After The Rain

Posted: May 23, 2012 in Politics

T’was Monday 21st May, 2012, the day the Thomson Circus finally rolled into Canberra.

The day the Honourable Member For Dobell, Craig Thomson made his long awaited speech before the parliament, and a packed press gallery. His aim… was to prove the word “Honourable” in his title is justified.

I’m assuming that anyone reading this is a big kid now, so I’m not going to try and convince you it was one of the greatest speeches ever in our parliament. Nor am I going to try and convince you that it was a piss poor effort. I’m sure you’re big enough and ugly enough to make up your own minds. Anyway whatever I said would be just like another voice calling out for an encore from the mosh pit at the Big Day Out…

 Every journalist, commentator, shock jock, blogger, media hack, and pretty much anyone with a twitter account has an opinion of Craig’s performance. And of course, all of them, apparently, are right.

I even heard today that Justin Bieber had an opinion on the saga… I’m not kidding, I had tweets to that effect…. It was sadly however, not proven. I  would have been interested to hear The Beeb’s take on it….

What I do want to talk about, is the fallout from Craig Thomson’s speech. In particular, the two main people whom the spotlight will fall upon as some tough questions are asked.

Watching 7 30, on the ABC the night of Thomson’s speech, I was pleased to learn a couple of new things about Kathy Jackson. Firstly, that she feels sorry for Craig Thomson’s family. 

It was a moment of sincere sweetness, cough, cough… I was touched to hear that she has a soft spot in her heart for those whose husband, and father, she has been publicly humiliating, and firing accusations at for well over a year now.

Secondly, that she feels she deserves a $100,000 pay cut. I tend to agree with her on this one, but I don’t think she goes far enough.

But wait up a minute, I will discuss that 7 30 interview in a moment…

Craig Thompson, it seems according to evidence pictured below, seems to have used a Union credit card to pay for escort services.

Geez, if only it had been Craig Thomson, the MP whose name doesn’t have a P in it….

Last time I opened a bank account they were pretty fussy about ID. They are quite careful to make sure your name is right for rather obvious reasons. For those of you who may reside on Mars, identity theft is a pretty big issue here on Planet Earth…

I would assume this to be even more important with a credit account, given it’s the banks money you are spending. Gone are the days when you found a credit card in a pack of Cornflakes and wrote whatever name you liked on it…

The credit card used as evidence by Fairfax Media may as well have had the name Lady Ga Ga printed on it. Without Thomson’s name on it, it is totally irrelevant to this case. Yet strangely, it is still constantly refered to.

This evidence, that is only remarkable in its sheer stupidity, was introduced by Fairfax Media’s “legal eagles” as “forensic evidence” of Craig Thomson’s guilt. Some would say that this should have signaled the start of a “field day”, but I can’t really think of a joke funnier than the evidence itself….

HSU Acting President Chris Brown explained after Thomson’s speech that the money taken by Thomson for election campaigns had not been approved by the Union. After all,  as he was on the committee he would have had to approve the expenditure. That leads me to a couple of queries… Why then would the Union not ask for the funds to be returned?

More importantly, if Chris was in charge of the Unions funds, how the hell did he not notice these funds go missing without sign-off??? We are talking about a substantial sum of money here. Was he asleep at the wheel, useless at his job, just plain dumb, or was he complicit? These are reasonable questions that seem to be not getting asked….

Craig Thomson’s address to parliament, made mention of the behaviour of the press, in particular Channel 7. This is not the first time channel 7 has been attacked for going the extra mile, and it’s portrayal of the news…

Who could possibly forget Tony Abbott criticising Channel 7 for their job on the infamous “shit happens” story last year. I thought Christopher Pyne was going to burst a blood vessel in his head over that one…

Before that, in NSW, we had the legendary David Campbell incident. MP David Campbell was filmed leaving a gay club one night, the apparent purpose of this was to say he drove a car there that was paid for by the govt. Well done Channel 7, what a high point in Australian journalism that was….

Never the less, Channel 7 deny Thomson’s allegations of hovering outside bathroom windows and we just accept it….

Some of you may have seen Kathy Jackson being interviewed on 7 30 by Chris Uhlmann, or heard her having a chat with Chris Smith on 2GB last week, if not I have included links to the full interviews.

Chris Smith knows a little about workplace relations, having had some interesting experience himself. Chris, prior to introducing Jackson, gives a summary of events that is at best a gross exaggeration, at worst a total fabrication.

Kathy Jackson – In the shade, or just shady?

I wanted to go over Jackson’s responses in a bit more detail. The following is taken from the transcript of the programme, I have added my comments underneath.

CHRIS UHLMANN: Did you witness a confrontation where a union official Marco Bolano said he would ruin Craig Thomson by setting him up with prostitutes?

KATHY JACKSON: I have never witnessed such a confrontation or meeting or clash or whatever you want to call it. That has never occurred.

WIXXY: Marco Bolano recalls things differently, he did recall the meeting, he denies however, the mention of hookers, but stated that the meeting was with a “half brother” of Thomson’s and that it was a heated exchange.

CHRIS UHLMANN: Are you aware of any union officials before Mr Thomson be accused of consorting with prostitutes?


WIXXY: For somebody that constantly refers to Thomson as “delusional” this is an interesting answer. Kathy Jackson is delusional to think that this is a credible answer. Are we to believe that Jackson has an incredibly short memory span? Or do we just assume she is telling a blatant lie? Here is a link to the story in the Weekend Australian which describes the same kind of allegations being made against her EX HUSBAND.… yes, ex husband. Kind of hard to forget that I would have thought…

CHRIS UHLMANN: Well Mr Thomson’s made many accusations about you as you have of him. He points out that you drive a union paid for Volvo, that your child care and gym fees are paid for, you have taken numerous overseas trips at the expense of the union and that you’re salary doubled in the weeks after he left at $270,000.

KATHY JACKSON: I reject all those claims. What I do say about the salary I’m quite interested in, what did he say …

WIXXY: All those claims? Jackson does in fact drive a union paid for Volvo SUV

KATHY JACKSON: (Discussing her $270,000 salary)
At mediation last week in the courts, as part of that mediation, process, I put my hand up and said that I should get at least $100,000 salary cut, and that was rejected.

WIXXY: Last week??? That is timely…. How many years has she been paid this amount of money for again?
At a mediation, unless the issue is in the terms of that particular mediation, it will be thrown out automatically as irrelevant to proceedings. This seems to me to be a planned token gesture….

CHRIS UHLMANN: Is there a conflict of interest here because your partner Michael Lawler is the vice President of Fair Work Australia?

KATHY JACKSON: No, not at all and I reject that claim totally. And Craig Thomson’s allegations are totally wicked against him. Michael Lawler is the Vice-President of Fair Work Australia, formerly the Australian Industrial Relations Commission.

WIXXY: As I mentioned in a previous post, Michael Lawler has all of a sudden gone on what FWA are calling “Long Leave”. This happened last Friday quite suddenly, even his PA was unaware of it when I spoke to her. It would seem that someone believe there is a conflict of interest….

CHRIS UHLMANN: Has Michael Lawler ever been involved with you in any of the strategy meetings with the HSU about any of the actions that you have got going?

KATHY JACKSON: Well obviously as my partner I talk to Michael about what I’m doing and as my partner I talk to him about not just HSU issues but other issues as well.

WIXXY: This is a colossal conflict of interest. Strikeforce Carnarvon was set up after Michael Lawler made the original complaints regarding union corruption.
The prospect of the Vice President of an investigative body, being the partner of, and discussing the case with a partner who is head of the body under investigation is atrocious, and should be investigated by the Independent Commission Against Corruption ICAC. It is akin to Ivan Milat going out to dinner with, and spending the night with the judge and jury of his trial….

CHRIS UHLMANN: Does Michael Lawler have connections with the Liberal Party as Craig Thomson suggests?

KATHY JACKSON: Not that I know of.

WIXXY: Should that be “No Specific Knowledge”?

CHRIS UHLMANN: You mentioned the HR Nicholls society, who is paying your legal bills?

KATHY JACKSON: I’m paying my legal bills. Um … I’ve got a $40,000 debt already. That the union won’t pay for. And Brett Shields for Reid Zafp are doing all the work pro-bono and so is Stewart Ward.

WIXXY: On 2GB Jackson stated “no-one is paying those fees”, and that “all are doing it pro-bono”. So where did the $40,000 debt figure come from?

CHRIS UHLMANN: Are you still using Harmers workplace lawyers?


CHRIS UHLMANN: And are they doing that work pro-bono?

KATHY JACKSON: Yes they are.

CHRIS UHLMANN: Are you aware that it’s the same law firm that’s representing James Ashby the man who has accused the Speaker of sexual harassment.


WIXXY: Come on, who is the delusional one now? I note that she did not look at all shocked or surprised at this revelation.

CHRIS UHLMANN: And why do you think Harmers workplace lawyers is representing you pro-bono?

KATHY JACKSON: I think they are representing me pro-bono because they believe in my case. I’m not making this up. The allegations that I have taken to the police are serious and genuine. I have not made these allegations to set Craig Thomson up or anybody up.

WIXXY: How nice of them… they believe in your case… If legal firms operated in that manner they would only charge a fraction of their clients, as I’m sure they believe in many of their cases. By Jackson’s logic, if Harmer’s charge a client for their services, they must think they are guilty, or not believe in the case. What a ridiculous statement.

The debate of Craig Thomson’s guilt or innocence will rage on for a while yet I’m afraid, all we can really hope for is that it doesn’t become any uglier.

Judging from the amount of correspondence Craig’s electorate office has recieved from locals since his parliament address, his electorate are happy with him. That is who counts right??? He is their chosen representative…

Not according to the opposition, they think they should decide….

Anyhow, I have a rather darstardly idea…

Seeing as politics has become a spectators sport, and seeing as though reality TV is the current rage, let’s combine them…

Whenever a scandal arises, and in a hung parliament there seems to be a new one each week, let’s have a vote. Not one at the member’s electorate, that’s boring, but a television event.

The concept is simple, MP’s involved in a scandal explain themselves, or get voted off the island. The MP in question get’s a half hour chance to tell his story, stretched out to 46 minutes with commercials. Each of the sides have the chance to rubbish each other before and after the contestants explanation, and the independents get to umm and arrr indecisively to keep up the tension.

I can almost smell the sponsorship dollars coming in now…

The public phone in their votes, with calls charged by the minute, or 50 cents for an SMS. All funds collected go towards getting the surplus back…

Extinguishing the MP’s torch?

Alternatively, we could just let someone tell their side of the story without pre-judging them.

If there is a positive outcome from Craig Thomson’s address, it is that it is good to see and hear the other side of the story starting to come out at long last.

One thing for sure, the accusations will be raining down thick and fast.

It will be interesting to see who is best covered, and who remains dry after the downpour…

A differently themed, and more detailed version of this post is publish at Independent Australia

  1. Reblogged this on The Left Hack and commented:
    Another great Blog on the Thomson issue…

  2. Another great Blog on the Thomson issue…

  3. Marilyn says:

    OK how did that credit slip ever get past anyone and get to claim it Craig Thomson?

    The media are reprehensible snakes tittering about nothing.

    thomson does not have to defend himself to any one of the cretins but the PG goad and taunt just like they did when Costello did over Nick Sherry.

    And still not a one of the cretins have read the reasoning of the FWA which amount to nothing at all.

  4. Marilyn says:

    I sent it to former Democrat Sandra Kanck who has been a friend for 25 years as she was a bit sceptical – she took one look and laughed and noted that the name and signatures had no relationship to each other.

    And it’s not so much selective blindness as McClymont covering her own arse with one lie followed by so called proof that it is the truth.

    In 2002 during the vicious campaign against the Bakhtiyari family I was handed their files and discovered that DÏAC had used the papers of a 17 year old Pakistani boy from 1975 to claim that the educated child was the illiterate Hazara Ali B.

    The documents got passed two lawyers, three courts and 4 tribunals by then and it took until the high court in 2004 to deem them to be bogus.

    Paul McGeough actually found the genuine documents in Pakistan for me some years back after he found the family in Afghanistan.

    There are now 4 photos on 4 documents all claimed by DIAC to be the same thing and they are all different.

    Yet all those collectively blind lawyers and judges and tribunal members said they were the same.

    Except one who said the photo was not Ali but who cared.

    I know a bit about set ups and when there is a big smelly rat.

    Perhaps you might like to send your pieces to the tittering nitwits in the Press Gallery who are all so collectively self-righteous.

    Because that lawyers assumption that because that restaurant had a link to an escort service means that Thomson or anyone else used it is as outrageous as what happened to Ali.

    Email me with your address.

  5. Catching up says:

    Yes, there was a mention that she asked the union to pay and was refused. She has also been told not to appear at that event by the HSU.

    I imagine she will, as the lady is inclined not to obey orders.

  6. Catching up says:

    I was under the impression that the young got hold of false licences easily, to use as false identity when entering license premises when they are under age.

    Would not pass the police maybe, but good enough for identity.

    Would not be hard to do. I do not think that many would hold a card up to the light, to see if it was a fake.

    I believe that the noise will falter out this week. Maybe there will be a last ditch effort tomorrow, with maybe attempting to pass a no confidence in the chair.

    The Privilege Commission could take months to come to a decision. Maybe because Mr. Pyne was too generous in his list of complaints.

    Mr. Randall, Liberal, said tonight on the Drum, that maybe they will have to wait until other authorities complete their role.

    Harping on will become tedious. Many are saying already, that they are sick of hearing the name Craig.

  7. Marilyn says:

    No-one else is doing anything though. Thomson has not been accused of anything.

    What is it with the collective intelligence of a country that cannot define the difference between claim and charge and conviction or not.

  8. Sue says:

    thanks wixxy for sticking with the issue. it is so annoying that all we have in the msm is a collective of opinion writers.

  9. Sue says:

    the latest, ACA and cheque book journalism. $60,000 paid to a prostitute for recognising CT from a photo as a client.

  10. Matt says:

    Interesting, problem is that once a credit card is issued, and yes Banks do stuff up when it’s a company credit card – and quite often companys will leave it be if it’s close enough. So could the credit card clip etc be Craig Thomson’s the MP – absolutely – is it – well who knows, but one wonders who Craig Thompson is who worked for the HSU in a capacity to be able to get a company/union issued credit card.

    Also the signatures look very similar enough to each other to be plausible. Sorry but I think I may have just pulled apart your arguement that it wasn’t him.

    Given that in the end I don’t really care either way that much, and just love watching the circus that is happening – especially Thomson and the ALP blaming Abbott et al for all of this, when Abbott has been very coy in not saying much at all – which yes it is a change for him.

    One’s gotta ask if this wasn’t him why hasn’t he picked up on the discrepancies? Also the photo idea does look like the creep that he seems to be.

    Given I think he should resign and then the media attention will be off him – also given that everyone is claiming that the Murdoch papers etc are all LNP alligned and yet during the last few elections they have been much more ALP aligned begs another question raised over the whole issue.

    Should he be treated innocent until proven guilty – only if everyone else whose not a politician or ALP/Union member at the moment gets the same treatment – but since this will never happen let’s just call it a day on trying to give a justified answer to it all.

    • Marilyn says:

      Why should he resign? Did Howard resign when no WMD were found and 1million Iraqis were dead?

      The problem is that the fact that their is no penalty at all attached to any of the so-called claims by FWA seems to have been missed.

      At the most a $2450 fine.

      • Matt says:

        Personally I think he should resign.
        But no because it will cause a by-election or a full on federal election.
        No, because he’s not doing himself any favours to himself or his family the long he stays around and lets all this happen.
        Come on his only defence to the who shenanigan is to blame everyone else and to say there was a conspiracy out there to get him and destroy him.

        His political life is dead in the water. Best to bow out as gracefully as possible and hopefully have a future somewhere else, than to let this keep on going and be completely ruined.
        He’s not going to get pre-selected for Labor ever again, so the only hope is that his consituants of Dobell would elect him as an independent.

        This can be seen from the fact that he is blaming everyone else except himself for what has gone on

  11. Marilyn says:

    Matt, even if it was him you cretin it was a fucking restaurant and nothing to do with any brothel.

    And it was 2005 and not when Thomson was an MP.

    Why are people so stupid.

    • Matt says:


      Well other than the fact that I do not wish to comment or make judgement on your intellect. I was not commenting on whether or not the attach showed he had used the credit card at a brothel or at a restaurant.

      However quite often as can be scene if and when one purchases goods from a “disreputable” place the name of the place usually shows as a legitimate business name – and I know this because I worked for a company where one of the owners “accidently” used his company credit card at one such place, and it was picked up because of the area it occured in and the knowledge of the what many of the businesses in that area provided.

      So to say for certain without a doubt that it was a restaurant and not used for the ” apparently” associated brothel is jumping to a conclusion which would be unwise to do unless one has absolute proof of either or case.

      Secondly it should no matter whether or not his misuse of a company/union supplied credit card and funds was before he back an MP or after – the fact of the matter is that he has been “alleged” to have misused those funds which members of the HSU contributed in the belief that they would be used solely for the benefit of creating better conditions for members – after all that is what a union is built for in theory.

      Thirdly I was commenting on the fact that even though the evidence given has a slightly different name, that the credit card could still have been his, as well as the signatures which look very similar.

      So as to your comment about why people are so stupid – well I could also reply with why you would be said as well.

  12. Marilyn says:

    Matt, the slip said it was a frigging restaurant.

    Are you stupid?

    • Matt says:

      Marilyn, Marilyn, Marilyn,
      Clearly you didn’t read a single thing I said.

      A “disreputable” place is there NOT gonna put on their freaking receipt that they are a brothel now are they!
      So what better way to hide your true activities than claiming to be a Restaurant? It’s a good front in’t it?

      Have you even been to said restaurant, or even driven pass said restaurant that the credit card slip says he went to?? I haven’t but that’s because I don’t live in NSW, if I did I would do a detour to go past and check it out. Also have you look at the price of his restaurant meal? $2,475.00 that’s one hell of an expensive meal unless there were at least 20 people involved in the meal – as the docket doesn’t give anywhere near enough information it’s hard to judge what exactly it is for.

      So unless you can tell me you have either been to and dined at said restaurant, or at least driven by it and noticed it, please FFS shut up and stop calling anyone with a different view or opinion than your stupid.

  13. Marilyn says:

    So Matt, if I forge your signature and it looks familiar and you are sued will you let me off.

  14. Matt says:

    I’d like to see you forge my signature.
    Anyway someone has to be very good at forging signatures to get within coo-ee of having something that looks even remotely similar to the original signature.
    No-ones ever proved that his signature was ever forged.

    He also told the workplace regulator that Fairfax had settled because he had been able to prove he wasn’t at the brothels on the dates his credit cards were used and that Fairfax had hired a handwriting expert who concluded Mr Thomson’s signature had been forged.
    The statements … made by you to FWA were false, the publisher said in a legal letter to Mr Thomson.


    Fairfax is extremely concerned that you have deliberately misled FWA in relation to the statements made by you … and the circumstances leading to the settlement of the proceedings brought by you.

    Read more:

    Look we could argue facts and innuedo’s all night, but I for one am tired and ready to watch TV and do my dishes.

    So go night, and goodbye because I won’t becoming back to this blog every again – which will probably suit you because I can’t then pull you up on you thoughts and beliefs which are not based on any evidence or reality – much like Craig Thompson’s statement about a conspiracy that everyone is out to get him.

  15. Marilyn says:

    Well here is a fact – there is no breach of any union rules and the penalty is $0 wo why the media have focussed on something that has not breach of anything and zero penalty is beyond me.

    the actual complaint by FWA was that there were no rules governing the use of credit cards and for that there is no breach or penalty.

  16. Marilyn says:

    Fairfax was the paper that used the false documents you moron.

  17. Marilyn says:

    And why would a guilty man not just give the union the frigging $6,000 instead of copping this crap.

    • Sacred to go to church says:

      I wonder if Kate ever bought anything parsonal on her corp credit card? Even if she paid it back..MB some should start investigating Kate, Michelle, Shann, and all the other shock jock..I bet my bottom dollar that if not all 90% would of done something against corporate policy regarding credit cards…Lets do some reasearch..Lets try to get all the bills Kate and Michelle have sign off over the years..Lets go back 20 years or until we find something like they have..Lets dig into Abbott past when he was a priest, Let look at who he associated with, let find out if these people new about sexual abuse, Lets see if abbott new, It is about time..Mirrabella is fronting the courts..Why is that not front page news? Slipper has been hushed up because of LNP involvement..Where is the media..Why is this not FRONT PAGE news…Lets find a pedo priest and ask him if he new abbott when he was a priest..How about when Abbott was a minister..did he know of anyone who was know to be a pedo priest and did he do anything about it…How many children siffered due to his lack of intervention when he was a minister?????

      • wixxy says:

        Some of your prayers may be answered soon….
        You have some valid points… It amazes me how Mirabella, one of the most hated women in the country, has not been all over the press for her drama’s

  18. Would this Happen says:

    can you check to see if cards had expired and new ones sent out – considering the timelines and do expire..They may of been sent to the HSU MB instead of the persons home?..Were additional cards requested?, etc

  19. Sue says:

    you say we may get some other news such as Mirabella, but that won’t be an issue because its the length of time these issues lead in the msm.

    Mirabella court action could hit an online news at 10pm and be gone by 6am the next day.
    It will take something bigger than that to get the msm looking at themselves.

  20. Sue says:

    Albanese is now mentioning section 28 of the Crimes Act, and a possible Abbott breach.
    Now that may be interesting

  21. Marilyn says:

    When you read the statement by
    Bernadette O”Neill she says she will use Thomson as a scapegoat and try and have him penalised for things she says have no penalty.

    I heard this am Marius Benson tittering with Dennis Atkins about Thomson asking them to leave him alone and they both declined, than Fran asked Michelle if they should leave him alone and Michelle says no way.

    Don’t these blithering cretins understand that Thomson and others could fuck anything in skirts and pay for it on their union credit cards and it would make no difference because there WERE NO RULES FOR THE USE OF CREDIT CARDS.

    • Better off talking to a brick says:

      Marilyn, Marilyn, are trying to get through to people that trust Abbott without fear or do you understand..they know their were no they played the members card..but do you hear the same screams when a business trades whilst insolvent and do not pay employees for their work or super – long service – do they worry about the workers then? do they cry foul when the buisness men and ceos just walk away with their millions and the taxpayer take the rest of the slack – NO..that how onesided they are..and nothing you tell them will make a diffference even if you have facts on your side..they will either try to compare it with something else that supposedly went wrong with Labor or try to spin it in a way that it was the Libs that did

      • Marilyn says:

        Yeah I know, but the support and sympathy and anger against the treatment of the Bakhtiyari kids is still a live issue in many parts of this country because I refused to shut up and kept telling the truth.

        Seeing them brutalised as Vanstone dragged them out of their beds in the night and now the brutalising of another young mum due to ASIO and the anger around the country shows that years of work does help in the end.

  22. Marilyn says:

    Could you find out how many other unions have been subjected to the union bashing investigations of this type?

    How many companies?

    How many charges against unionists upheld?

    In fact the very first report by Terry Nassios said that in 2004 there were attempts by some union officials to bring order and governance but they were over ruled by Kathy Jackson.

    I think the press in this country all need a holiday in the lovely Christmas Island resort.

  23. Marilyn says:

    Now one of the supposed claims against Thomson is that he lied about when he moved to Sydney, FWA said it was 2005, he said it was 2007.

    Well the Australian sure supported that claim three years ago.

  24. Sue says:

    Hi Wixxy
    I’ve been having a whinge over at Cafe Whipers about the story on the attached link. What has annoyed me is that you cannot see this story on the SMH or national times sites. Basically it has disappeared, it was only posted at the specific area and nowhere else at 1.44 today. My theory is that it doesn’t suit Kate McClymont attack, so the SMH won’t run with it.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s