The AWU Scandal - The AWU is talking crap
Saturday, 27 October 2012
The idea that the AWU did anything other than create the appearance of holding Wilson to account is fanciful.
There were good men in the AWU who were disgusted by what went on. Many tried hard to get justice.
But over the next few posts you'll be the judge of whether the AWU took appropriate action to hold Wilson to account.
You'll also form an opinion about whether any AWU members' money was involved in the frauds that several people were involved in.
The following email is from a reader of this blog. Read carefully the email that he wrote to the current Secretary of the AWU, Paul Howes.
You'll note he asks Paul about actions taken by Ms Gillard. Soon you'll read Paul Howes's non-response.
Hi Paul,
Given your numerous TV and radio appearances, I sort of feel that I have got to know you as a good bloke, doing a good job on behalf of AWU members. It sort of feels like I have come to know you, at least a bit, as a guest in our living room over the past few years.
My formerly favourable impression is coming into question in relation to the events relating to Ms Gillard and her role in the establishment and operation of the AWU Workplace Reform Association. By now you are no doubt as familiar with the issues as anyone (or at least anyone following the investigative journalism of Michael Smith and Hedley Thomas). I realise that this is a tricky and difficult issue for the AWU and you. However, it has become very clear that there is a major issue of concern here. Over $500,000 of AWU members assets has "disappeared" through a mechanism that could not have been available to Bruce Wilson had not Ms Gillard facilitated the establishment of the AWU Workplace Reform Association.
Ms Gillard claims to have "answered all questions" in relation to this matter. It is very evident that she has not. For example, she has not responded to the list of questions relating to this affair prepared by The Australian. Nor has she responded to questions from Michael Smith relating to the witnessing of the Power of Attorney, nor the representations to the WA Corporate Affairs Commission that led them to approve the establishment of the AWU Workplace Reform Association.
As I said at the outset, I think you are a good bloke. However, the time has come when you must stop defending the indefensible. There are issues of integrity and principle here that demand that those responsible be held to account.
Signed by the sender
PS. I am a retired bloke, a swinging voter who has voted more for the ALP than for the Coalition. I hold the view that the Hawke/Keating government was the best government this country has had in my lifetime, and a great credit to the union movement and Labour. Howard had the sense to support their initiatives from the opposition benches, and to continue their policies in government. Sadly, the Rudd/Gillard government looks like an amateur shambles by comparison.
And here is Paul Howes's letter in answer to this email.
Note the crafty tricks in Howes's letter. The person who wrote to Howes wrote this:
My formerly favourable impression is coming into question in relation to the events relating to Ms Gillard and her role in the establishment and operation of the AWU Workplace Reform Association. By now you are no doubt as familiar with the issues as anyone (or at least anyone following the investigative journalism of Michael Smith and Hedley Thomas). I realise that this is a tricky and difficult issue for the AWU and you. However, it has become very clear that there is a major issue of concern here. Over $500,000 of AWU members assets has "disappeared" through a mechanism that could not have been available to Bruce Wilson had not Ms Gillard facilitated the establishment of the AWU Workplace Reform Association.
The letter writer was concerned, as most Australians are, about the conduct of our Prime Minister. Paul Howes's letter pretends that the writer was writing about Blewitt and Wilson. Most Australians I think care that crimes are prosecuted, but they care deeply about allegations of criminal conduct involving their Prime Minister. Paul Howes pretends there is no reference to the PM at all.
There is a very clear and specific allegation regarding the Prime Minister acting in a fashion that hurt the interests of the AWU's genuine members. The allegation is that she deceived the WA Corporate Affairs Commissioner through her actions in creating the false documents that sought incorporation for the Australian Workers' Union Workplace Reform Association. The further allegation put to the PM in The Age and Sydney Morning Herald newspapers is that she wrote a letter to the WA Corporate Affairs Commissioner confirming the bona fides of the AWU-WRA. Each of these actions was contrary to the Rules of the Union and may disclose prima-facie evidence of serious criminal offences. I have personally received written advice from a person with direct, relevant evidence about the PM's actions confirming the existence of evidence to support the allegation regarding her letter to the WA Corporate Affairs Commissioner.
Howes goes on to say that no AWU members money was involved. As if you can blithely use the AWU name, pass an entity off as being an AWU entity, rake money in - but that in no way involves an interest held by AWU members. It's as if using the AWU moniker to rip money from companies does not involve or create an issue for the AWU itself.
Well that's certainly the way the AWU has reacted to Wilson's fraud. At no stage has the AWU completed any proceedings against Wilson to get one cent of money back from him.
Howes would well know that orders were made in the Australian Industrial Relations Court by Judge Madgwick declaring redundancy payments made to Wilson and others to be invalid. Judge Madgwick said that money was improperly paid out of union funds to Wilson and others. If that's not union members money then Paul Howes, what is?
And what action has been taken to get that money back? None.
You will hear a lot more from me about this, a hell of a lot more.