By Kevin Glancy

Hedley Thomas (pictured below) is the journalist at The Australian largely responsible for the ongoing investigation into Julia Gillard’s role in the AWU fraud scandal.  In tandem with an independent investigation by Michael Smith (www.michaelsmithnews.com) they are both on the ‘case’ and they will not give up in their quest for the truth and indeed justice.

Hedley and Michael are both extremely thorough and use words wisely. They both support their written word with documentation and possess witness affidavits that are beyond dispute.

Michael is a former Victorian Police Officer, a member of the armed forces and a former radio announcer with 4BC in Brisbane and 2UE in Sydney. When Michael first broke the story he was sacked as a radio announcer, following a phone call from Julia Gillard to Fairfax, his employer.

This was the second time that Gillard had tried to stop the story from breaking with journalist Glenn Milne also losing his job following demands made by Gillard. Glenn is no longer to be employed by the ABC as a panelist on Insiders.

When a PM interferes and bully’s the media you know there is something to hide. Her predecessor, Kevin Rudd was also a serial bully when it came to berating media editors, any time of the day or night, if he didn’t like what had been written about his role as Prime Minister.

As we know, Labor would like us to believe that it supports the freedom and independence of the press. However, that’s as long as it isn’t detrimental to their collective interests. Then they will do all in their power to remove that freedom as they are currently doing with their media inquiry and its Left-wing recommendations.  These are measures to curtail press activities, which are far more suited to life in China or Russia.

Hedley Thomas is one of the few remaining investigative reporters in Australia and took over the mantle from legendary, Bob Bottom (OAM). During his colourful career as a journalist, Bob instigated 24 Royal Commissions into crime and corruption and is a distinguished author.

The investigative journalist is a unique breed and they will attack both sides of politics without fear or favour.  Most journalists, including yours truly, generally write opinion pieces with very little investigation and rely on others like Hedley Thomas and Michael Smith to do the hard yards.

As far as investigating Julia Gillard is concerned Hedley Thomas is like a dog with a bone. Highly credible, Hedley is a 5 time Walkley Award winner including the much coveted Gold Walkley which he was awarded in 2007. This award was for his investigation during the Howard Government era into the Australian Federal Police conduct into suspected terrorist, Dr Mohamed Haneef, who was later cleared.

Julia Gillard’s defence in the AWU scandal has been to say that she has already answered questions at her impromptu press conference a few months ago and that, as far as she is concerned, was the end of the matter.

However, that particular press conference was clearly her attempt to pull off a ‘snow-job’. She held it without notice and had beforehand, led journalists to believe that she would be talking about another issue. Her strategy ensured that no journalist with any knowledge of the AWU issue would be in attendance including the likes of Hedley Thomas and Michael Smith. Consequently, there were no questions of any importance that were put to her.

At the press conference Gillard made out that The Australian newspaper’s use of the word ’trust’ instead of ‘slush’ in an article about the scandal meant that they were apologising for the whole article when this was patently untrue. This accidental one word error was not critical to the piece. Further, she openly admits that the fund she helped set up was a slush fund when such a beast is an abuse of members’ union fees. Further, her then client, the AWU, did not know of its existence at the time.   

Her only other defence has been to suggest that she was ‘young and naïve’ at the time when in fact she was 32 years of age, a lawyer and a partner at Slater Gordon. Being young and naïve is hardly a proposition to be entertained, given her senior role.

Since then she has avoided answering any questions put to her by Julie Bishop in parliament preferring instead to blame Tony Abbott for the mess she finds herself in.

Such questions surround allegations that Gillard conducted the conveyancing on a house purchased using funds from the ‘slush’ fund set up by her at Slater Gordon. This is a serious matter because as a conveyancer she would have known exactly where all the monies used to purchase the property would have come from. It is alleged that $150,000 came from the slush fund that she set up for her then boyfriend, Bruce Wilson. If that was the case then Gillard is complicit in an act of fraud.

Then there is her failure to keep a ‘file’ on her activities which is standard practice in any legal firm and it is standard practice for good reason.  This is at the very least, a major oversight or subterfuge not befitting a partner in a law firm and one which also suggests that she had something to hide.

Bearing in mind that her client was the AWU and in acting for her then boyfriend, to set up a bogus AWU bank account was in conflict with her client’s interests and it was a fund set up without their knowledge. It was also an abuse of union members’ money. Yet Gillard and her supporters see nothing wrong in her actions.

It is also alleged that Gillard misled the Commissioner for Corporate Affairs in Western Australia in writing. This occurred following a request from the Commissioner seeking confirmation that the nature of the account was to assist the people as intended by the name of that account – AWU Workplace Reform Association. Gillard confirmed that this was so and then later conceded that she had lied – when she referred to it as a slush fund.

Then there is the allegation, backed by a sworn affidavit, of $5000 being put into her account by then boyfriend, union member, Bruce Wilson.  Could be perfectly reasonable but; where did that money come from? Did it come from the slush fund?

 Michael Smith has been regularly sending questions to the PM’s office seeking answers to no avail. Even the Fairfax press is on the case.

This in itself is rather surprising given that the normally biased Fairfax media caters to people with left wing views. Perhaps they have realised that the reason they are going broke is because in reality, the Left-wing pie is such a small piece of the market and there is little profit to be made in preaching to the intolerant converted.   

If Julia Gillard has nothing to hide then she should simply answer the questions raised and it will all go away.

The Canberra press gallery, the ABC and many other left-wing media folk are continuing to ignore the story completely and the double standard is astounding given that if this was about Tony Abbott they would be on it like flies around dog poo.

Fortunately, as far as Michael Smith and Hedley Thomas are concerned until Gillard answers the many questions surrounding the fraudulent activities of her then boyfriend whom she assisted to defraud the AWU, they aint going away.

Below is a list of very pertinent questions compiled by Hedley Thomas and they should be answered by the Prime Minister. Until she does respond the doubt surrounding the issue will prevail. Made worse because Gillard is already a proven, serial liar and far from trustworthy.  

 

                         Hedley Thomas

Have you ever received funds into your bank account from the association or any other account owned or controlled by anyone from the AWU?

Have you ever made inquiries as to whether that occurred?

 Was the Commissioner for Corporate Affairs in Western Australia misled as to the true nature of the AWU Workplace Reform Association, given you later described it as a slush fund?

 Was the unauthorised description of the slush fund as being a related entity of the AWU misleading and deceptive?

 What was your precise role in the registration of the association?

 When did you first become aware that the inclusion of the AWU’s name in the title of the slush fund enabled cheques intended for the AWU to be deposited into accounts operated by the association?

 Was this the only such incorporated re-election fund that you helped establish for union clients as their solicitor?

 Did your failure to open a file at Slater and Gordon prevent your fellow partners from ascertaining a conflict of interest?

 Did your failure to open a file and your decision not to render a bill to the AWU for your work prevent the AWU from finding out about the unauthorised passing-off of its name?

 Do you accept that as a solicitor acting for the AWU that you were in a position of trust to the AWU?

 Before you helped Ralph Blewitt purchase an investment property in Melbourne, what inquiries were taken of his capacity to repay the loan?

 When did you discover this was a sham transaction with Blewitt the purchaser in name only, who never provided funds for the purchase, while Wilson controlled the asset with a power of attorney you witnessed?

 Why did neither you nor Slater & Gordon – on being made aware in mid-1995 of fraud concerns related to Wilson over the Victorian slush fund – not alert anyone in the AWU to the existence of the association you had helped to establish, and which bore the name of the AWU (the firm’s client)?

 

We’re waiting for your answers Julia………