So the Morrison/Abbott plan for more tents was 'sponsored' by a company out to make money?

[i-need-a-martini]

Can they possibly be more stupid?

Like, helloooooo? Knock, knock? Anybody home in that big round thing on the top of your neck? You're building up to an election and you decide that now (NOW??) is a good time to run with some shonky deal with a company who is profit driven and make that deal part of your 'policy' to build a tent city?

Seriously? As Julia Roberts would say "Big Mistake. Huge mistake!"

If Morrison was a public servant (I mean a real one) he would be sacked for taking that flight paid for by Toll. 

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/federal-election-2013/coalitions-tent-city-trip-funded-by-log...

[12elliemellie]

What isn't true?

This bit? I really have no interest in exlaining anything to nero

or this? Government has specific sets of protocols for dishing out contracts to ensure there is conflict of interest

this? Nero starts a thread on Obeid and his shonky doings

or maybe this?  Morrison just performed the same type of behaviour that Obeid is now standing before ICAC for.

[spotweldersfriend]

Toll is not too popular in the USA where it was paying its drivers at its LA facility $13 per hour.The median rate in the US is $20 per hour.With a little help from Australias TWU they decided to unionise.

[monman12]

INAM: " Nero starts a thread on Obeid and his shonky doings but Morrison just performed the same type of behaviour that Obeid is now standing before ICAC for."

What fantasy land are you in INAM?  A trip to NARU, on gossamer wings no doubt,  see the actual arrangements above according to NW with a media corrected report, as opposed to the ICAC findings apropos Obeid et al. Cuckoo land more likel;y.

SMH (dodgy LL?
Matt O'Sullivan and Bianca Hall:

Correction: In the original version of the story it said that Toll chartered the flight for the Coalition and News Limited. Toll Holdings says they were flying regardless and gave the spare seats on the plane to the Coalition.

LL: "the ALP don't have contracts with Toll, but the federal government has. they don't however undertake trips at Tolls expense in order to sweeten a potential tent purchase"
A ( irrelevant?) distinction LL, but it does not alter the underlying fact:
"Toll Holdings has contracts with the Department of Immigration valued at about $26 million." Shonky?.

"Sweeten" a deal by offering a trip to Naru, sweeten?.

The media, and some here,  need to travel (think) more, I would not go there if you paid me (and I  transited some small Pacific islands years ago) even had a months posting to Hawaii (Hickam AFB), now that WAS sweet.

I would wonder (shudder) at what you might consider a "sour" trip LL,  especially if NARU is considered sweet !

nɥºɾ

[i-need-a-martini]

MM - your sentences are extremely hard to read. Not being critical - just commenting.

Nevertheless - it doesn't matter if the seats were 'spare' or not, it is still shonky to accept a gift (because that IS what it is) by a company who has a vested interest in buttering you up for potential future business.

That is issue number 1.

Issue number 2, is that the 'policy' (I call it that because Morrison has called it that even though it is not published) is based on the tents being supplied by Toll. So where is the contract? Where is the tender process? What other companies were asked to provide their costings?

There aren't any because Toll pitched the idea to Morrison and Morrison has run with it without following process.

Go on as much as you want about the ALPs contracts with Toll but unless you can show me the lack of tender protocol then there is no point bringing this up. The info is fairly transparent - the Dept of Finance and Dereg list all the govt contractors and also issue the process for tendering. Nothing is being hidden as you seem to be implying.

Issue number 3 is how it was reported. The only media on board were 2 Murdoch journalist/photographer who were invited by Morrison and were told their story would be 'exclusive'. They were told not to mention the 'free' trip nor to mention who supplied the free trip. Later it turns out that even the 'policy' didn't exist and that other newspapers were told they should get their info from News Corp. Since when did the media supply policy information for this country on behalf of the government?

[i-need-a-martini]

I should only point out that Morrison only issued a press statement about the 'deal' AFTER other journalists and the media generally started questioning the ethics of the Liberal/News Corp information arrangement.

[lakeland27]

---

@monman12 wrote:

INAM: " Nero starts a thread on Obeid and his shonky doings but Morrison just performed the same type of behaviour that Obeid is now standing before ICAC for."

What fantasy land are you in INAM?  A trip to NARU, on gossamer wings no doubt,  see the actual arrangements above according to NW with a media corrected report, as opposed to the ICAC findings apropos Obeid et al. Cuckoo land more likel;y.

SMH (dodgy LL?
Matt O'Sullivan and Bianca Hall:

Correction: In the original version of the story it said that Toll chartered the flight for the Coalition and News Limited. Toll Holdings says they were flying regardless and gave the spare seats on the plane to the Coalition.

LL: "the ALP don't have contracts with Toll, but the federal government has. they don't however undertake trips at Tolls expense in order to sweeten a potential tent purchase"
A ( irrelevant?) distinction LL, but it does not alter the underlying fact:
"Toll Holdings has contracts with the Department of Immigration valued at about $26 million." Shonky?.

"Sweeten" a deal by offering a trip to Naru, sweeten?.

The media, and some here,  need to travel (think) more, I would not go there if you paid me (and I  transited some small Pacific islands years ago) even had a months posting to Hawaii (Hickam AFB), now that WAS sweet.

I would wonder (shudder) at what you might consider a "sour" trip LL,  especially if NARU is considered sweet !

nɥºɾ

---

 the fishing is very good, they play aussie rules football too. 

to be quite frank with you i think the coalition should be admonished for other matters, this is a bit of a beat-up .. its more like murdochs approach taken every single day to the gillard government . so, in that context its all fair..

[monman12]

"Since when did the media supply policy information for this country on behalf of the government?" That I do not understand INAM,  please explain!, as  I am well aware of government policy leaking  (deliberate)  via the media, but you obviously mean something more direct.

As for media sharing  (pooling) it is often employed. But tell me why a trip to NARU would be regarded by you as a "gift" I am sure there would be little enthusiasm within the journalists  ranks to go,  apart from using their OS expense account.

However, from the Island promotion information:

"Discover excellent deep sea fishing, scuba dive amazing ocean depths, take a tour of the island’s past economic mainstay the phosphate mines"

Ahhhhhhh,  the phosphate mines.

INAM: "Issue number 2, is that the 'policy' (I call it that because Morrison has called it that even though it is not published) is based on the tents being supplied by Toll. So where is the contract? Where is the tender process? What other companies were asked to provide their costings?

There aren't any because Toll pitched the idea to Morrison and Morrison has run with it without following process."

Hello, Morrison is part of the Opposition. Since when does an Opposition enter into a tender process for  government business, or even contract  on behalf of the government? 

"without following process." see above!

nɥºɾ

[nero_bolt]

Tobacco firm Korber 'flew Rudd first class'

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/special-features/tobacco-firm-korber-8216flew-rudd-first-class...  

[i-need-a-martini]

---

@nero_wulf wrote:

Tobacco firm Korber 'flew Rudd first class'

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/special-features/tobacco-firm-korber-8216flew-rudd-first-class...  

---

So go start a thread about lol.

[i-need-a-martini]

---

@monman12 wrote:

"Since when did the media supply policy information for this country on behalf of the government?" That I do not understand INAM,  please explain!, as  I am well aware of government policy leaking  (deliberate)  via the media, but you obviously mean something more direct.

As for media sharing  (pooling) it is often employed. But tell me why a trip to NARU would be regarded by you as a "gift" I am sure there would be little enthusiasm within the journalists  ranks to go,  apart from using their OS expense account.

However, from the Island promotion information:

"Discover excellent deep sea fishing, scuba dive amazing ocean depths, take a tour of the island’s past economic mainstay the phosphate mines"

Ahhhhhhh,  the phosphate mines.

INAM: "Issue number 2, is that the 'policy' (I call it that because Morrison has called it that even though it is not published) is based on the tents being supplied by Toll. So where is the contract? Where is the tender process? What other companies were asked to provide their costings?

There aren't any because Toll pitched the idea to Morrison and Morrison has run with it without following process."

Hello, Morrison is part of the Opposition. Since when does an Opposition enter into a tender process for  government business, or even contract  on behalf of the government? 

"without following process." see above!

nɥºɾ

---

Part 1:

What's not to understand? Policy information (even from an Opposition govt) should come from the Minister responsible for that portfolio. Ever heard of a press release? That is generally how Ministers disseminate their information.

To refer questions on the 'policy' back to News Corp is ridiculous. You're a clever sod and you are generally fair minded so I expect that you can see this as clearly as I can.

Part 2:

I have no idea what you are talking about regarding the island.

Part 3:

Firstly, whether Morrison is in govt or is in opposition, he is a public servant first. Therfore, he must declare all 'gift'. And yes, it is a 'gift' by government definition because it was free.

Secondly given that Morrison said (whilst on the island and in the care of Toll Holdings) that he would "immediately erect a 2000-person tent city under a Coalition government." it would seem clear that the 'contract' had already been promised.

Thirdly, even if he hasn't promised any contract to Toll, how could he be so stupid to not think of the consequences and the perceptions of his actions?