ogQ!(U~$(KGrHgoOKjYEjlLmS1ctBJ1K-4Uyh!~~_7.JPG?set_id=81 "i-need-a-martini"){kind=avatar}
@spotweldersfriend wrote:
Well they are the party of the 50's after all.
yes but without the stylish clothes.
The unions should be welcoming the Royal Commission. If, like they claim, there is no corruption, they have nothing to fear and it will put an end to the speculation and rumours that abound re using bikies as standover men, taking bribes etc.
Or is this about something else?
@freakiness wrote:
@punch*drunk wrote:The unions should be welcoming the Royal Commission. If, like they claim, there is no corruption, they have nothing to fear and it will put an end to the speculation and rumours that abound re using bikies as standover men, taking bribes etc.
Or is this about something else?
It's about constantly linking unions with corruption and criminality to instill the belief that all union people, therefore all Labor people, are not to be trusted criminals.
But if none of thats true then the result will be a win for the unions.....wont it?
@spotweldersfriend wrote:
I sincerely hope they call a Royal Commission to investigate the need for so many Royal Commissions.
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahhhhhhhhhhhhaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahahahahahahah
punchdrunk, I think below clearly explains why a royal commission into so called union corruption is unnecessary and a waste of money.........
When is it appropriate to establish a royal commission?
Although established by the Executive, a fundamental characteristic of a royal commission is the independence of the inquiry from the government. This is important to ensure public confidence in such investigations, particularly when the inquiry involves maladministration of the government.
However, given the continuing popularity of royal commissions as a response to a variety of issues in Australia, it is a matter of concern that the legitimacy of such inquiries may diminish if royal commissions are established too frequently. To maintain the legitimacy and authority of royal commissions, there must be a clear distinction between cases where royal commissions will be preferable and those where other forms of official inquiry might be more suitable. Royal commissions are always expensive, as is demonstrated by the commitment to the Royal Commission in this year's Budget. It is clear that royal commissions should only be convened to address issues of extremely substantial public importance, where no lesser form of public inquiry would be appropriate. The extensive powers under the Act exist to enable the investigation of particularly serious issues that cannot suitably be investigated by another mechanism and these need to be recognised to justify the high costs involved.
