AWU scandal: Is Roxon’s denial a fabrication? VIA Andrew Bolt.

his denial of Attorney-General Nicola Roxon on Meet The Press this morning is curious. What exactly is the “complete fabrication” she refers to?: 

HUGH RIMINTON: Could I quickly get you to resolve one thing? It has been said - you were a lawyer at Maurice Blackburn in the 1990s - and it has been reported in the papers that the AWU files came across your desk, when they shifted from Slater and Gordon to your company. Did you see them, did you?

NICOLA ROXON: No, look, this is also another complete fabrication. It’s true that I worked at Maurice Blackburn, and it’s true that the new union leadership were one of the clients. But there is a number of years between these issues. Again, people are just trying to make a link, because they want this story to keep running, they want to distract the Government from getting on with its serious work, and I’m not going to let it do that.    

First, a “number of years”?

When Julia Gillard formally resigned - under a cloud from the scandal - from Slater & Gordon: 

1996

When Roxon was with Maurice Blackburn: 

Industrial lawyer: Senior Associate, Maurice Blackburn and Co 1996-98.

That’s not “a number of years” at all. It’s two at most, or arguably three.

Second, is the fabrication that Roxon didn’t see any of the AWU files?  In fact:

Legal correspondence obtained by The Australian shows that Ms Roxon, as a solicitor for Maurice Blackburn & Co, a Melbourne law firm, worked on the AWU’s legal files after Ms Gillard’s departure from Slater & Gordon…

After the alleged fraud was exposed, the matters surrounding the union’s finances became the subject of an investigation by the Australian Industrial Relations Commission.

As a solicitor for the AWU Ms Roxon was directly involved in the handover of union documents for the investigation, as well as advising the then national union head, Terry Muscat. One of her legal letters to the commission’s then industrial registrar describes a 1998 conference at which ‘‘we identified outstanding documents which needed to be provided to your office for the purposes of completing your investigation’’.

Ms Roxon’s letter sought from the commission an opportunity to make a special case to the registrar ‘‘on the questions of breach, mitigation, consequences and the public or private nature of any final determinations, prior to any determination being made by the registrar in this matter’’.

Ms Roxon declined to answer questions but issued a statement that said she was ‘‘involved, to various degrees, in much of the work the (AWU) referred to Maurice Blackburn including unfair dismissals, discrimination cases, coverage matters and many general industrial disputes’’.

‘‘I have no recollection of any of that work involving Ms Gillard...”

And yet, as The Australian found, there’s written evidence that Roxon indeed worked on the AWU slush fund case: 

So what exactly is the “complete fabrication”? We should be told. Or is Roxon’s denial the fabrication?

(Thanks to reader Erin.)

AWU scandal: Is Roxon’s denial a fabrication? | Herald Sun Andrew Bolt Blog: