I'm going to address some of the points that Julia Gillard has now made publicly in recent times in her role as Prime Minister.  What she told Peter Gordon back in 1995 is important - but here is what she's telling you now as your prime minister.

JOURNALIST: Can you just clarify the point about whether it was wise to include the name of the union in the association when it was set up? And secondly on the matter of what happened in 1995, given the problems that have emerged, or the suggestion of problems, was it appropriate for you to advise the AWU about the existence of the reform association, or was there a client issue there about who was your client?

PM: Hindsight's a wonderful thing, isn't it? It’s a wonderful thing over 20 years. But put yourself in my shoes incorporating that association. This did not strike me as a non-standard transaction; unions incorporate associations to support the re-election of union officials.

As I made clear in August at the very long press conference in fact that is done to better assist with the management of these funds, that there had been circumstances in the past where a team of people who are all going to support each other at the next election decide at the time of the election that they're going to go separate ways and create new tickets.

And if the only way in which you've done the fundraising for your re-election is that it's kept in a shoebox as cash or it's popped in someone's personal bank account, it means that when you then divide and go your separate ways it can be very difficult to work out what's what, what money is whose.

So it is common for unions to incorporate associations for this kind of purpose. In those circumstances dealing with this matter during my legal career, a matter which at the time struck me as pretty routine, pretty low level, indeed so low level I didn't even charge for it, a matter of that nature, then it was being set up to support the re-election of a team of union officials in the AWU – hence the name – and they were intending to stand on a certain platform, hence the objects of the association.

So, and the second part of your question was?

JOURNALIST: In 1995, given that there were questions being raised about the funds of the union, would it have been appropriate, or should it have been appropriate that you advised the AWU of the association?

PM: The questions then in circulation in the AWU related to arrangements and circumstances in the Victorian branch. But I think it is true to say, and history records very extensively, that the AWU was well and truly seized of this matter.

And then in terms of who else was involved in looking at the matter, Mr Gude who first raised claims about me publicly in October 1995, advised the Victorian Parliament at that stage that the National Crime Authority was involved in the investigation, that the matter had been referred to the Victoria Police and he personally was referring it to the employee relations commission in Victoria. So, AWU involved in its own investigations and other authorities getting involved as well.

Once again, you can't report things you don't know and I didn't have before me any details or any evidence about transactions on the accounts of the association, any bank accounts, that had been established by the association. 

This is the bank account details for the actual WA Re-election fund set up by Wilson and Blewitt in 1994, nearly one year before Ms Gillard tried to convince Peter Gordon that an incorporated association was the better way to go.  In her interview with Peter Gordon on 11/9/95 she said,

it had been our experience that if you did it in a less formal way, you just had someone, say Fred Bloggs, say, oh look, I'll just open a bank account and everybody can put the money into there, the problem developed that when the leadership team fractured, as relatively commonly happens, you got into a very difficult dispute about who was the owner of the monies in the bank account, so it was better to have an incorporated association, a legal entity, into which people could participate as members, that was the holder of the account.

Apparently "our experience" only applied in this case, where Bruce needed an incorporated entity that would coincidentally be named in a letter addressed to the very incorporated association that Ms Gillard helped set up as the party to which Thiess intended to pay for workplace reform representative services.  Wow.  What a coincidence.

Well-seasoned lawyer says AWU: Elected Officers and Election Funds

All officers of the AWU are subject to election by the members of the union for a term of office of four years.

Should an elected official resign from the union then a casual vacancy is created and a election must be held to fill the casual vacancy unless less than three quarters of the term of office remains, in which case the appropriate governing body of the union may appoint a member of the union to fill the casual vacancy.

Bruce Wilson was an officer of the organisation and on about the 10 May 1991 was appointed the AWU WA Branch Secretary to fill a casual vacancy following the resignation of Joe Keenan the AWU WA branch secretary. As the AWU WA Branch Secretary he became a member of the National Executive.

Ralph Blewitt was an officer of the organisation and elected to the office of AWU WA branch Assistant Branch Secretary on the 12 December 1991.

If officers of the union contest elections then they are not permitted to use union funds or the resources of the union for their electioneering.

It is common for union officials to create election funds and raise money to finance contested elections in unions. One common method for raising money for an election fund is for union officials to authorise payroll deductions to be paid into a designated bank account in the name of an unincorporated association.

Elected officials in AWU branches created election funds to raise money to fund any possible contested elections.

Between the 10 May 1992 and December 1992 Bruce Wilson organised an election fund and raised money by way of payroll deduction from AWU WA Branch officials who donated money into a bank account to support the re-election of AWU WA Branch officials in any future contested AWU elections.

In 1992 AWU Victorian Branch officials opened an account known as the AWU Members Welfare Association and raised money by way of payroll deductions from AWU Victorian branch officials. The original signatories to this account were Robert Leslie Smith (known as Bob Smith 1) the AWU Victorian Branch Secretary between 1990 and 1993 and James Collins the AWU Victorian Branch Vice President.

Neither of these election funds sought to become incorporated associations under relevant State laws.

The incorporation of an election fund is a rare event in the history of trade unions in Australia and there must be some doubt as to whether such an incorporation has ever occurred before or after the AWU – WRA was incorporated on 24 June 1992. Despite widespread publicity given to Ms Gillard’s interview of the 11 September 1995 as published in The Australian on the 23 August 2012, no one to my knowledge has discovered a union election fund that has been incorporated under State laws governing incorporated Associations.

Ms Gillard on 11 September 1995 gives a fanciful explanation for the incorporation of the election/slush fund. She asserts that it has been the experience at Slater & Gordon that if a union official opened “a bank account and everybody ...put the money into …that when the leadership team fractured ….you got into a very difficult dispute about who was the owner of the monies in the bank account, so it was better to have an incorporated association, a legal entity, into which people could participate as members, that was the holder of the account”.

This thinking has not appealed to any other industrial lawyers at Slater & Gordon at the time and has not appealed to any industrial lawyers or union officials throughout the trade union movement.

One obvious problem with this explanation is that none of the rules of the association address this situation of fractured leadership and ownership of the money of the association.

An obvious rule to address this problem would be something like the following:

1. The Treasurer of the Association upon a member joining the association shall record all payroll contributions made by the member to the association and upon any member giving notice in writing of their resignation from the association the Treasurer shall refund all payroll contributions of that member  if they so request within 30 days of receiving such notice”.

No rules of the association addressed the problem of fractured leadership.

However, the real problem with this explanation is that if there was genuine fractured leadership amongst association members then the association may have no alternative except to be wound up as prescribed in accordance with the Act.

Under the winding up provisions of the Act, an association can be wound up voluntarily or by way of a Court order if for example the committee of the incorporated association has acted oppressively in relation to members.

Under section 33 of the Act, if an association is wound up then any surplus property may not lawfully be distributed among members or former members of the association and must be distributed to either another incorporated association or for charitable purposes.

No wonder union officials are not rushing into their lawyer’s offices demanding that their election/slush funds be incorporated.

Few union officials would be attracted to the possibility of the surplus property of an association being distributed to a charity upon the winding up of the association.