If in doubt, make it up
Tony Abbott’s latest attack on Nick Bolkus is a little bit silly:
Workplace Relations Minister Tony Abbott said Senator Bolkus may have evaded laws which require the mandatory recording of cash transactions over $10,000. …
“The amount of the cash cheque namely for $9,[8]80 may have been designed precisely to circumvent these legislative requirements,” he said.
In other words, the fact that Nick Bolkus didn’t break the law is prima facie evidence that he intended to break the law. What a nonsense.
If Bolkus had accepted multiple donations, each less than $10 000 but totalling more than $10 000, then Abbott’s assertion would have a compelling basis. But that is not the case, and Abbott is clearly trying to rake muck that isn’t there.
I think it goes a little deeper than that. To do with Bolkus avoiding the legislation regarding declaration of party political donations. Both side of politics, as per usual are ‘muck raking’ but I would have to agree with you that Abbotts attempt to muddy the ‘Visas-for-Money’ affair water is desperate at best, clumsily clownlike at worst.
The fact that the ALP has now amended it’s electoral commission donations return certainly indicates a cover-up. Bolkus is now blaming the whole thing on the ineptitude of the South Australian branch who “misled” him. No evidence of “the raffle” that Tan was supposed to have purchased 20,000 tickets in has yet surfaced ……
it’s also completely illogical because whether or not Bolkus is guilty has absolutely nothing to do with whether or not Ruddock is guilty.
$9880 is an awful lot of lottery tickets out of anyone’s book and as every crook and money-launderer knows, to avoid the Financial Transactions Reporting requirements you keep your transactions under $10000.
Gianna is morally right of course but unfortunately people in glass houses…….
As a consequence Labor’s attack has been blunted like the travel rorts affair I’m afraid ‘O Possums!’
You really wonder how long Abbott had that card up his sleeve before he chose the perfect time to play it. Teflon John does have a formidable team around him.
To say nothing of Laurie Ferguson’s letterhead testament as to the great moral integrity of Mr Kirswani …..whoops!
The problem that the ALP have with this topic is that there’s a long smelly trail of institutionalised backscratching from Al Grassby through Bolkus/Sciacca to ethnic branchstacks and sign-ups etc. It’s part of ALP heritage.
One can view Ruddock as an ice-veined, bloodless technocratic bastard perhaps, but no-one in the ALP believes for one second that the guy was on the brown-bag visa take. The aim was to try and throw enough circumstantial shit such that some might be persuaded to stick in the minds of hopelessly gullible Joe and Janelle Voter - for whose deductive powers of intelligence they obviously continue to have nothing but contempt.
“Gee look at that Janelle! Even that boring little Tory bureaucratoman has been slapping the ethnics round for backhanders!”
“And probably doing big lines of coke off their wives bare breasts as well, while simultaneously hoovering Bollinger, Joe!” I mean, get real…..
Julia Gillard has put me in mind of the self-hating Mary Steenburgen character in “Philadelphia” - vindictively pursuing the attractively dying Tom Hanks - as she attempts to fit Ruddock up as some wide boy, white shoer on the under-the-table-seeyaright-mate deal-circuit.
She’s much too smart to be wasting herself on this tawdry circus.
Rob’s a brave man to invite comments on this topic. [Absolutely NO irony intended here]