SA Footy

The NSW Greens set up this site showing major donations to the ALP, Liberal Party, federal Greens and their local NSW counterparts but now the SA Greens have joined up with them to shine a light on this practice.

http://www.democracy4sale.org

2007/08 financial year:

2007/08 Labor SA Property Gawler Northern Market Shopping Centre Pty Ltd $35,000
2007/08 Labor SA Hotels Australian Hotels Association (SA Branch) $15,000
2007/08 Labor SA Possible Assoc. Entity SA Officers Fund $11,000
2007/08 Labor SA Unions Transport Workers Union of Australia (SA/NT) $34,100
2007/08 Labor SA Unions Australian Services Union SA-NT Branch $15,000
2007/08 Labor SA Intra Political Party Australian Labor Party (ALP) - NATIONAL $600,000
2007/08 Labor SA Unions Australian Workers Union (SA) $30,000
2007/08 Labor SA Energy Companies ETSA Utilities $15,000
2007/08 Labor SA Unions Shop Distributive & Allied Employees Association-Federal $137,630
2007/08 Labor SA Property Balgara Shopping Centre $30,000
2007/08 Labor SA Resource Companies Santos Ltd $15,000
2007/08 Labor SA Unions Shop Distributive & Allied Employees Association-Federal $103,761
2007/08 Labor SA Unions CFMEU $20,650
2007/08 Labor SA Resource Companies Southern Quarries Pty Ltd $15,000
2007/08 Labor SA Unions LHMWU $90,000
2007/08 Labor SA Unions CFMEU $20,000
2007/08 Labor SA Property Makris Group $14,800
2007/08 Labor SA Unions LHMWU $75,141
2007/08 Labor SA Unions AMWU $55,738
2007/08 Labor SA Hotels Malens Colac Hotel Pty Ltd $20,000
2007/08 Labor SA Unions CEPU Electrical, Energy & Services Divsion - SA $11,965
2007/08 Labor SA Intra Political Party SA Progressive Business Incorporated $53,140
2007/08 Labor SA Financial/Insurance CSM Investments Pty Ltd $19,000
2007/08 Labor SA Unions CFMEU $11,450
$1,448,375

2007/08 Liberal SA Intra Political Party Liberal Party of Australia Federal Secretariat $15,000
2007/08 Liberal SA Property Dr Chau Chak Wing $29,980
2007/08 Liberal SA Property Auction Services Pty Ltd $12,000
2007/08 Liberal SA Other Political Party Liberal Party of Australia - NATIONAL $612,835
2007/08 Liberal SA Financial/Insurance Australian Unity $20,000
2007/08 Liberal SA Property Balgara Shopping Centre $20,000
2007/08 Liberal SA Political Party Affiliates Liberal Club $82,500
2007/08 Liberal SA Individual Mr Ian McLachlan $20,000
2007/08 Liberal SA Property Land SA $60,000
2007/08 Liberal SA Advocacy/Lobbyist Renewable Energy Generators of Australia $20,000
2007/08 Liberal SA Industrial/Manufacturing Gerard Corporation Ltd $50,000
2007/08 Liberal SA Pharmaceutical/Health Medicines Australia Inc $15,595
2007/08 Liberal SA Industrial/Manufacturing Gerard Lighting Pty Ltd $50,000
2007/08 Liberal SA Industrial/Manufacturing Adelaide Brighton Cement $15,000
2007/08 Liberal SA Property Dr Chau Chak Wing $49,986
2007/08 Liberal SA Energy Companies ETSA Utilities $15,000
2007/08 Liberal SA Intra Political Party The Liberal Party of Australia - Federal Secretariat $32,248
$1,120,144

Interesting figures, I personally think bona fide political parties should be funded to a fixed amount by the tax payer. I find it offensive and un-democratic that if I belong to a union (I do APESMA) or use a private service part of my payment goes to a political party. It would also stop people and organisations expecting favours for donations.

mick wrote:Interesting figures, I personally think bona fide political parties should be funded to a fixed amount by the tax payer. I find it offensive and un-democratic that if I belong to a union (I do APESMA) or use a private service part of my payment goes to a political party. It would also stop people and organisations expecting favours for donations.

The board of management of Unions, who are elected in a democratic manner, control whether a Union donates to a political party or not. You may find that offensive but it is seen as a way to further look after the interests of each unions members. Offensive, well you are entitiled to your own opinion, but to call it un-democratic is just plain wrong IMO.

Un-democratic would be used as the average Union member would not be aware of this practice.

Booney wrote:Un-democratic would be used as the average Union member would not be aware of this practice.

not the union i work for. Every 4 years there are elections and the board of management, who are rank and file members, are elected as well. These people usually come from large worksites and they all understand the process. I can't speak for other unions but the one i work for gives every member a chance to be involved.

My "Union" is democratic.
I'm free to join or not join without any repercussions or overt criticism - so I join.
Oh, and they don't make donations to any political party.

Psyber wrote:My "Union" is democratic.
I'm free to join or not join without any repercussions or overt criticism - so I join.
Oh, and they don't make donations to any political party.

You are free to join or not join any union Psyber without repercussions.

There are plenty of unions who don't donate to political parties, mine being one of them. Well the branch i work for anyway, some states do make donations.

Booney wrote:Un-democratic would be used as the average Union member would not be aware of this practice.

They must be very average indeed

mick wrote:Interesting figures, I personally think bona fide political parties should be funded to a fixed amount by the tax payer. I find it offensive and un-democratic that if I belong to a union (I do APESMA) or use a private service part of my payment goes to a political party. It would also stop people and organisations expecting favours for donations.

Political parties do very well out of the taxpayer already thank you very much. Postage and electoral allowances which mysteriously find their way into funding election material instead of serving the electorate. Then there's the electoral funding per vote received by the parties. Nope, they don't need any more from us.

I agree with your union comments though. What does an employee do if they wish to join a union but do not want an affiliation with or their fees going to the Labor party (if that particular union does that)?

By the way, APESMA are one of the better unions going around.

dedja wrote:

mick wrote:Interesting figures, I personally think bona fide political parties should be funded to a fixed amount by the tax payer. I find it offensive and un-democratic that if I belong to a union (I do APESMA) or use a private service part of my payment goes to a political party. It would also stop people and organisations expecting favours for donations.

Political parties do very well out of the taxpayer already thank you very much. Postage and electoral allowances which mysteriously find their way into funding election material instead of serving the electorate. Then there's the electoral funding per vote received by the parties. Nope, they don't need any more from us.

I agree with your union comments though. What does an employee do if they wish to join a union but do not want an affiliation with or their fees going to the Labor party (if that particular union does that)?
By the way, APESMA are one of the better unions going around.

Lobby the members on the committee of management to not donate or contribute to a political party. That is the answer.

On a similar topic, if the state Libs win the next election and ban the events where business pay big money to sit at a table with a politician and talk to them for the night, where is the shortfall in their revenue going to come from? Only way I can see is either more brown paper bags slipped under tables, or some taxes will be raised.

pafc1870 wrote:On a similar topic, if the state Libs win the next election and ban the events where business pay big money to sit at a table with a politician and talk to them for the night, where is the shortfall in their revenue going to come from? Only way I can see is either more brown paper bags slipped under tables, or some taxes will be raised.

But doesn't the money from these events go to the political party's coffers? Taxes go to the govt.

Political parties should be tax payer funded it is the only way to avoid corruption.

GWW wrote:But doesn't the money from these events go to the political party's coffers? Taxes go to the govt.

Taxes go to both but obviously more goes to the government of the day but I agree with Mick.

I see the references in the last few days to the businessman killed in Sydney, and his having had a file on corrupt NSW politicians, have disappeared from the media web sites now...
I'd been not commenting, waiting for developments, but its sudden disappearance makes me wonder if there was truth in it.

However, while looking for traces I did find this:
http://www.theage.com.au/national/now-i ... -fc57.html

EDIT: I see it has now re-emerged in an update:
http://au.news.yahoo.com/a/-/latest/592 ... d-reports/

Sydney Morning Herald journalist Vanda Carson said he was also involved in providing prostitutes to high-profile people.
"We understand he had a sports marketing business and he used that as a front to arrange prostitutes for high-profile men including sports players," she told the Nine Network.
Carson said a tape recording believed to contain a conversation capable of bringing down the NSW government had been handed to police.
"Mr McGurk told us about a tape that sounded absolutely sensational that had mentioned corruption at the highest levels of the NSW government," she said.
"We understand the tape was given to the police last night."

This should be a new thread really, Psyber.

Commissioner Scippione has potentially got a massive dilemma before him. IF the alleged tape is as explosive as the media have made it out to be, (without having heard it themselves of course!), then he may have to take it to the NSW Governor to see if the Queen's representative maintains confidence in the elected Govt or not. Depending on what is on the alleged tape, the NSW Commissioner may have no choice but to circumvent the NSW Police Minister and Premier.

NSW now seem to be similar to the types of controversies in Qld in the past.

Does NSW still have an ICAC (didn't Greiner set one up and it ultimately led to his demise as Premier?)

No one can argue that both sides of politics in NSW are putrid but lets try and keep our heads about this given (a) Utegate and (b) the company this guy supposedly kept. Some on here have shown to be pretty excitable when it comes to the MSM (mainly Ltd News) and their "exclusives".

Gozu, the credibility of News Ltd vs the ABC is pretty clear to most. The ABC is running with this and the difference this time (as opposed to Utegate) is that the story has emerged from outside of the political sphere. The implications Federally for a NSW Labor disaster are also pretty obvious. Everyone I talk to in NSW is crying out for an early election. This is a massive issue for the Rudd govt as if these things aren't resolved, the Rudd Govt could face a massive backlash at the next Federal election which is scheduled before the NSW on (in March 11).

I won't get into the credibility of the ABC in recent years. But supposedly this McGuirk character was trying to use this tape to blackmail a property developer and wanted $8 million for it. Graham Richardson says he's heard the tape and that there's absolutely nothing on it. Regardless lets wait and see before throwing around ridiculous statements that this might somehow lead to the Opposition being voted in at the next federal election. Remember idiots were demanding Rudd & Swan resign after the Utegate story broke too and how's those Pauline Hanson pics going?

Also you wildly overstate the supposed ramifications this will have for federal Labor. People aren't that stupid they know the difference between local and national issues. NSW Labor have been an absolute basketcase for years yet not only do they keep getting returned but the public voted federally for Labor in 2007. The sad thing about NSW is come election time they look at the even worse NSW Liberals and just vote Labor back in.