Another Pollie bites the dust

[snacker]

Thought she did a Ok job overall but screwed herself with this last lockdown. she was a shot duck because of that..

Also the "Extra" toll roads we now have.. costs a fortune just to commute around this city..

[enf]

Yeah, you're probably right. She did a fine job overall I thought.

Aaaah, the ex boyfriend....I thought it must be that....

[snacker]

Yup.. She is being formally investigated by NSW ICAC over her connection to her Ex Boyfriend.. Did she know anything and not report it or was she actively assisting in his dealings..

sounds like they have dirt on her and she is bailing before she loses her entitlements with a Guilty verdict... ( she would lose some but some all). but if she was still in office she would lose the lot...

[enf]

Depends. ICACs have a habit of destroying people without their having recourse to a defence. There are more than a few who have had any findings completely reversed by the courts later on. Not much solace when you've been destroyed publicly.

Still, she's done the job she had to do.....

Who's next?

[wotnot]

[lsemmens]

I wonder? To me, who knows little of that side of politics, it would appear that she is expecting to be found guilty, otherwise, it, to me, would be the "politically correct" thing to stand down (but not resign) until she is found innocent. snacker and enf, I suspect you may be close to the mark.

[trash]

[Ah-Those-Old-Days!]

I don't personally believe that Gladys was/would-be deliberately/knowingly devious or corrupt...
It may be a simple matter of oversight, or ignorance at the time. The current status of this Covid numbers up-surge
probably didn't help, with how she was feeling about the whole state of affairs recently!! She is just a 'Human-Being'.

[Reschs]

They were out to get her no matter what.
I think she has just had enough.
Why waste your time defending yourself and get nowhere.
By the time she is proven not guilty, and only naive, the damage is done.
Same scenario with Barry O'Farrell.
Who bribes a non drinker with alcohol.
Staff slipped up and made him look stupid.
He could have ridden this out, but decided he'd had enough.

[peteramjet]

NSW seems to have lost a good Premier for, at this stage, no other reason than ICAC having launched an inquiry.

Corrupt politicians should be prosecuted, but the issue with these public ICAC inquiries is that, in almost all cases, mud is thrown and none of it sticks. No charges, no convictions - just the people losing a good leader.

If ICAC has sufficient evidence to commence a prosecution than they should do so. But until that time, their inquires - that don’t rely on the rules of evidence - should remain behind closed doors.

[enf]

NSW seems to have lost a good Premier for, at this stage, no other reason than ICAC having launched an inquiry.

Corrupt politicians should be prosecuted, but the issue with these public ICAC inquiries is that, in almost all cases, mud is thrown and none of it sticks. No charges, no convictions - just the people losing a good leader.

If ICAC has sufficient evidence to commence a prosecution than they should do so. But until that time, their inquires - that don’t rely on the rules of evidence - should remain behind closed doors.

Yeah, all these ICACs seem the same. Mud slinging without defence. It's the old Hammer Syndrome. If all you have is a hammer, then everything soon starts to look like a nail.

Roland Freisler would be proud.

[macca]

If ICAC has sufficient evidence to commence a prosecution than they should do so.

The ICAC isn't a prosecutory organisation

that don’t rely on the rules of evidence

If you had any experience with the various organisations that conduct such enquiries you would know that statement is false.

[peteramjet]

Yeah, all these ICACs seem the same. Mud slinging without defence. It's the old Hammer Syndrome. If all you have is a hammer, then everything soon starts to look like a nail.

ICAC are the offical equivalent of a ‘Woman’s Day’ magazine or ‘A Current Affair’ show. They throw around accusations without evidence, then see what comes of it to make a determination if they have sufficient grounds to charge. It is a joke.

I said it above, corrupt politicians should 100% be put before a court, and ICAC should 100% be given investigative powers they have. But their witch hunts should be conducted in private until their is grounds to commence actual legal proceedings.

[peteramjet]

The ICAC isn't a prosecutory organisation

I’m aware of that. It was implied that ICAC should refer their matters to the DPP to make that determination.

However many (maybe most?) are not aware of this, and when they see a public ICAC hearing they assume a person has been charged with a criminal offence and is defending themselves in a court.

If you had any experience with the various organisations that conduct such enquiries you would know that statement is false.

My statement is not false. ICAC is not bound by the rules and procedures of a criminal court nor a criminal trial. The very Act they operate under stipulates that certain evidence rules don’t apply, all the way down to a right to silence.

They run their matters to the lower standard of proof, and much of the evidence obtained is not able to be used in criminal proceedings - yet all this is aired in public hearings.

Edit: Spelling

[wotnot]

LoL...

[TVguy]

LoL...

[OSIRUS]

I think she did a good job .... The ex-boyfriend seems like a shady character ? ... wanting her to look at various projects he was connected to ... (maybe why he wanted to be her boyfriend ?).... even though nothing came with a lot of his requests .... $5.5 million for a gun club in country NSW seems very excessive ? ... it may have been a lapse in judgement on her part (trusting the ex-boyfriend too much) .... but, I hope she can prove she had nothing to do with the decision

I think the ICAC have "something" starting on 18th October concerning this

I think her current "boyfriend is a "Lawyer" and may have advised her to get out of the way before it all became public

I think she could have been given a lot of hard questions at the daily covid update by the media had she stayed .....

As well as all the people who would come out of the woodwork then .... calling for her to stand down etc .....

[wotnot]

You don't want to read this (A Code of Conduct for Parliamentarians?) ->

[lsemmens]

You don't want to read this (A Code of Conduct for Parliamentarians?) ->

TLDR but, from a brief perusal it would be interesting if Parliamentarians did adopt a code of conduct. Problem is, where would you draw the line? What may be acceptable by one segment of the community would be abhorrent to others.

[enf]

TLDR but, from a brief perusal it would be interesting if Parliamentarians did adopt a code of conduct. Problem is, where would you draw the line? What may be acceptable by one segment of the community would be abhorrent to others.

It seems to me that the rabid twitter mob are already deciding for us and we are too weak to say no....

You don't want to read this (A Code of Conduct for Parliamentarians?) ->

The trouble I have with this sort of thing is that, like driving a car in a city these days, you spend too much of your time watching the speedo and not enough watching the road.

Politicians, whatever their level of competence is, will just be too scared to do ANYTHING lest the mob via an ICAC come after them for ANY perceived breach. It seems it just has to be an accusation, and your career is done.

As I said earlier, Roland Freisler would be proud.....