Five thousand …

Interesting news in The Australian this morning and, in case you can’t reach beyond the pay wall, here it is …

A UNION employee who was concerned about wrongdoing told the national head of the Australian Workers Union in June 1996 that he deposited about $5000 cash into Julia Gillard’s bank account at the request of her then boyfriend Bruce Wilson.

The disclosure by Wayne Hem forms part of a contemporaneous and confidential 150-plus-page diary that was kept by the then AWU joint national secretary, Ian Cambridge, now a Fair Work Australia commissioner…

In a statutory declaration signed in Melbourne on Sunday and in lengthy interviews with The Australian over the past fortnight, Mr Hem declared he had deposited the money after being given the account details of Ms Gillard along with a wad of $100 and $50 notes by Mr Wilson, an official in the AWU’s Victorian branch.

Ms Gillard, then a salaried partner at law firm Slater & Gordon, was Mr Wilson’s girlfriend and solicitor at the time.

Ms Gillard had provided legal advice in 1992 that helped Mr Wilson and his union ally, Ralph Blewitt, set up a slush fund – the AWU Workplace Reform Association – which the two men used in the ensuing years to issue bogus invoices and fraudulently receive hundreds of thousands of dollars.

The Prime Minister issued a short statement through spokesman Sean Kelly.

“As The Australian is well aware, the Prime Minister has made clear on numerous occasions that she was not involved in any wrongdoing,” Mr Kelly said.

“I also note that despite repeatedly being asked to do so, The Australian has been unable to substantiate any allegations of wrongdoing.”

But remember …

But it is vital to highlight what the Hem entry does not say – and what Hem does not say now.

He does not say Gillard ever wanted her union boss boyfriend to ask Hem to put about $5000 into her account in mid 1995.

Nor does Hem say that she knew she was receiving a financial benefit. There is no evidence of that and there could be several innocent explanations for the payment. We do know, however, that Hem was concerned about dishonesty by Wilson and this prompted him to blow the whistle.

On Diaries

The disclosure by Hem to Cambridge [in 1996 about the deposit] came eight months after concerns were first raised publicly by a Liberal minister, Phil Gude, in Victoria’s parliament, about Gillard allegedly getting a benefit in relation to the renovation of her house. Gude wanted a probe into what he was told at the time. He has insisted union officials had been to see him with evidence that Gillard was a beneficiary of union money.

Gude told the Victorian parliament in October 1995 that Gillard had been forced to leave her law firm; that she was directly linked to the misappropriation of union funds; that she had benefited from renovations to her own house; and that she had to pay money back to the AWU so that she and Wilson could “cover their tracks”.

Gude made his claims a short time after Gillard’s confidential tape-recorded interview on September 11, 1995, with Peter Gordon – and her abrupt departure from the firm. Its partners had lost trust and confidence in her.

Gillard told The Australian immediately after she was accused in the Victorian parliament in 1995: “Every allegation raised about me is absolutely untrue; there is not a shred of truth in any of it.”

On Hem …

BANK documents show the man who claims he was told to pay about $5000 into Julia Gillard’s bank account was entrusted to deposit more than $100,000 in cheques into an Australian Workers Union secret slush fund.

Wayne Hem, 58, told The Australian in interviews and in a statutory declaration that he was given the cheques in mid-1995 and told to put them into “a bank account for something I recall as the AWU Welfare Fund”.

He said that Ms Gillard’s then boyfriend Bruce Wilson, the corrupt branch head of the AWU, handed him the cheques on several occasions and told him to go to the Commonwealth Bank to make the deposits…

In a September 1996 affidavit filed in the Industrial Relations Court, the AWU’s national head Mr Cambridge named the Victorian Welfare slush fund account as one “used to hold and/or launder union funds, as a step in the conversion of those funds to unauthorised, invalid, irregular and possibly illegal uses”.

Mr Cambridge stated in his affidavit that the account was unknown to other union officials, and involved payments totalling $234,000.

Simple as ABC …

Quality journalism means being right about everything and letting you know it.

Except at the ABC where it’s left, Pravda would be impressed …

A Mr Parker of Canberra wondered why the ABC didn’t cover the Gillard story and asked them. Nosey. The reply

From: John Mulhall

To:

Sent: Tuesday, 23 October 2012 2:08 PM

Subject: ABC News query

Dear Mr Parker,

Thank you for your email regarding Mr Blewitt’s statements. The ABC is aware of these statements but we do not at this stage believe it warrants the attention of our news coverage.

To the extent that it may touch tangentially on a former role of the Prime Minister, we know The Australian newspaper maintains an abiding interest in events 17 years ago at the law firm Slater and Gordon, but the ABC is unaware of any allegation in the public domain which goes to the Prime Minister’s integrity. If indeed Ms Gillard has had questions to answer, ABC News reported those answers from her lengthy media conference of 24/8/12 in which she exhausted all questions on the issue.

However, if any allegation is ever raised which might go to the Prime Minister’s integrity, the ABC would of course make inquiries into it and seek to report it. As for matters concerning Mr Bruce Wilson, ABC News will cover the case against him as it proceeds.

Once again thank you for your query.

Best regards,

John Mulhall
News Editor, ABC News

This PM is not to be slushed …

er trusted

In a dramatic change of tactics, the Prime Minister abandoned her stonewalling on the issue after The Australiannewspaper wrongly claimed she had set up a trust fund for her then boyfriend, Bruce Wilson, who was an official with the Australian Workers Union.

Now come on, guys, the proper term is slush fund, or at least that was the term Ms. Gillard used when describing it to her seniors at Slater & Gordon. Although …

She preferred now not to call it a ”slush fund” – as she had in her interview during the 1995 Slater & Gordon inquiry – because that had an overtone.

And we are delighted to hear that Julia paid for her own renovations …

Kon Spyridis yesterday broke a 17-year silence to confirm that Ms Gillard personally paid him for nearly $4000 worth of renovations with two bank cheques…

“The union has got nothing to do with Julia’s payment for the house,” he said. “This is nonsense. Julia paid me. This is the true story…

Although, whilst Kon is clearly to be trusted, Julia seems a little uncertain …

JG: I can’t categorically rule out that something at my house didn’t get paid for by the association or something at my house didn’t get paid for by the union or whatever, I just, I don’t feel confident saying I can categorically rule it out, but I can’t see how it’s happened because that really is the only bit of work that I would identify that I hadn’t paid for…

Sorry, I’m getting confused… Bill the Greek, whilst I was at work one day, built for me a low level brick fence. I didn’t ask him to do that….  I didn’t pay for the bricks. I’ve never had an account in relation to the fence….

He, you know, he pleased as punch sort of said he had built it for me. That he had built it for me. Whether that means he himself did it, given Bill’s obvious difficulties with the truth I no longer know.

PG: What are Bill’s obvious difficulties with the truth?

JG: He’s just a big Greek bullshit artist.

What a tangled web …

West Australian on 6 March 1992 :

The Australian Workers Union (WA) Branch – Workplace Reform Association Inc.

Notice is hereby given that Ralph Blewitt of 138 Warwick Road, Duncraig, union official being duly authorised by the above Association intends to apply to the Commissioner of Corporate Affairs on or after 6 April 1992 for the incorporation of the Australian Workers’ Union – Workplace Reform Association Inc.

The Association is formed for the purpose of promoting and encouraging workplace reform for workers performing construction and maintenance work.

Julia Gillard in a meeting at Slater & Gordon with Peter Gordon (senior partner) and Geoff Shaw (general manager and partner) September 11, 1995:

It’s, it’s common practice, indeed every union has what it refers to as a re-election fund, slush fund, whatever, which is the funds that the leadership team, into which the leadership team puts money so that they can finance their next election campaign… The thinking behind the forming of incorporated associations is that … 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…

And the fund wasn’t for workplace reform or for a re-election, but it did buy Mr. Blewitt a house, tenanted by Ms. Gillard’s lover Bruce Wilson …

The transcript can be found in the Australian.

Paul Kelly, who famously asks his own questions, asks these …

First, the material published suggests that Gillard resigned under duress because the Slater & Gordon partners were no longer prepared to have her continue. Is this correct?

Second, what is Gillard’s explanation for the seemingly unusual way she established the Australian Workers Union Workplace Reform Association for Bruce Wilson, a union operative who was her boyfriend and client?

Third, given the alleged misappropriation of monies by Wilson from the entity established by Gillard, what was Gillard’s view of the purpose of the association? The stated objective was to receive funds from companies for safety and training of AWU members yet Styant-Browne said that in her interview Gillard referred to it as a re-election or slush fund. Is this true? If so, how is this reconciled with the declared purpose of the entity presumably as drafted by Gillard? At what time did Gillard become aware the association was being used for other purposes?

Fourth, is it correct, as stated by Gordon, that Gillard’s performance meant the partners felt she had displayed neither proper vigilance nor timely disclosure and, in the end, the relationship “had broken down irretrievably”? What responsibility does Gillard accept for this breakdown? Indeed, what might this breakdown tell us about Gillard?