Should Rudd be backed for the UN Sec General Job?

[CM86]

in positions of power you have what is called "proper purpose"

like ambulances are allowed to speed and run red lights under certain conditions. they are granted this power for a "proper purpose". In the case they do the same thing under the same processes (lights on etc) but for another purpose, they have broken the law.

This is no different.

So, you don't actually know what the money was spent on. You're just claiming it was a waste because you're a partisan hack.

Thanks for clearing that up.

At least this time you didn't try some elaborate bullshit story about how you were rubbing shoulders with such and such who told you this and that.

 

[Maggie5]

you are welcome to review DFATs reports on the matter but that isn't the issue.

Whether it is a Lib or a Lab is also not the issue.

Have no idea what you are referring to.

 

[CM86]

Have no idea what you are referring to.

The trick is to be as vague as possible. That makes it so much harder for people to call you out on your bullshit!

 

[Sinjin Smith]

Given it was Australia's money we should look at it from our perspective. If we wanted to fund schools, hospitals or infrastructure in foreign nations, then we should measure the success against the goal.

Unfortunately Rudd didn't have that intent.

Wouldn't it be great to waste $100+m on buying your next job?

Honest question, do you know what the money was spent on? I don't and the pessimist in me does suggest (because of Rudd) that not a cent actually went to any school or infrastructure. It would be good to see the trail, we never will though.

 

[CM86]

Honest question, do you know what the money was spent on? I don't and the pessimist in me does suggest (because of Rudd) that not a cent actually went to any school or infrastructure. It would be good to see the trail, we never will though.

I actually really do want to know as well.

I'm not unaware that it was for the UN bid. But, I would really like to know what happened to the money and if it was put to good use or not.

 

[Power Raid]

Have no idea what you are referring to.

If you want to know how the money was spent please refer the DFAT reports

but given that's not the issue on hand, please refer to them yourself

 

[Maggie5]

If you want to know how the money was spent please refer the DFAT reports

but given that's not the issue on hand, please refer to them yourself

You are now just repeating yourself, strange.
I was just interested to the answer that CM86 asked which you seem to be avoiding.

 

[Lebbo73]

Given it was Australia's money we should look at it from our perspective. If we wanted to fund schools, hospitals or infrastructure in foreign nations, then we should measure the success against the goal.

Unfortunately Rudd didn't have that intent.

Wouldn't it be great to waste $100+m on buying your next job?

So you can waste $100m on trying to get the UN Secretary General's position. However, if you keep $5m of that, it is a criminal offence!

 

[Power Raid]

Honest question, do you know what the money was spent on? I don't and the pessimist in me does suggest (because of Rudd) that not a cent actually went to any school or infrastructure. It would be good to see the trail, we never will though.

google the year you are interested in............DFAT performance of Australian Aid

 

[Power Raid]

You are now just repeating yourself, strange.
I was just interested to the answer that CM86 asked which you seem to be avoiding.

because it is not relevant to the issue.

the issue is proper purpose

 

[Maggie5]

because it is not relevant to the issue.

the issue is proper purpose

You made the comment and now you can't back it up, typical!

 

[Power Raid]

You made the comment and now you can't back it up, typical!

OK Maggie....let's play your game. what question would you like answered that is relevant to buying votes in Africa and the Caribbean?

what is DFAT? a govt department
what has DFAT got to do with this? the money didn't come out of Rudd's pocket
what is the Caribbean? a very nice place
what is proper purpose? phone a friend Maggie

 

[CM86]

because it is not relevant to the issue.

the issue is proper purpose

When I want to laugh, I compare your posts about this, to your posts in the Parakelia thread.

In that thread, you just wanted to talk about old policies by the Greens.
In this thread you don't actually care what happened with the money, you just trot around on your high horse.

"The Caribbean? a very nice place"
Ridiculous comment in the context, and you know it.

 

[Power Raid]

When I want to laugh, I compare your posts about this, to your posts in the Parakelia thread.

In that thread, you just wanted to talk about old policies by the Greens.
In this thread you don't actually care what happened with the money, you just trot around on your high horse.

"The Caribbean? a very nice place"
Ridiculous comment in the context, and you know it.

Both are absolutely consistent and in line with wanting better accountability and integrity of government (no matter who is in power).

 

[Maggie5]

OK Maggie....let's play your game. what question would you like answered that is relevant to buying votes in Africa and the Caribbean?

what is DFAT? a govt department
what has DFAT got to do with this? the money didn't come out of Rudd's pocket
what is the Caribbean? a very nice place
what is proper purpose? phone a friend Maggie

Not a game, you talked about waste, I was interested to know where the waste was. Pretty simple request I would have thought.
Just because it is just another of your brain farts, don't now start playing games and redirect the discussion.
DFAT is a rather big site and as I didn't make the claim have no idea what to look for.

 

[CM86]

Both are absolutely consistent and in line with wanting better accountability and integrity of government (no matter who is in power).

Hahaha. Sure.

In the Parakelia thread, where there is evidence and it is known that the Coalition was using tax payer's to fund their campaign.
You talk about the Greens.
In this thread about backing the UN job, you have no evidence or knowledge as to what happened to the money, and Rudd was successful, except he was blocked by the Coalition.
You allude to corruption and waste.

Your inconsistency is the only thing that is consistent about you.

 

[Power Raid]

Not a game, you talked about waste, I was interested to know where the waste was. Pretty simple request I would have thought.
Just because it is just another of your brain farts, don't now start playing games and redirect the discussion.
DFAT is a rather big site and as I didn't make the claim have no idea what to look for.

ah OK Maggie.

I used the word waste as over $100+m was used to buy votes for Australia to get a position in the UN and Rudd his glory in the top job. Just in case you can't see the issues:
- this is bribery.
- this is abuse of proper purpose

Do we want to become a dirty nation which supports kick backs and bribes as normal just a way of doing business? We are all horrified by Olympic Officials taking kick backs, we are all horrified by unions taking kick backs and we should all be horrified by governments taking kick backs. Equally, we should be horrified by our governments, businesses and individuals paying kick backs.

In addition governments are merely custodians of our nations capital and it should be spent to benefit Australia and not engage in grubby activities or buy future jobs. Governments are also vested with power for proper purpose. These are basic and important concepts that safeguard our nation. Further thank god Rudd didn't get the top job as we do not need someone at the top of the UN who participates in corrupt conduct.

Unfortunately we know politics can be very dirty and attracts self centered people, who often have very little commercial experience and a very thin CV. As a result they often don't appreciate what integrity and professional conduct is. This is why we need safeguards and professional oversight for our politicians.

We need an integrity commission.

 

[Power Raid]

Hahaha. Sure.

In the Parakelia thread, where there is evidence and it is known that the Coalition was using tax payer's to fund their campaign.
You talk about the Greens.
In this thread about backing the UN job, you have no evidence or knowledge as to what happened to the money, and Rudd was successful, except he was blocked by the Coalition.
You allude to corruption and waste.

Your inconsistency is the only thing that is consistent about you.

You are confused.

In both cases I believe there was a wrong doing. Both were legal acts but morally wrong.

The issue isn't the use of funds as I am sure both Lib and Lab can justify their actions legally. What we can both see is that morally it was wrong and an abuse of power and process.

The only difference is how you and I respond to the issue. We can either get emotional like Maggie and express our thoughts via a like button, we can arm wave and say there should be charges for activities where there was no crime or we should have an integrity commission (as proposed by the greens) which monitors and reports on politicians and governments conduct.


oh and I have told you where you can find information on how the money was spent. You just can't be Fkd reading it.

 

[Maggie5]

ah OK Maggie.

I used the word waste as over $100+m was used to buy votes for Australia to get a position in the UN and Rudd his glory in the top job. Just in case you can't see the issues:
- this is bribery.
- this is abuse of proper purpose

Do we want to become a dirty nation which supports kick backs and bribes as normal just a way of doing business? We are all horrified by Olympic Officials taking kick backs, we are all horrified by unions taking kick backs and we should all be horrified by governments taking kick backs. Equally, we should be horrified by our governments, businesses and individuals paying kick backs.

In addition governments are merely custodians of our nations capital and it should be spent to benefit Australia and not engage in grubby activities or buy future jobs. Governments are also vested with power for proper purpose. These are basic and important concepts that safeguard our nation. Further thank god Rudd didn't get the top job as we do not need someone at the top of the UN who participates in corrupt conduct.

Unfortunately we know politics can be very dirty and attracts self centered people, who often have very little commercial experience and a very thin CV. As a result they often don't appreciate what integrity and professional conduct is. This is why we need safeguards and professional oversight for our politicians.

We need an integrity commission.

What is it that you don't understand?

I understand how things work, what I want to know is where the waste was.
To help you out, was money directed to a hospital and then pocked by a corrupt politician? If so, can you give examples?
It annoys me greatly when you make a broad statement and can't back it up by examples. But your fall back position is for me to check DFAT! What the?

 

[Power Raid]

What is it that you don't understand?

I understand how things work, what I want to know is where the waste was.
To help you out, was money directed to a hospital and then pocked by a corrupt politician? If so, can you give examples?
It annoys me greatly when you make a broad statement and can't back it up by examples. But your fall back position is for me to check DFAT! What the?

If you want to know, go read the reports

 

[Maggie5]

If you want to know, go read the reports

Nah, we are going around in circles and I am over it.
You made the comment and can't back it up. As per usual!!!!

 

[Power Raid]

Nah, we are going around in circles and I am over it.
You made the comment and can't back it up. As per usual!!!!

stick to the like button Maggie if you can't comprehend issues in topics. #weismyreportitsjustnotfair

 

[Maggie5]

stick to the like button Maggie if you can't comprehend issues in topics. #weismyreportitsjustnotfair

You waffle too much, try facts for a while, really holds the readers attention and makes the board so much more interesting.

 

[JackOutback]

Power Raid, you are being deliberately disingenuous; you made a claim of waste and then refused to provide any such examples, telling people they can go google it themselves. This is why people don't trust your comments in other threads and I wish you wouldn't spam up threads with obfuscation and circular arguments.

 

[Power Raid]

Power Raid, you are being deliberately disingenuous; you made a claim of waste and then refused to provide any such examples, telling people they can go google it themselves. This is why people don't trust your comments in other threads and I wish you wouldn't spam up threads with obfuscation and circular arguments.

no, that is not correct.

I did say the money was wasted but the frame of reference was the purpose and not the use of funds. The reason for this was Rudd boosted foreign aid to certain jurisdictions for the purpose of influencing "blocks" of votes. Given the purpose was greasing wheels (call this bribery if you like), then the use of funds to be considered is the votes rather than what other nations did with our money.

If people want to look at how the money was spent, then they simply need to look at the year in question on the DFAT site. I'm sure some will justify corruption because some poor child was given access to running water or similar. No one would suggest that isn't a great result, if that is the case, but it simply isn't the issue at hand.