PM's poll pain: Abbott and Rudd more popular

VOTING INTENTION

2010 TO PRESENT

PREFFERED PRIME MINISTER

"SUPPORT for both Julia Gillard and her government has slumped, wiping out most of the gains made since the carbon tax was introduced last year and raising the chances that she could be replaced by Kevin Rudd.

Tony Abbott now leads Ms Gillard as preferred prime minister for the first time in seven months, but Mr Rudd declared on Sunday that he would not be drafted into the Labor leadership.

The Herald/Nielsen poll found the gap between Ms Gillard and the former prime minister has grown, with Mr Rudd favoured by 61 per cent of respondents to just 35 per cent for her."

Julia Gillard … deserted by voters.

The ALP is gripped by internal tensions over the possibility, but Mr Rudd, who fuelled speculation last week with criticism of the mining tax, used a sixth high-profile TV appearance in a week to dismiss speculation.

Advertisement

''A couple of weeks ago I said everyone should take a cold shower,'' he told Sky News Agenda. ''Last Friday I said they should have an ice bath. It's time this debate was put into cryogenic storage.''

Labor's support, which had climbed into the mid-30s, has now collapsed, plunging it back towards landslide-losing territory were an election held now.

Its primary vote stands at just 30 per cent, a dip of 5 points since the last survey in December and a mere 4 points above its nadir of 26 per cent in May 2012.

Support for the Coalition rose 4 points, taking its primary vote to 47 per cent - its highest level since just after the carbon tax began in July 2012. Greens support held steady at 11 per cent.

On a two-party-preferred basis, Labor's support languishes at 45 per cent to 55 per cent for the Coalition, according to voter feedback on the direction of second preferences.

Based on preference flows from the 2010 election, the two-party split is 44/56 in favour of the Coalition - a swing towards the Coalition.

It was a bad sign for the government in an election year, the pollster John Stirton said.

''It confirms that the trend to Labor that ran from May to November last year and appeared to stall over Christmas is now heading in the opposite direction,'' he said.

Crucially, in terms of Ms Gillard's command of the Labor leadership, Mr Abbott has overtaken her in the preferred prime minister stakes with his support leaping by 9 percentage points to 49 per cent compared with Ms Gillard on 45 - down 5 points.

Labor strategists have previously pointed to her superior popularity as an important reason to retain her as leader.

The poll follows a terrible fortnight for Labor in which Mr Rudd returned prominently to the airwaves and the Treasurer, Wayne Swan, admitted his mining tax had raised almost no revenue.

Fewer than one in four voters now support the mining tax in its current form, with two thirds of voters in favour of either dumping it or making it stronger.

The national poll of 1400 voters was carried out between Thursday and Saturday.

Approval/disapproval ratings tell a similar story of woe for the embattled Prime Minister.

The snapshot of voter sentiment coincides with a Galaxy Poll published by News Limited newspapers on Sunday that showed female voters, thought to be Ms Gillard's secret weapon against Mr Abbott, were walking away, with 36 per cent indicating support for the Prime Minister.

Mr Stirton said it was possible that women may have led the charge away from Ms Gillard.

''There is some evidence that the fall in Labor's vote was greater among women than men but we will need another round of polls to confirm this,'' he said.

PM's poll pain: Abbott and Rudd more popular:

Galaxy poll shows female voters choose Tony Abbott

Tony Abbott's family Christmas card, featuring Margie, Tony, Frances, Louise and Bridget.

FEMALE voters have rejected Julia Gillard's claim Tony Abbott is a misogynist and are preparing to elect him prime minister despite some concerns about his "negativity" and views on abortion.

In the nation's first female-only Galaxy poll, The Sunday Telegraphasked women to tell us the real reasons for the gender gap on voting intentions.

The exclusive results reveal women stand ready to end the reign of Australia's first female Prime Minister on September 14, with just one in three women - 36 per cent - preparing to vote Labor.

But the Galaxy results also found high levels of concern among women about Mr Abbott, with 44 per cent concerned "he says no to everything" and 39 per cent concerned about his views on abortion.

Mr Abbott, who says his position on abortion is that it should be "safe, legal and rare", has previously described abortion as an "easy way out" and a national tragedy.

A majority of women also said Mr Abbott's push to campaign as a family man, surrounded by his wife Margie and three daughters, would have no influence on their vote - and nor would the fact Ms Gillard has no children.

However, 13 per cent said they were more likely to vote for Mr Abbott because he had the life experience of marriage and raising kids, and 13 per cent were less likely to vote for Ms Gillard because she did not.

"Female voters are supporting the Liberal Party despite concerns about Tony Abbott," Galaxy's David Briggs said. "The majority of female voters - 62 per cent - do have some concerns about Tony Abbott.

"Among females aged 18-34 years, 46 per cent are concerned about the Opposition Leader's views on abortion."

The survey found 44 per cent of women firmly reject the PM's claim that Mr Abbott is a misogynist. Just 25 per cent agreed Mr Abbott was a misogynist, a figure that included 44 per cent of female Labor voters and 9 per cent of female Coalition voters.

Women were divided over whether Ms Gillard was a good role model, with 44 per cent saying yes and 43 per cent calling her a "disappointment". A majority of women aged over 50 regard the Prime Minister as a "disappointing" role model but support for Ms Gillard is stronger among younger women, with 46 per cent backing her as "good".

Mr Abbott has ramped up appearances with his wife Margie and his daughters, stressing his experience with balancing a family budget.

But the majority of female voters - 81 per cent - say his family-man status and the PM's unmarried, childless status had no bearing on their vote.

The PM has endured political attacks over her marital status for years, with Liberal Senator Bill Heffernan once describing her as "deliberately barren" and suggesting Kevin Rudd at least knew his way around "the nappy bucket".

This Galaxy poll was based on a national sample of 800 female voters.

The primary vote of 36 per cent for the PM is three points below female support for Gillard in a Galaxy poll conducted at the time of the August 2010 federal election.

Primary support for the Coalition is 46 per cent - three points higher than females polled at the time of the last election. Assuming a flow of preferences similar to the last election, this would result in a two party preferred figure of 47 per cent for Labor and 53 per cent for the Coalition.

Galaxy poll shows female voters choose Tony Abbott

The unfounded slurs on the Victoria Police Fraud and Extortion Squad have sinister overtones - @mpsmithnews

I've been troubled by the number and intensity of false allegations of misconduct and malicious behaviour made against Victoria Police by Craig Thomson and his lawyer for a few days now.   It doesn't make any sense when you view it through the lens of what is logically in Craig Thomson's interests.   Think about it, the coppers have the trump cards, if you were in Craig's shoes would you be out there getting stuck into them at every turn?  It's not going to help in the court house, so why is it happening?

I hope I am wrong, but I sense some disturbing, sinister portents.  

Craig Thomson was investigated and charged by members of the Victoria Police Fraud and Extortion Squad.

The Prime Minister Julia Gillard is being investigated for serious criminal offences by the same squad of police in relation to The AWU Scandal.

Back to Craig.  At every point of contact with the media this year, Craig Thomson and his lawyer have each made serious allegations against the Victoria Police Fraud Squad.

Thomson was arrested by the police authority with power of arrest in NSW, the NSW Police.   NSW Police were responsible for executing the warrant, processing Mr Thomson, holding him, bringing him before the NSW Court and then arranging for the return of the warrant once bail conditions were set.

So read this account of the day from Mr Thomson, who spent  precisely no time in the custody of Victoria Police.    The timing of the arrest was decided by NSW Police quite properly for operational reasons.   Victoria Police had no operational role.

This article from The Australian newspaper captures Mr Thomson's key messages - you can choose from dozens of other media appearances where Thomson's key messages are the same.

FORMER Labor federal MP Craig Thomson maintains Victorian police deliberately set out to make a spectacle of his arrest on fraud charges.

Mr Thomson, who now sits as an independent in Parliament, was last week arrested by NSW police executing a Victorian warrant at his electorate office at Tuggerah on the NSW central coast.

The arrest was captured by television cameras and caused a sensation in political circles.

NSW fraud squad chief, Detective Superintendent Colin Dyson, admitted on Monday he had erred in saying Mr Thomson had refused when asked to surrender prior to his arrest.

''The NSW police were misled by the Victorian police,'' Mr Thomson told ABC Radio today.

 ''The truth of the matter is they could have sent a summons to my solicitor and we would have been there tomorrow in Melbourne just the same.

''(It) was deliberately designed to create a spectacle. That's what they went out to achieve. It was unnecessary and hurtful and humiliating.''

'I have done nothing wrong'

MP Craig Thomson denies any wrongdoing as he faces charges of 150 counts of fraud.

Mr Thomson told Fairfax his arrest and court restrictions placed on him not to approach prostitutes were about whipping up his case.

''I think the condition is about sensationalising this case,'' he said, adding that he had never used a prostitute.

When asked if the condition was a police concoction, he said: ''Absolutely.''

Thomson arrest a circus: lawyer

Craig Thomson's lawyer Chris McCardle slams the police and media over the handling of his client's arrest.

''What a preposterous bail condition to have there.

''... They've picked out something that they believe will make this even more sensational and it's a ridiculous bail condition and if I'd had my wits about me a little bit more when that bail condition was put I would have objected to it.''

He said some of the 150 charges against him were for amounts smaller than $20 and other charges were double-ups.

''I think the police were after a big number. The police were after the spectacular arrest in terms of this,'' he said.

The MP said two rounds of strip searching by police was ''certainly not routine''.

''You take off an item at a time and turn around until you have nothing on,'' he said.

''So that was both distressing and humiliating.

''(I feel) both angry and humiliated, which I think at least the latter was the intention of the strip search. There is no other possible explanation for it.''

He said he was not sure whether political interference in his case from the Coalition had played any role in events.

Mr Thomson has consistently denied allegations he misused member funds to pay for prostitutes, air travel, entertainment and cash withdrawals when he was national secretary of the Health Services Union (HSU).

Mr Thomson also said he was committed to seeing out his term in his seat of Dobell but had not made any further commitments.

While his arrest had damaged the federal government, Mr Thomson believed Labor could win the September 14 election based on its policies.

Mr Thomson's wife will accompany him when he faces Melbourne Magistrates Court on Wednesday over the 149 charges.

ENDS

I have dealt with the officers of this squad.   They are dead straight policemen, interested in the law and breaches of the law.   They abhor media coverage.   I have never heard a single political comment from any officer of the squad.

There were apparently sound reasons for Mr Thomson's arrest, a process that includes fingerprinting.

I would imagine that police have evidence to lead at court from the witnesses (the escort agencies) with whom Mr Thomson has been ordered not to communicate.   Both of those elements of Mr Thomson's matter are unremarkable.

None of Mr Thomson's allegations about police actions or motivations is true.   If he had any genuine observations of police misbehaviour the police internal affairs, or ethics and integrity division would be falling over themselves to investigate it.   But there is no such factual complaint, just the constant, inaccurate smearing at every turn.  And it is combined with the vague allusions to the involvement of the Coalition, reported faithfully without comment by much of the media.

Compare Mr Thomson's recent discovery of how badly the Victoria Police do everything, with his analysis of the behaviour of the same police traipsing through his house with a search warrant last year.  Mr Thomson praised the police then for their professionalism - the date was 24 October, 2012.

What's changed?  The police behaviour?   The police members on the job?  No, none of those factors have changed.

What has changed in the interim is that Julia Gillard is now a person of interest in a major union-related fraud that is being investigated by the same squad of police as investigated and charged Thomson.

This "cheat-sheet" was leaked to me in 2011, just after my interview with Craig Thomson and  one of our readers has sent me in a second copy more recently.   It's a copy of the briefing to Labor members of parliament provided by the PM's media team and it provides the talking points in answer to the day's possible questions.

Download Thomson cheat sheet

The Prime Minister's office confirmed last week that the PM and her staff are aware that she is the subject of a police investigation by the Victoria Police.  The Prime Minister has a large staff, including John McTernan and other spin doctors.   Just a week or so ago the Prime Minister's office blocked an FOI application by Hedley Thomas for any papers prepared at taxpayer expense in the management of this growing AWU issue for the PM.  The official answer from the PM's office - there are none.

I hope the practice of releasing those 'cheat-sheet" for media comments has ceased.

The unfounded slurs against the conduct of the Victoria Police Fraud Squad have to stop.   Its investigators should be left to their jobs unhindered by false allegations.   Any move on the part of any federal politician or his or her lawyer to improperly attack the motivations or operations of a state police force which is engaged in investigating the conduct of Federal parliamentarians would represent a grave danger to the heart of our system of government - and justice.

The unfounded slurs on the Victoria Police Fraud and Extortion Squad have sinister overtones

Caucus won't dance to the PM's tune: Where no monkeys

THERE is only one way Julia Gillard can silence her many internal critics, and it will not be through lectures or intimidation.

All she did by effectively telling them on Tuesday to stop leaking against her was put up in lights their loss of faith in her and her distrust of them.

They will shut up when she stops making mistakes and shows she has learned from the ones she has made. Sadly, that seems unlikely so, given the perilous position many Labor MPs face, staying quiet and pretending everything is hunky-dory won't happen. It wouldn't fix the problems anyway.

What unsettled the Labor critics so much and what has confounded the public is the stunning mismatch of words and deeds, and the promise of stability coupled with acts of shock and awe. Only an exceptional leader could conquer these contradictions; then again, an exceptional leader would not create them.

Disagreements within the highest echelons of the government surfaced over Gillard's wisdom in declaring the election date so far out. Those who thought it was a good idea were soon in furious agreement, with the emphasis on furious, on the resignation of two senior cabinet ministers at the weekend. It was greeted near universally behind the scenes as an unmitigated disaster.

One frustrated minister said the problem was not just that it would be seen as a sign the government was unravelling; he feared it was actually unravelling. No matter what gloss or spin accompanied their departure or the quality of their successors, it should not have been allowed to happen, particularly after Gillard's central reason for naming September 14 as election day was to provide stability and certainty.

Another minister described it as madness and the Prime Minister herself as mad, and for many reasons, including that the Senate vacancy left by Chris Evans in Western Australia easily could have been filled by an indigenous Australian from that state, thus preventing Northern Territory Labor ripping itself apart over Nova Peris.

A lower level of irritation for Gillard's cringing colleagues was the decision to showcase her partner Tim Mathieson. Clearly wanting to help and to show he is as much an asset as any other modern political family, Mathieson appeared prominently in shot, holding the pet dog in his arms and stroking him, as Gillard made a speech for Australia Day award nominees. A gauche performance replete with alleged joke followed soon after at the drinks for the PM's XI.

While the two ministers are united in their assessment of their survival prospects, they remain divided about the solution, which says it all about where the government finds itself.

One still hopes of a Rudd return to save the government, saying nothing should be ruled out; the other discounts suggestions Kevin Rudd is closer and remains glued to Gillard even if it means losing with her, as he confidently expects he will.

Gillard's failure to discuss in even the broadest terms her election plans with her cabinet, the timing of the two resignations, and her remarks to caucus reveal the profound dysfunction now at the heart of government. At the cabinet meeting the night before Gillard's speech to the National Press Club, there was a political discussion as per usual after the formal deliberations. Sources say Gillard gave her usual spiel about the need to keep the pressure and the focus on Tony Abbott. She now refrains from mentioning the Opposition Leader's name, but she wants everyone else to keep talking about him.

Inside the cabinet room she did not raise the election, not even in general terms, nor did anyone else, even though she had separately consulted some ministers, then warned Tony Windsor, Rob Oakeshott and Christine Milne, obviously all more trustworthy than those supposedly on her side.

Gillard did consult Northern Territory MP Warren Snowdon days before booting long-term senator Trish Crossin for Peris. He objected, was ignored, then stayed quiet rather than tell his colleagues so they could help scuttle it. Now he is worried about losing his seat, especially as Labor insiders fear more damaging stories will emerge about Peris and predict it will end, as it began for her, in tears.

The most benign construction that could be put on the timing of Nicola Roxon's and Evans's resignation was that they were a circuit-breaker to correct yet another circuit-breaker that had short-circuited, thus diverting attention from the Craig Thomson saga, which had undercut the election announcement. This theory was instantly dismissed by experienced operators from both sides, who appreciate that in politics, as in comedy, timing is everything.

It didn't pass the sniff test. Nor did the story that the timing was designed to keep Rudd at bay. All that did was foster the belief that everything Gillard does is designed to ensure her own survival. Roxon and Evans didn't sound like rats, but they certainly looked like them and smelled like them, and that was the only sniff test that counted. And if that's offensive, sorry, but I am not sorry.

If it is true, as the Prime Minister said, that both had signalled their intentions a year ago, they should have gone then. Or they should have left before Christmas or any time before her announcement of the election date.

If they resisted, the Prime Minister, knowing what she knew, including her own intention to nominate the election date, should have insisted.

Continuing in their jobs after they had decided not to hang around was selfish and indulgent. It was definitely not in the best interests of Gillard or the government. And they are supposed to be her friends.

Labor MPs were struggling to remember other high-profile departures after the leader had called the election and could not.

Not unless you count Bill Hayden's involuntary departure from the opposition leadership on the day Malcolm Fraser called the election that enabled the installation of Bob Hawke. Which brings us right back to Rudd and the kind of scenario that gives Gillard, half the Labor Party and all the Liberals nightmares.

After trying to turn him into mincemeat last year, Labor ministers now want him to help them win the election by playing monkey to Gillard's organ grinder. As he said when he revived other unpleasant memories of his leadership by engaging with media outside a church, give us a break.

Many more things will go wrong between now and September 14, not all of them for Gillard. Apart from the obvious advantages knowing the date provides the opposition, it leaves no room for errors by Abbott and his team, not on candidate selection, or on logistics or costings.

They will have no excuse for any mistakes, which Gillard is counting on to save herself.

However, Abbott's tonier performance, especially yesterday in parliament on closing the gap, if repeated consistently until the election, shows what he can do when he puts his heart and mind into it. That too is the stuff of nightmares for Labor.

Craig Thomson to face an additional five charges of fraud, told to stay away from brothels

EMBATTLED MP Craig Thomson has been warned off making contact with sex workers at several brothels he allegedly frequented from 2003 to 2007.

The bail condition was set as charge sheets reveal he is facing 154 charges ranging from deception involving amounts of more than $2000, to small amounts for in-house R-rated pornographic movies on union credit cards he is alleged to have falsely represented as his own.

Mr Thomson appeared in the Melbourne Magistrates Court, where a further five charges were laid in relation to alleged misuse of union funds.

He was ordered to reappear for a committal mention on May 22.

The former Labor MP, now sitting as an independent, later emerged from court with his wife, Zoe Arnold to again vigorously protest his innocence.

After joking that the media pack waiting for him was more like an AFL grand final turnout, Mr Thomson, arrested on the NSW Central Coast last week, also complained that police had yet to produce a list of witnesses in the case.

“What was disappointing about today was it became clear that not only was last Thursday wrongly done by the police, but after 18 months in relation to investigating this matter they still don't even have witnesses that they are able to produce for us in terms of some of these issues that are here.

“So that's disappointing.We are trying to get on with this, get it on as quickly as we can.

“It wasn't encouraging that the police still aren't even ready after all this time, but we'll get on with it as quickly as we can to clear my name.”

In court, Mr Thomson's barrister, Bill Dwyer, argued that prosecutors should identify the witnesses his client was prohibited from contacting.

However magistrate Donna Bakos agreed to prosecutors amending bail conditions prohibiting him from contacting a “class of persons” owning or working at particular businesses, including Boardroom Escorts, Tiffany's Girls, A Touch of Class and Young Blondes.

Mr Thomson must also notify police of any trips interstate or overseas unless he is going to Canberra for parliamentary business.

In court he spoke only when asked by Ms Bakos whether he understood the varied conditions of his bail.

He stood and replied: “Yes I do your honour”.

Mr Dwyer also told Ms Bakos that claims in the warrant for arrest that Mr Thomson had been avoiding service of the summons and not making himself available to police were untrue.

“That's simply not accepted,” Mr Dwyer said. “He was always available.

“Police were well aware he was.”

Ms Bakos said the court was not concerned with his comments because it had heard no such allegation from the prosecution.

“He is here, he's answered his bail, that is all this court is concerned about,” Ms Bakos said.

Mr Dwyer said his client had had the matters hanging over his head for a long time.

“He is anxious to get these matters resolved,” he said.

Mr Thomson has repeatedly denied allegations he misused member funds to pay for prostitutes, air travel, entertainment and cash withdrawals when he was national secretary of the Health Services Union (HSU).

He said outside court he would not make any further comment given the matter was before the courts.

He joked about the size of the media scrum.

“You'd think it's (the) AFL grand final with all you blokes here,” he said.

“I'm sure you'll all be back here on the 22nd.

“Talk to you then.”

VIEW ALL 154 CHARGE SHEETS:  CLICK HERE


Craig Thomson to face an additional five charges of fraud, told to stay away from brothels

And people vote for these parasites, are they F#@KING MAD! Senior Labor figures admit to gifts from Obeid

Australian Labor Party  powerbroker Eddie Obeid.  

Anthony Stephen 'Tony' Burke
is an Australian politician
representing the Labor
Party, and the current
Minister for
Sustainability, Environment,
Water, Population and Communities.

THREE of Labor's most senior politicians - federal Environment Minister Tony Burke, Communications Minister Stephen Conroy and New South Wales Opposition Leader John Robertson - have been dragged into a corruption probe after admitting they accepted lavish ski trips from the ALP powerbroker Eddie Obeid.  

In his final few moments in the witness box at the Independent Commission Against Corruption on Tuesday, Mr Obeid named six senior Labor figures he claimed had accepted thousands of dollars worth of hospitality from his family at a lodge in the Perisher ski resort.

Mr Obeid was being questioned about his generosity to former state mining minister Ian Macdonald, who is accused of providing the Obeid family confidential information about a government coal tender. Mr Macdonald was given a rent-free holiday at the Obeids' three-bedroom ski lodge, The Stables at Perisher, which costs more than $7500 a week in peak season. The Obeids also picked up Mr Macdonald's meals tab.

Mr Obeid denied providing such hospitality was to create obligations on behalf of other people. ''We're generous people and we like to share our generosity with our friends,'' he told the corruption inquiry.

Stephen Michael Conroy
is an Australian
politician and the
current Minister for
Broadband, Communications
and the Digital
Economy in the Gillard Ministry.

Mr Obeid added that he thought the federal Workplace Minister, Bill Shorten, had enjoyed a holiday on the slopes with Mr Burke. Mr Obeid was mistaken. It was not Mr Shorten, who doesn't ski, but his colleague Mr Conroy, who issued a statement saying: ''I wish to declare one stay for two days at this apartment in either 2005 or 2006.''

In a statement Mr Burke said: ''Given the media interest which has emerged today, I declare two separate stays at this accommodation in the period 2004 to 2006.''  

Both Mr Burke, who enjoyed two stays, and Mr Conroy, who had one, said the Obeid family was not present. Both ministers said that although they had accepted Mr Obeid's generosity in a personal capacity, the pair believed it was in the public interest to clarify the matter.

The Federal Parliament's disclosure rules state that ''any sponsored travel or hospitality received where the value of the sponsored travel or hospitality exceeds $300'' must be declared.

Mr Obeid said the former NSW premier, Morris Iemma, the former NSW minister Carl Scully and the former federal minister turned lobbyist Mark Arbib had all stayed at The Stables lodge.

John Cameron
Robertson MP,
an Australian politician,
is the Leader of the
Australian Labor Party
in New South Wales
and the Leader of the Opposition

Mr Iemma denied the claim. Mr Scully said he stayed there twice but ''as this was from a fellow parliamentary colleague I did not at the time believe I was required to declare it in the pecuniary interest register''. 

Mr Robertson and Mr Arbib confirmed they had accepted Mr Obeid's hospitality, but said it was before they entered Parliament.                                                          

Mr Robertson said his trip, with his family, occurred in 2007 when he was the head of Unions NSW. He said no politicians or members of the Obeid family were present.

The disclosure comes just days after Mr Robertson unveiled new transparency reforms to clean up Labor's image in NSW and counter the impact of the ICAC inquiry.

Mr Arbib, who now works as a lobbyist for James Packer's Crown Limited, said he had spent a weekend at Mr Obeid's lodge in 2004-05, when he was the general secretary of NSW Labor.

Mr Obeid's testimony came as a result of a two-year investigation undertaken by ICAC into an allegedly corrupt 2008 coal licence tender run by Mr Macdonald that led to windfall gains for the Obeid family of more than $75 million.

During his second day of interrogation by counsel assisting the inquiry, Geoffrey Watson, SC, Mr Obeid was grilled about his own pecuniary interest declaration, which made no mention of the millions of dollars flowing into the Obeid family trust.

Mr Obeid repeatedly declared he did not know and could not explain the workings of the accounts - including how it was that payments made to his family's business partners, its staff and even to himself were channelled through his wife's loan account.

Senior Labor figures admit to gifts from Obeid

A legal eagle has kindly contributed these thoughts about aiding, abetting, procuring, counselling and acting in concert in criminal enterprise: @mpsmithnews

Michael Smith:

Steve J has been very generous to us with his time and his expertise.   In this article, Steve looks at the Criminal Code and its provisions about principal offenders and those who help them out.

Steve J said:

These would appear to be the relevant sections of the Queensland code.  I believe WA is identical.

7 Principal offenders

(1) When an offence is committed, each of the following persons

is deemed to have taken part in committing the offence and to

be guilty of the offence, and may be charged with actually

committing it, that is to say—

(a) every person who actually does the act or makes the

omission which constitutes the offence;

(b) every person who does or omits to do any act for the

purpose of enabling or aiding another person to commit

the offence;

(c) every person who aids another person in committing the

offence;

(d) any person who counsels or procures any other person to

commit the offence.

(2) Under subsection (1)(d) the person may be charged either

with committing the offence or with counselling or procuring

its commission.

(3) A conviction of counselling or procuring the commission of

an offence entails the same consequences in all respects as a

conviction of committing the offence.

(4) Any person who procures another to do or omit to do any act

of such a nature that, if the person had done the act or made

the omission, the act or omission would have constituted an

offence on the person’s part, is guilty of an offence of the

same kind, and is liable to the same punishment, as if the

person had done the act or made the omission; and the person

may be charged with doing the act or making the omission.

An outline of the steps I see as necessary to the commission of the offence are set out in my comments under Section 8 below.

It would appear that (1) (a) (c) and (d) cover the cases of “principal in the first degree” “principal in the second degree” and “accessory before the fact”.

R v Saliba [1973] Qd R 142.

Para (a) covers all persons who do one or more in a series of acts which constitute the offence.

An accessory should not be held liable for anything that they have not realised may be involved in the project agreed upon. Brennan v R (1936) 55 CLR 253.

However deliberately refraining from making enquiries places that person in the same position as knowing the facts.

To show Gillard aided in the commission of the offence we must show she knew what the association was to be used for, or should have made enquiries and refrained from doing so.

Some active steps must be taken by word or action.

Para (c) requires the aider to know what offence is being committed or at least what offence might be committed by the person being aided.

An intimation of encouragement or acquiescence sufficient to constitute aiding and abetting may exist where an indication is given that some duty owed to a party affected by the proposed act is not to be performed. Re Brotherson [1957] SR (NSW) 326.

This may have relevance to Gillards duty towards her client, the AWU.

She had a duty to prevent the unauthorised use of the name AWU.

She had a duty to enquire into why the Association was seeking to use that name.

This is a strong example of where actual knowledge should be implied.

If appropriate questions were not asked it can only be because Gillard deliberately refrained from asking them.

The question of whether someone has counselled another to commit an offence requires a consideration of what the former has urged or advised the later to do.

There may be more than one offence that Gillard has had a role in counselling.

This has obvious relevance to the advice to Ralph concerning the lodgement of the application for incorporation. Given Wilsons involvement at the relevant meeting he would also be included in this.

A person cannot counsel or procure unless they know or intend what is to be done.

Similar considerations to those outlined above would apply here.

8 Offences committed in prosecution of common purpose

When 2 or more persons form a common intention to

prosecute an unlawful purpose in conjunction with one

another, and in the prosecution of such purpose an offence is

committed of such a nature that its commission was a

probable consequence of the prosecution of such purpose,

each of them is deemed to have committed the offence

My assertion is that Wilson corruptly solicited and/or received from Theiss valuable consideration either as an inducement or reward for ensuring industrial peace or as a reward for ensuring Theiss got the contract.

In so far as the consideration related to industrial peace this was a matter relating to the affairs of his Principal as defined, the AWU.

Both Section7 and 8 can be used in situations where the actual perpetrator is unknown.

S 8 extends the criminal responsibility of persons who have made a concert to commit an offence.

They are responsible not only for the concerted or willed offence, but also for such offences as are objectively the probable consequence of the prosecution of the concert.

Here we know who committed the offence, (Wilson).

We need to show a joint enterprise and what has been agreed as part of that enterprise.

We only need to show that Gillard contemplated and foresaw that the primary offenders act was a possible incident of the planned joint enterprise. Chang Wing-Siu v R [1985]AC 168.

Not asking the obvious questions will not help her and the duty she owed to the AWU will be relevant to this and any lack of appropriate action.

The joint enterprise consisted of putting in place the structures needed to allow Theiss to pay amounts to the benefit of Wilson and pass those amounts off as legitimate expenses relating to Workplace Reform. It also consisted of negotiating these arrangements with Theiss and the invoicing and collection of funds.

The disbursal of the funds is not part of the offence but it may be instructive as to who was actually involved in the joint enterprise..

Gillard helped with the structure. She may also have been involved in the disbursements.

Ralph allowed his name to be used in the setting up of the structure and assisted in the  invoicing and collection.

Wilson was involved in the Theiss negotiations and assisted with the structure.

Wilson benefitted from the cash and it appears to be highly likely that Gillard did as well.

The evidence of Ralph and Bill the builder will be relevant.

To me the name AWU WRA has always been the key.

Gillard drafted the rules for the association to be consistent with the objects of promoting workplace reform.

She said she understood that it was actually to be used as the “Bruce Wilson and mates re election fund”. It was to receive funds from payroll deductions and raffles.

If this was the case why wasn’t the Association named as such.

Her justification is risible.

Therefore her real understanding of the purposes of the fund and what it was to be used for and how it was to acquire funds must have been something else.

Why disguise a re-election fund as an Association for workplace reform bearing the name AWU if there was no knowledge of the proposed source of funds.

In the absence of an explanation for the emphasis on Workplace Reform and the use of the name AWU the only and obvious reason for the name is that which is consistent with Wilson providing a cover for the extraction of funds from Employers.

Any Solicitor should have asked questions about the proposed source of funds for the association. If she turned a blind eye this is no defence.

Her duty to the AWU required her not to acquiesce in this arrangement let alone actively facilitate it. She therefore aided it.

Her counselling was instrumental in allowing the incorporation and in the absence of some other explanation for the choice of name she must be taken to know the intended source of funds.

Her relationship with Wilson provides the motivation.

Gillard and Ralph were both involved in aiding the commission of the offence.

Gillard was also involved in counselling it.

It goes without saying that Wilson was a principal offender.

It may also be possible to regard the incorporation of the AWU WRA alone as the prosecution of an unlawful purpose. It was not entitled to be incorporated. The Commissioner was provided with misleading information as to its main purpose.

The offence of receiving secret commissions was a probable consequence of such prosecution.

The fund was set up with the name it had to facilitate only this.

The lengths to which Gillard went to conceal this activity demonstrates that she well understood the issues involved. 

A legal eagle has kindly contributed these thoughts about aiding, abetting, procuring, counselling and acting in concert in criminal enterprise

The Bilderberg Group Founder Reveals Secrets of the Bilderberg Group

20 years after the Bilderberg Group was established, its founder Prince Bernhard revealed to the world the secrets of the Bilderberg Group.

Today, the Bilderberg Group is still the same shadowy and secretive organization that it was in 1954 when it was founded.

In fact, former United States President Gerald R. Ford in 1965 revealed his thoughts about the exclusivity of the Bilderberg Group. The former president was quoted as saying “you don’t really belong to the organization, one gets an invitation from the Prince”.

The following years after the Bilderberg Group was established, the world’s only means of understanding what the organization is all about has been derived from selectively leaked information and the odd conspirator who has willingly divulged prohibited information (such as attendance lists).

However, 20 years after the Bilderberg Group was founded, the founding father of the Bilderberg Group, Prince Bernhard, actually revealed to the world the inner workings of the organization to The Argus-Press on June 21 1974.

The following is a summary of what the Bilderberg Group founder Prince Bernhard revealed. The Prince covered a wide range of topics, including ‘what is the Bilderberg Group’, ‘the purpose of the Bilderberg Group’ and the ‘rules that govern the Bilderberg Group’.

Prince Bernhard, Founder of the Bilderberg Group

All Bilderberg Group meeting attendees are guaranteed privacy.

Reporters are never allowed to enter the hotel where Bilderberg Group meetings are held.

Participants who are caught dealing with the press, are not invited back.

Between 1954 (when it was founded) and 1974, on average 80 persons were invited to each meeting.

Up until 1974, and possibly beyond that, there was only one topic discussed at Bilderberg Group meetings. The topic was ‘prospects for the Atlantic world’.

The main speakers at Bilderberg Group meetings get 10 minutes to deliver their speech. Other participants are limited to 5 minutes per speech.

Security at all Bilderberg Group meetings is of the up-most importance. During Bilderberg Group meetings, they are to be “practically” surrounded by police for the three-day event.

The founder Prince Bernhard always tried to ensure that there was a 50% switch in representation at each Bilderberg Group meeting.

Any notes or official documentation is to be written in both American English and French.

When it comes to voting, the votes of who voted for what are never recorded.

Prince Bernhard, personally requested that Henry Kissinger attend Bilderberg Group meetings. Also, at the 1974 meeting, David Rockefeller was also in attendance.

Prince Bernhard also expected that the ideas that emerged from Bilderberg Group meetings would influence the inner circle to which it’s participants belong.

Birthplace of the Bilderberg Group, 1954.

This brief, yet revealing insight into the inner workings of the Bilderberg Group highlights that there is still plenty we do not know about the organization.

Coalition takes economy, Labor slumps on all issues

THE Gillard government has lost ground to the Coalition on the handling of every key electoral issue, with voter support for Tony Abbott's opposition surging back to the levels of the Howard government in its last three years.

Support for Labor's handling of the economy has crashed from 34 per cent to 28 per cent, the equal lowest level since Kevin Rudd won the election in 2007. The Coalition's economic management has risen to 50 per cent, up from 46 per cent a year ago, for the first time since 2007 when the Howard government was in power.

The Newspoll survey of voters' attitudes to important issues, conducted exclusively for The Australian last weekend, came at the same time as Labor's primary vote dropped back to 32 per cent and the Opposition Leader greatly cut back Julia Gillard's lead as preferred prime minister.

Although unemployment remains low at 5.4 per cent, the Gillard government has lost its lead over the opposition on handling jobs. Last year Labor led the Coalition on the issue 42 per cent to 38 per cent Coalition; now Labor is on 37 per cent to the Coalition's 41 per cent.

While interest rates remain at "emergency" lows and mortgage payments have dropped markedly, Labor has gone backwards on managing interest rates, down from 32 per cent to 28 per cent, lower than during the global financial crisis. Coalition support on handling interest rates is virtually steady on 43 per cent. The continuing low rate of official interest meant the issue dropped one place in voters' importance from third-last to second-last.

Last week, the Prime Minister said she would conduct a "crusade" to improve education, and declared that economic management was the key to the "years ahead".

Labor continues to lead the Liberals on the handling of the top-ranking issues of health and education but Labor's lead has been halved in both areas. On the issue of health and Medicare, traditionally a Labor strength, Labor's support has fallen from 44 to 40 per cent in the last year and the Coalition's is steady on 36 per cent.

On education, which Ms Gillard said last week would be a "moral crusade" that defined her prime ministership, voters downgraded Labor from 46 per cent in February last year to 41 per cent, and the Coalition lifted from 33 to 36 per cent, its highest since February 2005.

The biggest area of change was on the handling of asylum-seekers with support for the Coalition jumping 11 percentage points to 47 per cent and Labor's going from 18 per cent to 20 per cent.

During last year's debate over offshore processing and the opposition's blocking of the government's attempts to establish the Malaysia Solution, Liberals support was at 36 per cent, just double Labor's support; now the Coalition is regarded as more than doubly capable of handling the arrival of asylum-seekers.

Despite Australia's success at winning a temporary seat on the UN Security Council, Labor's standing on the handling of national security fell from 31 per cent last year to 24 per cent while the Coalition rose two points to 47 per cent, its highest since June 2007.

The ALP has also fallen back on industrial relations, with support dropping from 47 per cent a year ago to 41 per cent last weekend as Coalition support went from 34 to 36 per cent, the highest since June 2004 before John Howard introduced Work Choices.

Labor fell on the handling of climate change, dropping from 35 per cent last year to 30 per cent as the Coalition's support rose from 26 per cent to 28 per cent.

GRAPHIC: Issues Newspoll

Coalition takes economy, Labor slumps on all issues: Newspoll

Craig Thomson case threatens balance of power in parliament

Craig (The Crook) Thomson

CRAIG Thomson will front his accusers in a Melbourne court this week even though the Government wants him and his vote to stay in Canberra.

And it is almost certain the Opposition will not allow a “pair” by dropping one of its MPs to account for Mr Thomson’s absence.

Mr Thomson’s office confirmed today the independent MP will not be in Parliament on Wednesday but will attend the Melbourne Magistrate’s Court for the start of hearings into 150 fraud charges related to his time as secretary of the Health Services Union.

Mr Thomson's absence could have an effect on votes in the House of Representatives.

The Government has 70 MPs in the 150-member House, excluding Labor Speaker Anna Burke. The Coalition has 71.

Votes are decided by the large cross bench of eight MPs: Greens Adam Bandt; independents Tony Windsor, Rob Oakeshott, Andrew Wilkie and former Speaker Peter Slipper; Katter Australia Party's Bob Katter; and West Australian National Tony Crook.

Mr Windsor, Mr Oakeshott and Mr Bandt are likely to support the Government in a confidence motion but they and the other cross bench members are able to vote against Government legislation.

Support from Mr Katter and Mr Crook effectively gives the Opposition 73 votes, which means the Government needs four votes for its Bills to survive.

The absence of Mr Thomson on Wednesday could make it harder for the Government to protect its Bills.

Mr Thomson had a rare victory today when the NSW Police confirmed he had not been given the option of surrendering to them on a Victorian warrant last week. Instead, on Thursday he was dramatically arrested by five officers and taken to a watchhouse where he was strip searched.

After the arrest Detective Superintendent Col Dyson said Mr Thomson had been invited to surrender himself before Christmas but had declined.

In fact, he had been asked to come to Melbourne to be interviewed by police and had rejected that request.

Today Mr Dyson said in a statement, "The arrest warrant indicated that Mr Thomson was invited to Victoria to be interviewed.

"It additionally indicated that the arrest warrant was issued on the grounds that he was avoiding the service of the summons. I concede the word 'summons' and not 'arrest' should have been used when I referred to the wording on the warrant.''

Mr Thomson's lawyer, Chris McArdle, said his client's case might have been injured by the original police comments.

"There's this great steamroller of opinion in the public mind that this fellow must have done something - 'You wouldn't charge him with 150 things if he hadn't done anything, would you?' seems to be the rhetorical comeback," Mr McArdle told the ABC.

"Well, it's simply cemented the fact that this fellow's some sort of fugitive, which he is not. He's the most available human being in the country.''

Craig Thomson case threatens balance of power in parliament

Just lock her up !... PLEASE....Gillard accuses own MPs of trying to destroy her

Julia Gillard has accused her own MPs of trying to destroy her Government from within as she addressed a shattered caucus.Source: Supplied

JULIA Gillard has accused her own MPs of trying to destroy her Government from within as she addressed a shattered caucus ahead of the resumption of Parliament tomorrow.

A source inside the caucus told The Daily Telegraph that the PM said she was aware that MPs had been leaking to journalists with the intention of backgrounding against the Government. Backgrounding is where politicians provide sensitive information to journalists under the assumption they will not be named.

In a clear sign that Ms Gillard and her backers are concerned about another challenge being mounted against her leadership, the PM said that marginal seat MPs would be the only ones to suffer from the continuous leaking.

While talk of Kevin Rudd has been revived following today’s disastrous poll results, the former PM was a noticeable absence from the meeting. Mr Rudd was said to be unwell.

The caucus met at 2pm today in Parliament.

Ms Gillard then claimed that the source for her claim of backgrounding MPs was a journalist.

The caucus also elected Communications Minister Stephen Conroy as the new Senate leader to replace Chris Evans, who rocked the Government on Friday night when he stepped down from Cabinet, along with Attorney General Nicola Roxon.

Gillard accuses own MPs of trying to destroy her