Craig Thomson:
Peter Lloyd writes: Re. “Thomson could face jail if found in contempt (and he wouldn’t be the first)” (yesterday, item 4). Serious questions are beginning to be raised in independent media about the strength of the case against Embattled Labor MP Craig Thomson* (trademark pending), the motives and relationships of his key accusers, and the fairly direct path of those accusers to Opposition Leader Tony Abbott.
We know Abbott would always prefer to resort to Machiavellian schemes to bring down an opponent (ask Pauline Hanson), rather than having to resort to an area where he struggles: presenting policy and arguing its merits.
But the Thomson case highlights, again, what a toxic media environment Australia has: Fairfax, as the original vehicle for Thomson’s attackers, is hardly going to take up his case. News Limited of course operates as a virtual media arm of the Coalition, as do almost all the shock-jocks. The ABC devotes far too many resources to providing outlets for the punditocracy and Canberra-based journalists whose appetite for exposing truth is non-existent, but whose abilities to throw together work from the “he said, she said” school are unmatched.
Why the ALP has not sought a judicial inquiry that can compel witnesses is beyond me, and speaks far more to their incompetence than does any school hall program or carbon tax ad campaign.
Alexandra Penfold writes: Former Howard government Minister Peter Reith seems to bob up in the media quite often these days. He was on The Drum on Tuesday night, looking utterly bewildered and shocked because Craig Thomson had said that his phone card had been tampered with and used by someone else (or words to that effect).
Pennies started dropping, wasn’t this the bloke who gave his son his parliamentary phone card to use when son went off to London in 2000?
The same son, who Peter Reith said had not made the $50,000 worth of calls over five years? and someone else had fraudulently used sons phone card?
Well six months later after all this was exposed by The Canberra Times, Peter Reith repaid the $50,000 to the federal government. Yes we love a good coincidence.
Didn’t Peter Reith mislead Parliament and the Australian people back in 2002 when he said those kids were thrown overboard? They weren’t thrown overboard but I don’t recall Reith ever acknowledging that. Didn’t he then retire from Parliament before he could be held to account by the Privileges Committee but not before availing himself of his generous life time superannuation? And did he not then immediately go to work for a defence contractor?
He is an outrageous character and should be held to account. At the least the Privileges Committee should re-call Mr Reith’s case and have a good look at blocking his super.
Ahhhh The Drum (making-over Reith)? “Empty vessels ….. most noise”?
Peter Reith is a slimy, mendacious little hypocrite!
Nothing little about his hypocrisy – and one vote from epitomising
everything the party stands for, from being elected Liberal party president.
Let’s not forget the lengths he went to, to “facilitate” a win for
employers, behind the scenes, during the wharf dispute.
Or as Leader of the House how the party knifed the Speaker of the House
(from his own party, Bob Halverson) for being “too even-handed”?
Sorry Klewso, as in “little” Johnny, I meant his mind, his world view, his
minute inability to see anything beyond his own ego!