by Q. » Fri Jan 24, 2020 9:36 am
by stan » Fri Jan 24, 2020 9:43 am
The stories that are coming out about some of the grants now are getting worse.Q. wrote:McKenzie will reluctantly take one for the team - it's pretty obvious the decision to undertake these rorts came from the top. She's just making sure she gets looked after with a cushy position in 12 months time.
by Dutchy » Fri Jan 24, 2020 11:44 am
by Jimmy_041 » Fri Jan 24, 2020 12:49 pm
cracka wrote:stan wrote:That's what I am hearing as well. Turns out there may be a line, but my word the public need to patrol that line pretty bloody well because they don't mind crossing it and only seem to care if we care.Magellan wrote:The word is McKenzie will announce her resignation by tomorrow.
What pisses me off is she'll still claim she did nothing wrong but is resigning for the good of the party & that will be the end of it. These c**** need to start being held accountable & criminally charged for their actions. Until then these rorts will continue
by tipper » Fri Jan 24, 2020 2:30 pm
Dutchy wrote:Did she actually do anything wrong?
I cant see any evidence that she was an active member of the organisation.
She (like many other MP's do) joined as a member of a club in their local community to support them.
by Dutchy » Fri Jan 24, 2020 5:48 pm
by heater31 » Fri Jan 24, 2020 5:58 pm
If this was a public servant working in the relevant minister's department approving grant applications and failed to disclose such information they would be sacked. Why should MP's be any different?Dutchy wrote:slap on the wrist, dont do it again and play on IMO
by tigerpie » Fri Jan 24, 2020 6:16 pm
heater31 wrote:If this was a public servant working in the relevant minister's department approving grant applications and failed to disclose such information they would be sacked. Why should MP's be any different?Dutchy wrote:slap on the wrist, dont do it again and play on IMO
by stan » Fri Jan 24, 2020 10:34 pm
I'm not so much concerned with the membership things, it's where these grants have gone and how they have been used to buy votes.Dutchy wrote:Did she actually do anything wrong?
I cant see any evidence that she was an active member of the organisation.
She (like many other MP's do) joined as a member of a club in their local community to support them.
by DOC » Fri Jan 24, 2020 10:42 pm
Dutchy wrote:slap on the wrist, dont do it again and play on IMO
by Dutchy » Fri Jan 24, 2020 11:25 pm
heater31 wrote:If this was a public servant working in the relevant minister's department approving grant applications and failed to disclose such information they would be sacked. Why should MP's be any different?Dutchy wrote:slap on the wrist, dont do it again and play on IMO
by tigerpie » Fri Jan 24, 2020 11:27 pm
Dutchy wrote:heater31 wrote:If this was a public servant working in the relevant minister's department approving grant applications and failed to disclose such information they would be sacked. Why should MP's be any different?Dutchy wrote:slap on the wrist, dont do it again and play on IMO
Find it hard to believe any Public Servant would be sacked, protected species.
So if someone else approved it (which would have happened) there is no issue?
Isnt this only $30k we are talking about?
by DOC » Fri Jan 24, 2020 11:33 pm
Dutchy wrote:heater31 wrote:If this was a public servant working in the relevant minister's department approving grant applications and failed to disclose such information they would be sacked. Why should MP's be any different?Dutchy wrote:slap on the wrist, dont do it again and play on IMO
Find it hard to believe any Public Servant would be sacked, protected species.
So if someone else approved it (which would have happened) there is no issue?
Isnt this only $30k we are talking about?
by stan » Sat Jan 25, 2020 6:52 am
The entire saga is 100m whichis what o am more concerned about.DOC wrote:Dutchy wrote:heater31 wrote:If this was a public servant working in the relevant minister's department approving grant applications and failed to disclose such information they would be sacked. Why should MP's be any different?Dutchy wrote:slap on the wrist, dont do it again and play on IMO
Find it hard to believe any Public Servant would be sacked, protected species.
So if someone else approved it (which would have happened) there is no issue?
Isnt this only $30k we are talking about?
100 million
by stan » Sat Jan 25, 2020 10:18 am
by DOC » Sat Jan 25, 2020 11:21 am
by tigerpie » Sat Jan 25, 2020 2:43 pm
by stan » Sat Jan 25, 2020 10:33 pm
Correct, 9 didn't have applications in by the due date. 4 didn't have applications at all. But all were awarded grants.tigerpie wrote:I know from previous experience how many hurdles you have to leap over in order to even be considered.
It's so time consuming and volunteers putting in many hours.
If an application hadn't been received by the due date, bad luck try again next year.
If its true some haven't gone through the application process but still got grants then she's toast!
Criminal offence in my book.
by Psyber » Tue Jan 28, 2020 6:48 pm
by DOC » Tue Jan 28, 2020 8:27 pm
Competitions SANFL Official Site | Country Footy SA | Southern Football League | VFL Footy
Club Forums Snouts Louts | The Roost | Redlegs Forum |