Dan is dead

[leon]

Just in his denials of impropriety. We may yet hear a version of "I'm not a crook".

But not acknowledging him as another utterly incompetent, destructive (bombing of Cambodia that enabled the Khmer Rouge rise to power) unscrupulous (Watergate), ego maniacal, right wing politician - Trump-like (if he got a 2nd term especially - see Capitol Insurrection attempt to overthrow legitimately-elected democratic government of USA).

Quite simply you have been clutching at straws on the whole Covid/political threads/Dan Andrews for a long, long time. So you conveniently fail to see Nixon as one of your own. Dan Andrews is incomparable with this monster of history but you throw this in ... what selectively? How convenient and shallow.

I just find it pathetic and desperate. Puzzles me how someone who seems very clever and astute e.g. in footy postings, maths/stats capacity, can flounder so badly in these crucial areas of values. I refrain from speculating but, have to say, you have absolutely no chance of altering my mind.

That's why I only come for an occasional glance at what is going on in same. Waste of time mostly.

 

[LeeToRainesToRoach]

Some are taking Dan's imminent political demise in a less than heroic manner...

Investigation codenamed 'Operation Richmond'!

 

[AngryAnt]

Some are taking Dan's imminent political demise in a less than heroic manner...

How do you act heroically when hearing about someone who is not you being investigated?

Do you read about it bravely while sipping tea and eating biscuits? I can do that.

 

[MD Jazz]

Agree. 100%. Like him or not he is a leader. Don't know of any other politician in my life time that fronted up on a daily basis for months answering questions without notice until there were no more questions to be asked from the press that day, day after day, every day.
'Dictator Dan' .... kind of childish really.

You could argue he wasted a lot of valuable planning time in those press conferences. What difference did they actually make? Show that he has stamina?

Would prefer he delegate essentially meaningless tasks to more junior players and get on with the job of dealing with covid and planning the next steps. They haven't nailed much in the way of a future strategy.

 

[AngryAnt]

You could argue he wasted a lot of valuable planning time in those press conferences. What difference did they actually make? Show that he has stamina?

Would prefer he delegate essentially meaningless tasks to more junior players and get on with the job of dealing with covid and planning the next steps. They haven't nailed much in the way of a future strategy.

I think initially there was some value in a leader showing presence and giving thorough updates, but over time that was diminishing returns, I agree.

If he's acted corruptly then he needs to go. It does all sound a bit vague at the moment to be fair. Still more substance to it than the bizarre conspiracy theories involving police and ambulance service coverups thrown about on this thread.

 

[MD Jazz]

I think initially there was some value in a leader showing presence and giving thorough updates, but over time that was diminishing returns, I agree.

Yeh, he took responsibility at the start, demonstrated leadership. But arguable it was ego driven in the end and a distraction he (and us as his constituents) didn't need.

 

[Sintiger]

Maybe this will return Dan to the grave.

Labor ministers quizzed by corruption watchdog amid calls for Daniel Andrews to stand down (paywalled)

Several current and former ministers and dozens of Labor staffers have been interviewed in a major corruption probe into the misuse of public money.

A complaint from Premier Daniel Andrews last year triggered a joint investigation by the Independent Broad-based Anti-corruption Commission and Victoria’s Ombudsman into accusations of branch stacking by dumped minister Adem Somyurek and his allies.

But the Herald Sun understands the joint probe has widened its focus amid concerns of systemic misuse of public money including the wholesale deployment of taxpayer-funded staff to do Labor Party political work.

At least six current or former ministers are believed to have been spoken to.

With public hearings to commence next week, many in the government are fearful it could have devastating consequences for Labor.

It also emerged this week Mr Andrews and his key staff were being investigated by an entirely separate IBAC probe into the government’s dealings with the United Firefighters Union and its chief, Peter Marshall.

Disgruntled former party insiders were believed to have showed up to IBAC to “drop a bucket” – and in doing so, triggered a significant widening of the investigation.

Branch stacking investigations are a problem for the Labor party but I am pretty sure the LNP dont want them either. Remember this ?

'That's politics': Inside the Liberal Party's branch-stacking machine

The drab outer suburban Melbourne electorate office of conservative federal MP Kevin Andrews is an unlikely place to launch a political heist.

www.theage.com.au

Personally I hate it whoever does it, it just makes us all more dismissive about politicians and politics, but the liberals better be careful what they wish for.

Dan was made Labor leader because he got support from some major unions. The fire fighters were one of them and he had to deliver on his promise of a merger of the old CFA and the MFB, therefore significantly adding to the power of the union. He delivered.

I wouldn’t have thought it was illegal although although I disagree with it, plus it took a very decent and competent minister in Jane Garrett down as well.

 

[AngryAnt]

Yes, to be honest it sounds like the usual vague "people are saying" waffle beloved of Trump supporters and Herald Sun readers.

If IBAC are investigating I guess the truth will out eventually.

 

[Sintiger]

Hundreds of things are referred to IBAC every year. The requirements on advising them are pretty onerous, which is a good thing.
Many of them are looked at and not investigated and dealt with in-house, many are investigated to some extent to decide if they are taken further, some are investigated and dropped or action is taken and some go to hearings.
If every public sector employee referred to IBAC stood down it would be a long list.
Appearing or giving evidence to IBAC doesn’t necessarily mean anything, it could be that you are just part of information gathering.

 

[Baloo]

Yes, to be honest it sounds like the usual vague "people are saying" waffle beloved of Trump supporters and Herald Sun readers.

If IBAC are investigating I guess the truth will out eventually.

Are they investigating or examining?

 

[AngryAnt]

Are they investigating or examining?

Not sure and legally they are not even allowed to confirm if someone is being investigated.

 

[DavidSSS]

Taxpayer funded staff doing work for the political party the member of parliament they work for is a member of?

Geez, if they truly enforced any rules around that there would be no parliamentarians left. I'm not condoning this in any way, but I would estimate around 110% of taxpayer funded staff of MPs are doing this (I know, over 100%? I'm factoring in some skimming on the side!).

It's a rort and should stop but it is a rort built into the system.

DS

 

[Sintiger]

Taxpayer funded staff doing work for the political party the member of parliament they work for is a member of?

Geez, if they truly enforced any rules around that there would be no parliamentarians left. I'm not condoning this in any way, but I would estimate around 110% of taxpayer funded staff of MPs are doing this (I know, over 100%? I'm factoring in some skimming on the side!).

It's a rort and should stop but it is a rort built into the system.

DS

100% agree. It is rife throughout the system and rorted by all parties

That's why I reposted the investigation last year into Michael Sukkar, Kevin Andrews and the behind the scenes player Marcus Bastiaan. The ALP is being looked at but the Libs probably should keep quiet about it as well.

 

[LeeToRainesToRoach]

Are they investigating or examining?

They're investigating Victorian government corruption.

https://www.theage.com.au/politics/...ntre-of-corruption-probe-20211007-p58xyc.html

 

[22nd Man]

Branch stacking investigations are a problem for the Labor party but I am pretty sure the LNP dont want them either. Remember this ?

'That's politics': Inside the Liberal Party's branch-stacking machine

The drab outer suburban Melbourne electorate office of conservative federal MP Kevin Andrews is an unlikely place to launch a political heist.

www.theage.com.au

Personally I hate it whoever does it, it just makes us all more dismissive about politicians and politics, but the liberals better be careful what they wish for.

Dan was made Labor leader because he got support from some major unions. The fire fighters were one of them and he had to deliver on his promise of a merger of the old CFA and the MFB, therefore significantly adding to the power of the union. He delivered.

I wouldn’t have thought it was illegal although although I disagree with it, plus it took a very decent and competent minister in Jane Garrett down as well.

I am not even sure if "branch stacking" is a "crime". what is a local political party branch anyway? There are a lot of vociferous commentators on this thread many with strong preferences to one party or another, But not one has ever declared they are member of party or shared an experience as a member. And regardless of the rules of the party its the powerbrokers on state executives who make the big calls on pre-selection. And some of the powerbrokers don't have to hold an official position. Most branches have few dozen members and a lot less active ones.

I dont like the look of it but really its dog eat dog. Can you tell me of one candidate who missed preselection due to branch stacking who would have been a better choice than the dodgy one? eg Temerillo who did he knock off? wouldn't know and unlikely to make any difference to my life.

 

[22nd Man]

100% agree. It is rife throughout the system and rorted by all parties

That's why I reposted the investigation last year into Michael Sukkar, Kevin Andrews and the behind the scenes player Marcus Bastiaan. The ALP is being looked at but the Libs probably should keep quiet about it as well.

who would be preselected without those practices? You don't like Sukkar or Andrews but the alternative was more likely to be similar rather than the ideological opposite.

 

[22nd Man]

Taxpayer funded staff doing work for the political party the member of parliament they work for is a member of?

Geez, if they truly enforced any rules around that there would be no parliamentarians left. I'm not condoning this in any way, but I would estimate around 110% of taxpayer funded staff of MPs are doing this (I know, over 100%? I'm factoring in some skimming on the side!).

It's a rort and should stop but it is a rort built into the system.

DS

having 200 people in the Premiers Media unit on the public payroll is the biggest rort of all. What is the difference between government and the party in power?

[Doubt Guy will offer to cut the number in that unit by much as an election promise. ]

.... its a much more of a rort than the MPs cousin employed to make a few party related phone calls a day. (I understand why they employ Family members, who else could take orders from some of the DHs in parliament)

 

[Sintiger]

who would be preselected without those practices? You don't like Sukkar or Andrews but the alternative was more likely to be similar rather than the ideological opposite.

My comment was in reply to David's post about using taxpayer's money to pay staff who are working as political operatives not about branch stacking

I agree with your point about branch stacking probably not being illegal. It is certainly unethical but may not be illegal.

Sukkar is the member for Deakin which has been a swinging seat for years, probably more liberal than Labor. My suspicion would be that it would be a more moderate seat than where Sukkar sits on the political spectrum but branch stacking may well mean they don't get that choice of candidate.

 

[22nd Man]

My comment was in reply to David's post about using taxpayer's money to pay staff who are working as political operatives not about branch stacking

I agree with your point about branch stacking probably not being illegal. It is certainly unethical but may not be illegal.

Sukkar is the member for Deakin which has been a swinging seat for years, probably more liberal than Labor. My suspicion would be that it would be a more moderate seat than where Sukkar sits on the political spectrum but branch stacking may well mean they don't get that choice of candidate.

Does branch stacking always end up with a lesser / worse candidate ?
I get the point about the staff in mp offices but to claim these are the worst examples of govt money being used to promote party interests is over simplifying the issue.

 

[22nd Man]

Isn't branch stacking essentially exactly what our board does with every vacancy nowadays?

Well there are similarities..... and I saw stat's yesterday that said in company meetings resolutions endorsed by the Board are passed at rate of 98%. That would include board elections. No reason to think a modern FC board wouldn't follow the same path.