat of Wagga Wagga given her relationship with the local MP.
Now the question is does the punishment fit the crime. I'd argue it does not, but it's hard to find any middle ground these days between complete denial and resignation.
I think she has had some serious lapses in judgement. The Wagga stuff is one thing, but she also allowed meetings to take place in parliament when I think she pretty clearly knew the dealings were dodgy. I think she enabled and had knowledge of her partner doing thing illegal things.
BUT, I think she's been a great Premier, and I really want her stay on.
I don't know how to reconcile this
-
Labor MP Joel Fitzgibbon:
I think ICAC has been a failed experiment. That’s the truth of it. I’m a great supporter of the principle innocent until proven guilty and with ICAC for many years just the opposite has been true. Once you have a referral of any sort to ICAC you’re guilty until proven innocent, and three Liberal Premiers will testify to that fact. None of them ever had any adverse findings against them in the eyes of the law, but were certainly hung out to dry by what I think is effectively a kangaroo court.
-
@act-crusader Labor is poorer with Joel retiring.
-
@voodoo said in Aussie Politics:
@barbarian said in Aussie Politics:
You can't have a Premier under active investigation by ICAC, no matter the charges.
Two things can be true: she was a good, hard-working Premier, and she also made a few bad decisions in relation to the seat of Wagga Wagga given her relationship with the local MP.
Now the question is does the punishment fit the crime. I'd argue it does not, but it's hard to find any middle ground these days between complete denial and resignation.
I think she has had some serious lapses in judgement. The Wagga stuff is one thing, but she also allowed meetings to take place in parliament when I think she pretty clearly knew the dealings were dodgy. I think she enabled and had knowledge of her partner doing thing illegal things.
BUT, I think she's been a great Premier, and I really want her stay on.
I don't know how to reconcile this
I think she's done a mostly good job. The longer term ramifications of some of the decisions e.g. privatisation of energy assets won't be felt for some time yet, but it gave the state the capital needed to build out transport which was overdue.
So how long would an investigation take? Surely if ICAC peeps have done their work, they're ready to go, and Gladys' defence or otherwise should likewise known how much blood was in the water. Let's not pretend that nobody knew this was coming in the Halls of Power.
-
@antipodean said in Aussie Politics:
@act-crusader Labor is poorer with Joel retiring.
His office is going to disappear into an open cut mine anyway, so might as well get while the getting's good.
-
@nta The problem is ICAC take so long to do anything. John Sidoti has been under investigation for years with no end in sight. Same with Daryl. So you exist in this purgatory where you aren't guilty (yet), but you also can't do anything because you are the subject of an investigation.
-
@barbarian said in Aussie Politics:
@nta The problem is ICAC take so long to do anything. John Sidoti has been under investigation for years with no end in sight. Same with Daryl. So you exist in this purgatory where you aren't guilty (yet), but you also can't do anything because you are the subject of an investigation.
Sounds like a bureaucracy of some sort
-
@antipodean thanks forgot about Greiner.
-
@voodoo said in Aussie Politics:
@barbarian said in Aussie Politics:
You can't have a Premier under active investigation by ICAC, no matter the charges.
Two things can be true: she was a good, hard-working Premier, and she also made a few bad decisions in relation to the seat of Wagga Wagga given her relationship with the local MP.
Now the question is does the punishment fit the crime. I'd argue it does not, but it's hard to find any middle ground these days between complete denial and resignation.
I think she has had some serious lapses in judgement. The Wagga stuff is one thing, but she also allowed meetings to take place in parliament when I think she pretty clearly knew the dealings were dodgy. I think she enabled and had knowledge of her partner doing thing illegal things.
BUT, I think she's been a great Premier, and I really want her stay on.
I don't know how to reconcile this
Well it is probably better she leaves now if the findings are likely to be against her than drag it out to court fights.
I'd expect her to stay on and fight though, if she thought she was innocent.
Aussie Politics