What's new
The Front Row Forums

Register a free account today to become a member of the world's largest Rugby League discussion forum! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

OT: Current Affairs and Politics

Bandwagon

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
33,173
I saw this legal eagle on the ABC yesterday morning talking about the model they have been setting up.

He said after reading what ScoMo has done he is convinced it is designed to protect Federal pollies, their staff, and their families.

It has nothing to do with corruption unless you are not in politics, so the sports rort and carparks rort would be exempt from investigations.

I don't get how there is no noise about this if what this guy said is true, it would be a total waste of time and money.

This is the draft legislation released around March I think. As far as I'm aware it is basically unchanged and is the working model they have.


Here's some comment on it from the Guardian..

Transparency International said, however, that the CIC model could be saved with significant changes. It also said the proposed funding levels were a good starting point.

Its criticisms have been echoed by other thinktanks and anti-corruption groups.

Earlier this week, the National Integrity Committee, a group of retired judges, said the legislation as drafted could leave ministers exempt from investigation.

The judges also warned that the requirement for “reasonable suspicion” before a corruption investigation begins would prevent preliminary investigation being carried out.

Anthony Whealy, a former New South Wales supreme court judge and member of the committee, said the shortcomings left the body “disastrously short” of being effective. “The government has fought for years against any proposal for a federal anti-corruption body,” he said. “Now it has put forward a proposal essentially designed to protect themselves, and to shield the public sector from proper scrutiny.”

The Centre for Public Integrity has also warned against the proposed model. In a November briefing paper, the Centre for Public Integrity warned the draft legislation prevented the CIC from conducting own-motion investigations of law enforcement corruption and did not allow it to make findings of corrupt conduct for parliamentarians


 

Bandwagon

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
33,173
I have little doubt that the government will table the above legislation knowing full well it won't get through the senate, Labor, the Greens and most independents won't have a bar of it.

The government will then go into the next election stating that Labor rejected the legislation, and so can't be believed on wanting to implement same. Why did they ( labor ) do this, what are they hiding, you can't trust them, blah blah blah.

The Murdoch press will toe the line, and a shit ton of disengaged plebs will just buy into it.
 

Gronk

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
64,471
This is the draft legislation released around March I think. As far as I'm aware it is basically unchanged and is the working model they have.


Here's some comment on it from the Guardian..

Transparency International said, however, that the CIC model could be saved with significant changes. It also said the proposed funding levels were a good starting point.

Its criticisms have been echoed by other thinktanks and anti-corruption groups.

Earlier this week, the National Integrity Committee, a group of retired judges, said the legislation as drafted could leave ministers exempt from investigation.

The judges also warned that the requirement for “reasonable suspicion” before a corruption investigation begins would prevent preliminary investigation being carried out.

Anthony Whealy, a former New South Wales supreme court judge and member of the committee, said the shortcomings left the body “disastrously short” of being effective. “The government has fought for years against any proposal for a federal anti-corruption body,” he said. “Now it has put forward a proposal essentially designed to protect themselves, and to shield the public sector from proper scrutiny.”

The Centre for Public Integrity has also warned against the proposed model. In a November briefing paper, the Centre for Public Integrity warned the draft legislation prevented the CIC from conducting own-motion investigations of law enforcement corruption and did not allow it to make findings of corrupt conduct for parliamentarians


Thanks for posting. Can’t say I’m surprised that a politician would create a Claytons Federal ICAC model. Sir Humphrey would be proud.
 

Bandwagon

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
33,173
It's also worth noting the Liberals created the ICAC here in NSW, after years of government by Labor, and allowed it retrospective powers. Unfortunately for them, it's bit them rather hard on the arse a few times now, so you can see why the feds are wary.
 

Bandwagon

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
33,173
Except it potentially has more than just economic ramifications

It still remains to be seen if they will fail, or probably more accurately if the CCP will allow them to fail.

Nothing is completely privately controlled in China, nor is anything immune to the whims of the CCP.

My money would be on them either propping them up, or more likely nationalising them, then it's a case of who's left holding the bag and for how much.

Who are their major bond holders?
 

Gronk

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
64,471
My bad .... politically correct lamb shortage? 😱
Yes and no. Chinese don't really do lamb or mutton, hence Mongolian. But that's just being pedantic and dumb.

I was more taking a pot shot at the CCP for murdering (sorry re-educating) muslims.
 

84 Baby

Referee
Messages
23,577
It still remains to be seen if they will fail, or probably more accurately if the CCP will allow them to fail.

Nothing is completely privately controlled in China, nor is anything immune to the whims of the CCP.

My money would be on them either propping them up, or more likely nationalising them, then it's a case of who's left holding the bag and for how much.

Who are their major bond holders?
My phone f**ked up (I probably have a key logger on my phone monitoring me) after I had a Ram style 40 paragraph response so basically Evergrande is more or less a government department of the CCP, the major bond holders are western world banks, but pay or don’t pay the underlying problems for why they couldn’t pay debts are still there and after a long roundabout way what’s the easiest way for a property development company to make money? Cheap land. And the cost of acquiring a certain island isn’t any more than they are currently spending anyway
 

84 Baby

Referee
Messages
23,577
Yes and no. Chinese don't really do lamb or mutton, hence Mongolian. But that's just being pedantic and dumb.

I was more taking a pot shot at the CCP for murdering (sorry re-educating) muslims.
Meh it’s not racially motivated
 

strider

Post Whore
Messages
74,480
Yes and no. Chinese don't really do lamb or mutton, hence Mongolian. But that's just being pedantic and dumb.

I was more taking a pot shot at the CCP for murdering (sorry re-educating) muslims.
mongolian lamb was invented in the US of A
 

strider

Post Whore
Messages
74,480
My phone f**ked up (I probably have a key logger on my phone monitoring me) after I had a Ram style 40 paragraph response so basically Evergrande is more or less a government department of the CCP, the major bond holders are western world banks, but pay or don’t pay the underlying problems for why they couldn’t pay debts are still there and after a long roundabout way what’s the easiest way for a property development company to make money? Cheap land. And the cost of acquiring a certain island isn’t any more than they are currently spending anyway
tasmainian lamb might be at risk then? ... maybe we can just give it to em as good will - keep the world ticking
 

Bandwagon

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
33,173
My phone f**ked up (I probably have a key logger on my phone monitoring me) after I had a Ram style 40 paragraph response so basically Evergrande is more or less a government department of the CCP, the major bond holders are western world banks, but pay or don’t pay the underlying problems for why they couldn’t pay debts are still there and after a long roundabout way what’s the easiest way for a property development company to make money? Cheap land. And the cost of acquiring a certain island isn’t any more than they are currently spending anyway

Every private Chinese held company in China is "basically a government dept" , depending on how loose you wanna be with the interpretation. But land isn't their problem, they already have plenty, as you undoubtedly know empty buildings are.

What's the easiest way for a property developer to go broke? Not sell the buildings they build.

Taiwan aint gonna fix a heap of empty buildings in China, no more than is bondholders doing their coin.

On a side note I just love how we've built a system where certain folks get to invest and as soon as it looks like they'll do their coin, it's panic stations.

It's as if for those merkins investment is always supposed to be a sure f**king thing, and when it's not, some merkin better stump up the coin or all hell's gonna break loose.
 

Latest posts

Top