Politics > Australian Politics

The challenge for Fritz (or anyone else)

(1/7) > >>

Heinz_Guderian:
Given that politicians meet lobbyists all the time, what, in objective terms, is wrong with having lunch with Brian Burke?

Fritz:
Fair question Heinz. I guess the crux comes down to the fact that a lobbyist is just a lobbyist until he is a convicted crimminal. I would think that if you are in a position, like a politician, you would need to have processes in place to ensure that your actions both business and private are representing of your constituents. Meeting with a convicted crimminal and having lunch with him is probably not in the best interests of desired outcomes that you may be working towards. In fact, I believe they would be a hinderance.

Emperor Fadeaway:
What's wrong with sitting down and having lunch with Al Capone? Apart from the fact that he's actually dead and if you claimed to have done this in 2005 you'd have to be a luntic?  But yeh, apart from that, nothing's wrong with it, it's just a bit of lunch and a chat, isn't it?

The problem is the association itself.  The fact that it may seem that Rudd's ascension to the leadership was somehow influenced by Burke.  It's common knowledge that Burke still exerts influence over members of the WA ALP.  All leadership ballots are a numbers game, and if Rudd depended on Burke for the WA numbers, then even you can see how this isn't the best way to obtain the leadership Heinz.  Or at least I hope you can see it.

There's no suggestion that Rudd is implicated in some shady dealings, there's no suggestion that things actually happened the way I've suggested, but the fact that he may be somehow indebted to Burke is bad enough.  And sure, you can argue that he should be assumed innocent until proven guilty, but you know that doesn't wash.  One needs to be above suspicion, simple as that.

Mez:

--- Quote from: fadeaway on March 09, 2007, 10:35:48 AM ---
There's no suggestion that Rudd is implicated in some shady dealings, there's no suggestion that things actually happened the way I've suggested..

--- End quote ---

Actually, JHo and Costello ARE suggesting it - very loudly!  And monotonously.

Heinz_Guderian:
okay...

Burke was convicted of fraud and has done his time. This would normally mean a person can do any job they wish to do.  So does that mean lobbying is not an acceptable job for a former criminal?  Is it the upheld criminal charge that's the issue, or the gaol time?  I've gone down for offensive language and dangerous driving, does that mean I can't be a lobbyist?  Many jobs specify 'a criminal background check' but I've never been told what this means.

So again...

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page