Parakeelia

Remove this Banner Ad

Ratts of Tobruk said:
Given the LNP-owned company then 'donated' $1.1M of taxpayers' money to the LNP, it's fair to say they were probably over-charging themselves...
Click to expand...

a simple rule change by requiring all entities donating funds to political parties must sign acknowledging they complies with all sections of the corporations act relevant to a public entity. this would raise the bar and cut out related party issue that are not at arm's length.

there should be an additional requirement for both political parties, politicians and those donating funds relating to carrying on their affairs in line with the concepts of misleading and deceptive behaviour. Currently this concept relates to trade practices but it is clear that politics is a business and as such, should comply.
 
Power Raid said:
a simple rule change by requiring all entities donating funds to political parties must sign acknowledging they complies with all sections of the corporations act relevant to a public entity. this would raise the bar and cut out related party issue that are not at arm's length.

there should be an additional requirement for both political parties, politicians and those donating funds relating to carrying on their affairs in line with the concepts of misleading and deceptive behaviour. Currently this concept relates to trade practices but it is clear that politics is a business and as such, should comply.
Click to expand...
They did this specifically to get around and hide it from existing policy. Finding loopholes.
And your solution is just add another "simple rule change"?
They will just find another loop hole.

You state your position, but then everything you write actually means you dont actually hold that position.
You dont want this to stop or be stopped.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Watchyourwaite said:
They did this specifically to get around and hide it from existing policy. Finding loopholes.
And your solution is just add another "simple rule change"?
They will just find another loop hole.

You state your position, but then everything you write actually means you dont actually hold that position.
You dont want this to stop or be stopped.
Click to expand...

I think you might be getting confused. I want practices like this stopped but as discussed before, a related party transaction is not an issue if it is arms length.

A quick ASIC search shows Parakeelia is a Pty Ltd thus the concept of related parties does not apply. By having all entities (individuals, companies, associations) that wish to provide donations, comply the same governance and principles as public companies, then everything would have to be arm's length or be a breach of the law.

It is simple, very clear and proven.
 
Watchyourwaite said:
Belnakor - Hated the waste of taxpayers money that was going to Storarr. (Used a lot of descriptive language about him as well. Duncan isnt a human in belnakors eyes). Surely belnakor will be outraged at the use of taxpayers money threw Parakeelia.

stew42 - Very angry at the $50k people put towards a fund for him. Must blow his mind at the $1.1mil thats been taken (not given) in this case.

Big_Birdy ClokesShankedIt Rob Lester Burnham

Seemed to really hate Duncan for criminality, wasting taxpayers money, getting money he didnt deserve. Look forward to your outrage in this thread.



Rob your not the same as the other posters I tagged. I didn't see anything bad from you, but you did justify the media attention for $60k. What are your thoughts on the lack of media attention on $1.1mil?
Click to expand...
Well, this is somewhat out of the blue. Ok, here we go.

I beg your pardon, but go jump in a lake. You have completely misunderstood what I said on that issue, which was months ago. I thought we were all over it.

Enjoy your ranting. Do it in a padded cell somewhere rather than annoying the rest of us. I'm disappointed that my 600th post was wasted on a political nong on a footy forum.

Ta.
 
Watchyourwaite said:
They did this specifically to get around and hide it from existing policy. Finding loopholes.
And your solution is just add another "simple rule change"?
They will just find another loop hole.

You state your position, but then everything you write actually means you dont actually hold that position.
You dont want this to stop or be stopped.
Click to expand...
Seriously don't get involved with PR, he will dazzle you with waffle.

Power Raid said:
I think you might be getting confused. I want practices like this stopped but as discussed before, a related party transaction is not an issue if it is arms length.

A quick ASIC search shows Parakeelia is a Pty Ltd thus the concept of related parties does not apply. By having all entities (individuals, companies, associations) that wish to provide donations, comply the same governance and principles as public companies, then everything would have to be arm's length or be a breach of the law.

It is simple, very clear and proven.
Click to expand...

Why don't you do a deeper search and see who the directors are/were? You really need to be better informed on this.

Arms length is about right, one hand writes the cheque to them, they receive and then send it right back to the coffers of the Liberal Party.

They may in fact be in a spot of bother if anyone at ASIC wants to follow up as they were not notified of change of directors. Another little clerical error.

Given that the company (check where it is registered) operates out of the Libs offices - all at arms length and perhaps a few paces.

You are the master of spin but I think the majority have cottoned on to you. Empty vessel.
 
Maggie5 said:
Seriously don't get involved with PR, he will dazzle you with waffle.



Why don't you do a deeper search and see who the directors are/were? You really need to be better informed on this.

Arms length is about right, one hand writes the cheque to them, they receive and then send it right back to the coffers of the Liberal Party.

They may in fact be in a spot of bother if anyone at ASIC wants to follow up as they were not notified of change of directors. Another little clerical error.

Given that the company (check where it is registered) operates out of the Libs offices - all at arms length and perhaps a few paces.

You are the master of spin but I think the majority have cottoned on to you. Empty vessel.
Click to expand...
My gosh Maggie. You do realise that Labor does something similar? It isn't against the rules. Is it right in the eyes of the average punter? Probably not. This doesn't make it illegal but I would support new rules/laws that stop any political party from doing this.
 
Lebbo73 said:
My gosh Maggie. You do realise that Labor does something similar? It isn't against the rules. Is it right in the eyes of the average punter? Probably not. This doesn't make it illegal but I would support new rules/laws that stop any political party from doing this.
Click to expand...
My gosh, Lebbo, no they don't. The Company the Labor Party uses has never donated to the labor party.

Please check your facts first,:)
 
Watchyourwaite said:
Belnakor - Hated the waste of taxpayers money that was going to Storarr. (Used a lot of descriptive language about him as well. Duncan isnt a human in belnakors eyes). Surely belnakor will be outraged at the use of taxpayers money threw Parakeelia.

stew42 - Very angry at the $50k people put towards a fund for him. Must blow his mind at the $1.1mil thats been taken (not given) in this case.

Big_Birdy ClokesShankedIt Rob Lester Burnham

Seemed to really hate Duncan for criminality, wasting taxpayers money, getting money he didnt deserve. Look forward to your outrage in this thread.
Click to expand...

Did a quick scan of the thread but I'm not going to throw a lot of time at this. Seems like a scam to me and hope the police can get involved somehow.

On another note - you seem particularly arsehurt that we called Duncan out for his bullshit. Good.
 
Maggie5 said:
Seriously don't get involved with PR, he will dazzle you with waffle.



Why don't you do a deeper search and see who the directors are/were? You really need to be better informed on this.

Arms length is about right, one hand writes the cheque to them, they receive and then send it right back to the coffers of the Liberal Party.

They may in fact be in a spot of bother if anyone at ASIC wants to follow up as they were not notified of change of directors. Another little clerical error.

Given that the company (check where it is registered) operates out of the Libs offices - all at arms length and perhaps a few paces.

You are the master of spin but I think the majority have cottoned on to you. Empty vessel.
Click to expand...

you always seem to miss the key issues

is that deliberate?

separately, you do know that arms length is not a measure of distance right?
 
Power Raid said:
you always seem to miss the key issues

is that deliberate?

separately, you do know that arms length is not a measure of distance right?
Click to expand...

you are a strange one, think it may be you that misses the key issues and they have been clearly stated.
Arms length? Duh...
Maybe if you really researched the topic at hand before you post?

Think you may need to step back and realise you are not an expert on all things?
 
Power Raid said:
I think you might be getting confused. I want practices like this stopped but as discussed before, a related party transaction is not an issue if it is arms length.

A quick ASIC search shows Parakeelia is a Pty Ltd thus the concept of related parties does not apply. By having all entities (individuals, companies, associations) that wish to provide donations, comply the same governance and principles as public companies, then everything would have to be arm's length or be a breach of the law.

It is simple, very clear and proven.
Click to expand...
No, its been explained to you several times that it isn't some random business that has decided to put some support into the Liberal party.

It is a company made by the Liberal party, and owned by the Liberal party, which they launder tax payer money through, and pay to themselves to fund their party.

You keep trying to skip the main fact or the corruption. You keep downplaying what is happening. Thats why I know you are lying when you say your against it and want this to be stopped.

"A quick ASIC search shows parakeelia is a Pty LTD thus parties don't apply blah blah".
No, its been explained to you, and links have been provided that explain it and support the explanations.
It is made, owned and exploited by the Liberal party.
So why would you pretend youve just done a quick search on ASIC that shows you nothing has been done wrong?
Its been explained to you so many times.
 
Watchyourwaite said:
No, its been explained to you several times that it isn't some random business that has decided to put some support into the Liberal party.

It is a company made by the Liberal party, and owned by the Liberal party, which they launder tax payer money through, and pay to themselves to fund their party.

You keep trying to skip the main fact or the corruption. You keep downplaying what is happening. Thats why I know you are lying when you say your against it and want this to be stopped.

"A quick ASIC search shows parakeelia is a Pty LTD thus parties don't apply blah blah".
No, its been explained to you, and links have been provided that explain it and support the explanations.
It is made, owned and exploited by the Liberal party.
So why would you pretend youve just done a quick search on ASIC that shows you nothing has been done wrong?
Its been explained to you so many times.
Click to expand...

But that wasn't what I said.

I agree with your position and only refer to ASIC and PTY ltds as it is almost impossible to prove fraud but it is easy to implement changes with lower thresholds of breaches.

Can you explain that to Maggie?
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Power Raid said:
But that wasn't what I said.

I agree with your position and only refer to ASIC and PTY ltds as it is almost impossible to prove fraud but it is easy to implement changes with lower thresholds of breaches.

Can you explain that to Maggie?
Click to expand...
Maggie definitely has a better understanding of the situation than you do.
On top of that she clearly understands you.
 
Watchyourwaite said:
Maggie definitely has a better understanding of the situation than you do.
On top of that she clearly understands you.
Click to expand...

then why are you both arguing, given I agree with you? Is it you were upset because you would like to keep the debate about emotion and not interested in solutions?

take a read of the difference between a proprietary company and a public company. this simple requirement would alleviate any concerns regarding the arrangements as the "trip" thresholds are much lower.
 
Power Raid said:
then why are you both arguing, given I agree with you? Is it you were upset because you would like to keep the debate about emotion and not interested in solutions?

take a read of the difference between a proprietary company and a public company. this simple requirement would alleviate any concerns regarding the arrangements as the "trip" thresholds are much lower.
Click to expand...
Your agreement consists of three or so words then you go into a big spiel of total irrelevance. See your last sentence, WTF?

You can't stay on topic but try to muddy the waters and come into threads with your opinion first without informing yourself of the facts.

Very irritating.
 
Power Raid said:
then why are you both arguing, given I agree with you? Is it you were upset because you would like to keep the debate about emotion and not interested in solutions?

take a read of the difference between a proprietary company and a public company. this simple requirement would alleviate any concerns regarding the arrangements as the "trip" thresholds are much lower.
Click to expand...
We don't agree. You think its "cute" and needs "a simple rule change". And that its to "alleviate any concerns".
Its obvious that they have just used loopholes to get around the old "simple rule changes" and will do the same in the future.

Your not providing a solution. And your telling people who are angry with what the politicians are doing with our money, that we are being too emotional and shouldnt talk about it. Your telling us that we should ignore it and just talk about adding another line of red tape, that can easily be stepped over. And sweep it all under the carpet and let it just continue happening.

This is the Liberals using our money to give themselves and there friends more money. And finding a legal way to do it.
The same way they will find a legal way to do it with your "simple rule change".

You dont care that theyve done it and you dont care that they will continue to do it. You just want us to stop talking about it, because we are being to 'emotional'.

Your a bully and a politician.
 
Maggie5 said:
Your agreement consists of three or so words then you go into a big spiel of total irrelevance. See your last sentence, WTF?

You can't stay on topic but try to muddy the waters and come into threads with your opinion first without informing yourself of the facts.

Very irritating.
Click to expand...
You and waitstaff are copping a belting on this thread!
 
No mention of Parakeelia. But Medi'scare' is the end of the world and needs a federal police investigation.

I really cannot believe how people who couldnt lay straight in bed can pretend to be so outraged over anything.
Seriously makes me sick
 
Brown Bottle said:
There's clearly a good reason why no-one is prepared to go after this story and we're missing it

At least the LNP are now worried about dishonesty. Maybe one day they'll be able to recognize that it's at the heart of most of what they do
Click to expand...
Probably because all parties do it, just liberals dumb enough to be caught- this time.
 
Watchyourwaite said:
No mention of Parakeelia. But Medi'scare' is the end of the world and needs a federal police investigation.

I really cannot believe how people who couldnt lay straight in bed can pretend to be so outraged over anything.
Seriously makes me sick
Click to expand...
Leave them too it Watchyourwaite. The more they bang on about "Medi'scare'", the more their health policies go under the microscope.

They are a joke mate.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Parakeelia

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top