by CANdoAust 27,271 views
From the AWU to the HSU, millions of dollars of unions members funds have been stolen.
There have been no prosecutions, no Royal Commissions, and with the AWU - the media has been gagged.
Now Michael Smith - a commentator courageous enough to put his job on the line - has been interviewed by CANdo, uncovering the scandal which has engulfed the trade union movement in Australia.
by CANdoAust 4,112 views
Michael Smith asks why don't union bosses prosecute organisers who use members funds for their own purposes in massive amounts.
Is the $20million diverted from the HSU and up to $1million from the AWU just aberrations, or is there a bigger problem in the unions.
by CANdoAust 3,112 views
Michael Smith explains how a sham entity was established for Bruce Wilson and his associate in Western Australia.
He compares the handwriting on the application with other documents and concludes that it was set up by Wilson's lawyer.
He explains how the entity, who's rules forbade its personal use, was actually the source of funds to purchase a house in Melbourne.
Wilson's lawyer acted on the purchase, arranged a mortgage, and accepted the balance of the purchase price paid direct from the sham entity.
by CANdoAust 1,896 views
Michael Smith asks why, when vast sums of union members funds are taken, the union bosses seem reluctant to go to the police.
He calls for a Royal Commission into the HSU, AWU and any other scandals.
He also calls for the same standards of accountability to apply to union bosses, as applies to company directors.
by CANdoAust 1,168 views
Instead of union bosses rising through the ranks, a new breed has taken over Australian trade unions.
Recruited from political offices and universities, especially law schools, the new breed is ambitious for power and political office. They bask in the immunity that the system condones and Federal law confirms.
Michael Smith tells how union funds were used to renovate a house with vast amounts of cash withdrawals over short periods of time.
by CANdoAust 1,570 views
Michael Smith tells how he pre-recorded an interview which was approved by Fairfax's defamation lawyers and by the station's managment, but which was blocked by a senior Fairfax executive 10 minutes before broadcast.
The Prime Minister obtained from News Limited CEO John Hartigan, the withdrawal of a column by Glen Milne and an apology.
He asks what has happened in Australia that a Prime Minister can obtain such compliance from the media concerning matters relating to her personal affairs.
by CANdoAust 990 views
The government is considering significant "reform".
This, as Michael Smith indicates, is part of an agenda to disallow dissent on major political issues in Australia.
The proposals to establish a government media council to control the press, broadcast, and internet media - as well as the proposal to control takeovers through a so called public interest test - are new tools to ensure a homogeneous, pro-government message goes to the Australian people.
by CANdoAust 1,313 views
Some compliant commentators say that AWU scandal is old and the Prime Minister's answers are on the public record.
Michael Smith disagrees; there has never been a prosecution or an enquiry.
As with the HSU, there is need now for a Royal Commission with the power to have hearings in public, to compell the production of documents and the testamony of witnesses.
Only in this way will union members and Australians generally be properly informed as to the scandals that are engulfing the trade union movement.
by CANdoAust 22,006 views
Michael Smith - a commentator courageous enough to put his job on the line - says that the authorities were deceived about the purpose of the sham not-for-profit entity, the "AWU Workplace Reform Association", which Julia Gillard set up for her boyfriend Bruce Wilson as well as Ralph Blewitt - the relevant document can be seen in this video.
Following on CANdo's recent explosive video interviews, Michael Smith refers to revelations in The Australian by a former law firm partner, including one that Ms. Gillard knew the fund was to ensure the re-election of union bosses - a "slush fund".
There are "hard questions" which Michael Smith says the Prime Minister must now answer.
But contrary to the Prime Minister's repeated claims, not one of the answers is on the public record.
These include the potential conflict of interest in acting for the two men and the AWU, that the AWU was unaware of the formation of the sham entity, that it was used for illicit purposes which included the purchase and renovation of a house on which Julia Gillard's firm acted without charge and provided a mortgage, and that the balance of the purchase price for the house was provided, not by a bank cheque as requested, but by a cheque from the sham entity in clear breach of its rules.
Distancing himself from rumour and innuendo by some internet bloggers, he stressed that everything he was saying was supported by clear evidence, and had been vetted by expert lawyers.
by CANdoAust 2,785 views
CANdo demands that the Prime Minister answer these ten crucial questions. Michael Smith comments.
1. When you acted as a lawyer on the establishment on the incorporation of the "AWU Workplace Reform Association" for the purpose of an electoral slush fund, why was the purpose described in the application as being to facilitate "worker safety and training"?
2. Why did you not call for a resolution or other authorization from your other client, the AWU, and why did you not advise them?
3. When precisely did you realise AWU Workplace Reform Association was being used for fraudulent purposes? What did you do and what did you say to Wilson, Blewitt, your other client the AWU and your partners?
4. When you received a cheque on the AWU Workplace Reform Association for the balance of the purchase money - not a bank cheque as your firm requested - was this not sufficient notice of the fraud?
5. Given this fraud on the AWU, the massive fraud on the HSU, the vast sums of member's money and superannuation under union official's control, the minimal statutory financial standards compared with those applicable to company directors, and the number of former career trade union officials in the Parliament, is it not now time to call a Royal Commission into union fraud and mismanagement, headed by lawyers commanding universal respect, rather than an impotent enquiry (such as that you instituted into the BER enquiry)?
6. Why do you still refuse to make a statement on your involvement in the AWU affair to the Parliament?
7. Why do you avoid being interviewed by the nation's most informed journalists on the AWU affair - for example, Michael Smith, Alan Jones, Hedley Thomas and Andrew Bolt?
8. When did you resign from Slater & Gordon and when did your resignation take effect?
9. Did you, or someone on your behalf, contact Fairfax prior to the scheduled broadcast by Michael Smith on 2UE? What was said?
10. What precisely did you say to News Limited's John Hartigan concerning the Glen Milne comment?