Gillard protected the biggest criminal organisation
History will record that the largest criminal organisation in Australia was protected by the first woman prime minister of Australia. This is going to be a big month for Julia Gillard's reputation. Starting as early as Tuesday, she is likely to be called as a witness by the Royal Commission into Union Corruption. Then, on September 24, her political memoir will be launched.
The factual tide is flowing against her. Gillard's name will always be associated with the word "fraud". Frauds committed not by her but by others she supported. There is also a direct correlation between Gillard's actions as PM and the brazen contempt for law that has broken out across the construction industry, with national economic ramifications.
All of this has led the Productivity Commission, among many others, to urge the re-introduction of the Commonwealth Building Code, the re-instatement of the Australian Building and Construction Commission, and the introduction of higher penalties for unlawful activities in the construction industry. All because Gillard, as prime minister, shut down the ABCC and the building code after furious lobbying by the CFMEU, which hated the police powers of the ABCC and the legal restraints imposed by the building code. And Bill Shorten, as leader of the Labor Party, is fighting a rear-guard action to stop the ABCC and building code from being revived.
Gillard's actions while prime minister have had huge ramifications because the construction industry is huge, on a par with the mining industry, which is regarded as the engine of the economy. While mining represents 8.6 per cent of gross domestic product, construction represents 8.3 per cent, and employs many more people than mining, more than 1 million jobs.
On Gillard's watch, and as a direct result of some of her actions, the construction industry saw an outbreak of cost blow-outs and on-site intimidation that contributed to ending the mining boom and continues to inflate the cost of infrastructure, inhibit investment and destroy jobs.
None of this will even get a mention when Gillard is questioned at the Royal Commission this week. She has been called to give evidence about events which took place years ago, before she was in parliament. The outcome may or may not seriously damage her reputation. It will all revolve around whether she is found to have been a witting or unwitting participant in serious fraud because of her actions as a labour lawyer.
Whatever the outcome, Gillard has already been struck by fraud lightning far more than most politicians. The Labor figure on whose vote her government depended for survival, and whose reputation she defended, Craig Thomson, turned out to be a fraud and liar who misled the parliament on multiple occasions. The person she elevated to be speaker of the house, Peter Slipper, has since been convicted of fraud. Her former boyfriend, Bruce Wilson, is immersed in multiple serious fraud allegations.
The most defining speech of her career, the "misogyny" speech delivered in parliament on October 12, 2012, was based on not on evidence that Tony Abbott had a hatred of women but served as a cynical diversion from the scandals embroiling her leadership. It set a poor precedent that the first woman PM would resort to a vindictive personal attack, playing the gender card, to deflect from multiple self-inflicted controversies.
The defining promise of her one election campaign as leader – no carbon tax – turned out to be a falsity. Even her greatest legislative legacy, the National Disability Insurance Scheme, was drafted and passed with bipartisan support, but not adequately funded.
The Australian people have delivered an adverse verdict on Gillard's leadership. She took a comfortable majority into the 2010 federal election and lost it all. She never had the chance to go to a second election because her standing in the opinion polls had sunk so low her party removed her rather than face the electorate with her as leader.
Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/comment/two-shades-of-limelight-for-julia-gillard-with-royal-commission-and-memoir-launch-20140907-10dljw.html#ixzz3CiHCeGwh
Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/comment/two-shades-of-limelight-for-julia-gillard-with-royal-commission-and-memoir-launch-20140907-10dljw.html#ixzz3CiGZNOvb
Crikey paywall
During this morning's session Stoljar tried to establish whether Gillard had written copy for an advertisement that had to be placed for the incorporation of the WRA. After she answered that she didn't think she had, Stoljar attempted to press:
“The likelihood is that you advised Mr Wilson of the necessity of placing the public advertisement?”
“Mr. Stoljar I'm giving evidence in a royal commission, I'm not prepared to guess.”
The press room chuckled. Stoljar paused for a moment, and Neil Clelland QC, counsel for Gillard, interjected:
Clelland: “I'm sure it hasn't escaped Mr Stoljar's recollection, I think Mr Blewitt gave some evidence about this matter on 12 May 2014, pages 16 and 17 of the transcript, and he gave some evidence about who had drafted the advertisement, if that's of assistance to our learned friend. He nominates Mr Wilson.”
Stoljar: “This witness is giving her recollection of events, and I'm not sure if it assists --”
Clelland: “I thought if Mr Stoljar was interested in who actually drafted it, there was some evidence of it.”
Mr Stoljar did not appreciate the help.
Stoljar: “I put on record the interjection was quite inappropriate.”
More laughs.
How did it come to this? It's largely down to Michael Smith, the former 2UE drive presenter, who essentially lost his job over pursuing this story in 2011. He has spent his time since then feeding questions to talkback radio colleagues and News Corp allies to keep the story alive, with his encyclopedic knowledge of the case. His website, is kept afloat by public donation and is the most comprehensive resource on the Gillard/AWU accusations.
He had become a friend to Gillard's chief accuser, Ralph Blewitt, and dedicated himself to a website whose sole purpose was the pursuit of Gillard's scalp. With 90,000 hits a day, the site accepts public donations to keep Smith afloat.
But Smith was unlikely to have got what he wanted out of this morning's appearance. The wind has long gone out of the sails of this inquiry.
In time, those who have believed the conspiracy will perhaps wish they had not had their day.