The 3 percent

This morning the Fairfax press is reporting that 95 percent of the population support the Royal Commission into child abuse. Three percent oppose it. One might ask what sort of monster wouldn’t support the Royal Commission? Well, for a start, I don’t.

This Royal Commission is policy on the run. The current government has form in this area. During the GFC it panicked and ended up wasting billions of dollars – not to mention burning down homes and four deaths in the pink-batts fiasco. Then who can forget the live export cattle ban? There the government got spooked by appalling scenes on ABC television and acted before they’d investigated the issue or even spoken to the industry or export partners.

That has happened again. The government seems to have been spooked by another ABC television show.

TONY JONES: This is actually – this is – as horrific as the litany of sexual crimes against children are, to me one of the most disturbing lines in your letter was along these lines: “I can testify from my own experience the Church covers up, silences victims, hinders police investigations, alerts offenders, destroys evidence and moves priests to protect the good name of the Church.” You’re saying you have evidence of all of this?

PETER FOX: Oh, not only do I have evidence, it’s irrefutable. Most of that is fact that’s been admitted by many of them. We encounter it all the time. For people to sit back and say it’s not going on, they’ve got their head in the sand. The greatest frustration is that there is so much power and organisation behind the scenes that police don’t have the powers to be able to go in and seize documents and have them disclose things to us.

TONY JONES: If things were covered up, if there was serious cover-up, how high up the chain did it go to your sure knowledge?

PETER FOX: I have definite information that – of some covering up certainly to a number of diocese bishops. It potentially goes even higher than that.

TONY JONES: Higher than that? You mean into the top levels of the Church hierarchy, is that what you’re saying?

PETER FOX: That’s correct. I’ve got no doubt. You know, to sit back and sort of say, “Listen, each of these diocese are self-autonomous and there’s no-one above that knows what goes on at those lower levels,” we live in a real world and it would be as if, you know, I’m doing something in the police force at Raymond Terrace and I’m not accountable to somebody else at a higher level at Newcastle or in Sydney.

That’s how the chain-of-command in any organisation works. To turn around and say, “No, we work something different. We didn’t know about that,” I think most of the public are smart enough to be able to put two and two together there.

That exchange is the basis for the Royal Commission. Make no mistake those are very serious allegations and should be investigated. By the police. Let’s look again at what was said:

Tony Jones: You’re saying you have evidence of all of this?
Peter Fox: Oh, not only do I have evidence, it’s irrefutable.

If true, why are we having a Royal Commission? Why hasn’t Detective Chief Inspector Peter Fox of the New South Wales police force arrested the individuals he believes to have committed a crime? Why have those individuals not appeared in open court? Why hasn’t the “irrefutable” evidence been presented to a jury? Trial by jury remains the law of the land. Trial by ABC television is an innovation that should be resisted. Big question: Why didn’t Tony Jones ask those very questions?

Then there is the question of the what outcomes a Royal Commission would produce. Jennifer Hewett has a magnificent column in the AFR ($) on this very issue.

Just what a Commonwealth commission into “institutional responses into instances and allegations of child sexual abuse’’ is expected to produce is, however, much harder to pin down. The government’s announcement is in that sense the latest example of politics as grand theatre.

It is popular with the audience. The show will go on for years, featuring villains galore. It will be cathartic for many victims – and for many institutions, including, most obviously, the Catholic Church in Australia. It will become a focal point for community anger without too many specific solutions.

I’m not sure that is the function of a Royal Commission. It is hard to see what policies the Commission will recommend beyond things like the police should hunt down and arrest criminals. Perhaps longer jail sentences for child molesters. More resources for policing, etc. We don’t need a Royal Commission to come to those conclusions.

While the appointment of a Royal Commission will be seen by many as being tough on crime there are more immediate and more practical measures that can be adopted now.

So what else is going on? Some have viewed the Royal Commission as a “Let’s get George” opportunity.

Pell and Hart really seem not to understand how they are perceived because they do not see themselves as part of the problem – as many in the pews and wider society do. In their eyes they are the solvers, the Hercules who cleaned out the Augean stables of entrenched clerical sexual abuse and cover-up.

As Paul Kelly wrote on Saturday:

Church leader George Pell played his role to perfection. Leading a deeply divided institution Pell is unable to project a convincing sense of compassion, reform and healing. His media conference this week was a catastrophe, sure to deepen hostility to the church. Pell looms as a huge liability in the institutional crisis now facing the Catholic Church in Australia.

All that is tied in with a “Let’s get Tony” agenda. Jennifer Hewett:

And unfortunately for Abbott, Cardinal George Pell is far from the best ally to have in such highly sensitive manoeuvring about just what tolerance means in modern Australian society.

Their long-standing personal association is well known – to Labor’s delight. The traditional strong Catholic influence on the right wing of the Labor Party, especially in NSW, is treated as a minor internal matter by comparison.

A third consideration is “Let’s get Church property”. The usual suspects quickly started talking about removing various tax exemptions for the church. This belongs to the “tax as a punishment” and not “tax as a source of revenue” approach to public finance. The fact of the matter is that there is a reason why not-for-profit organisations aren’t taxed. There just isn’t much ‘profit’ or ‘excess’ or ‘surplus’ (whatever non-for-profits call their profits these days) to actually tax. In any event this is a government that couldn’t organise a tax to capture mining profits, so I don’t fancy their chances here either. Where it would matter is on land tax. Churches occupy some of the finest real estate in most cities. If the exemption on land tax were to be removed those churches would be unable to pay and, I imagine, the State governments would end seizing them and on-selling them to property developers (or running them themselves). So not very practical or smart.

So all up – the Royal Commission isn’t going to achieve any policy improvement that cannot or should not be undertaken immediately anyway by State government authorities. Longer prison terms, housing with the general prison population, more resources for police etc. would prove to be very popular with the electorate.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

151 Responses to The 3 percent

  1. Geoff

    “I can testify from my own experience the Church party covers up, silences victims, hinders police investigations, alerts offenders, destroys evidence and moves priests MPs to protect the good name of the Church party.”

  2. Uber

    This royal commission is just another expression of postmodern secularism. The church is the worldview enemy because it stands for absolute truth, and it will inevitably be undermined by the relativists and reductionists who own the public discourse.

  3. jupes

    Count me in with the 3 percent.

    This is political opportunism of the most vile kind. If Tony Abbott was an atheist, would this RC have been announced? Serious question.

  4. jupes

    Reading my post above, it really does lead to the question of the roll Tony Abbott is playing in this.

    This time he actually has one: He’s a Catholic and friend of Pell.

  5. johanna

    It’s an expensive publicity stunt. We have: no clear rationale or objectives; no timeline; no terms of reference; no Commissioner(s); no budget; the Commonwealth trying to run an inquiry into State responsibilities – it’s all about the vibe, man.

    Today I read that they think the RC could run until after not just the next election, but the one after that as well. The lawyers must be licking their chops. And yet, no-one has asked what good it will do. The media are not only acquiescient, uncritical droolers (except Paul Kelly) on this issue, almost all of them have talked about nothing but the Catholic Church.

    It’s a despicable exercise, straight from the Tony Blair playbook via McTernan.

  6. H B Bear

    In other breaking news, Mrs Magoo reports that 98% of Age-Nielsen survey respondents agree with motherhood statements.

  7. Viva

    Like the Bringing Them Home enquiry this RC provides the opportunity for mass cartharsis – assuaging community feelings of guilt as well as providing an outlet for a deep well of entrenched grievance and rage.

    Of course it will be a huge exercise in the projection of blame – that is how the mechanism works. I suppose it is better than mass bonfires of priests in the town squares of the nation.

  8. Rabz

    I’m one the three percent as well, it seems.

    As stated before, this entire exercise is a cynical sham, a witch hunt and a massive waste of public monies.

    It needs to be shut down with extreme prejudice once the coalition win the next election.

  9. C.L.

    Fox isn’t terribly bright.

    He’s the imbecile who began the whole confession stunt – incredibly, on the basis that he knows what God wants.

  10. candy

    It’s designed to whip up anti-Catholic feeling in the community and taint Tony Abbott.

    like Jupes said above if TA was atheist the whole RC would not happen

  11. Jannie

    I am part Catholic and I know this RC is a political tactic by Labor, and is predicated on anti-Catholicism.

    But I do not oppose it. Just get on with it. This is no time to be defensive.

    These people are not as clever as they think they are. Just look at their record. This will blow up in their faces and they will move seamlessly into the next confected outrage or ploitical travesty.

  12. Gab

    PETER FOX: Oh, not only do I have evidence, it’s irrefutable.

    Really? So why hasn’t he done something about it before now? Why did he just sit on the “irrefutable evidence” allowing the alleged cover-ups to continue, allowing the alleged perpetrators to continue their alleged hideous activities? How many more children could have been protected from the alleged paed0philes due to Fox remaining silent until now?

  13. C.L.

    Well Gab, there are only two explanations.

    1. He’s a liar.

    2. He’s a coward.

  14. Infidel Tiger

    I’m with the 95% who demand that the ALP and ABC be investigated. Our children are too precious to have ALP and ABC employees thinking they can molest them unhindered.

  15. sdog

    If true, why are we having a Royal Commission? Why hasn’t Detective Chief Inspector Peter Fox of the New South Wales police force arrested the individuals he believes to have committed a crime? Why have those individuals not appeared in open court? Why hasn’t the “irrefutable” evidence been presented to a jury? Trial by jury remains the law of the land. Trial by ABC television is an innovation that should be resisted.

    Exactly.
    The whole post is excellent, Sinc, but that part especially.

  16. The Royal Commission has arisen out of evidence given to two state based enquiries. I haven’t even read Fox’s evidence, but that given by Victorian Deputy Commissioner Ashton and Professor Parkinson (who formerly worked with the Church on the matter) is pretty compelling that, even up to recent years, the institutional response of the Catholic Church is of concern.

    I am with David Marr (on Insiders yesterday) on this one: there is no reason to be surprised in these circumstances about why the RC would, at least initially, be concentrating on the Catholic Church response.

    The criticisms about what the RC might achieve, and how long it may take, might also be better placed once the terms of reference are actually known.

    It would appear the general public are not so cynical about political machinations that are imagined to be behind this. Good.

  17. candy

    Is Peter Fox hinting at a massive cover-up by the Catholic Church at the highest level and the police department as well so that no charges have been made.
    and he’s the only one to blow the whistle?

  18. Gab

    Wonder why gillard never announced a RC before now? A RC that will begin in 2013. Why didn’t she announce one in 2010? or 2011? Or even push for one in 2008? This is such an important matter but apparently not that important to her.

  19. Gab

    Perhaps if the heat of the AWU scandal and gillard’s involvement in it had been played out in the media in 2009 maybe the RC would have been announced back then.

  20. Scapula

    You play the cultural wars long enough and you’re bound to get ‘wedged’ and with 95% supporting a RC and even Abbott saying the seal of confession should be broken – you’ve been ‘wedged’.

  21. Token

    The Royal Commission has arisen out of evidence given to two state based enquiries.

    Criminal matters are a state matter. As you note the states are addressing these with royal commissions.

    I’m yet to see/hear how the federal government we deliever any additional benefit.

    You play the cultural wars long enough and you’re bound to get ‘wedged’ and with 95% supporting a RC and even Abbott saying the seal of confession should be broken – you’ve been ‘wedged’.

    As Scrappy acknowledges, this is part of the culture wars, where flaming sectarian hatred will divert attention from the fact the government does not intend to cut spending & will not deliever a surplus, has no solutions for the endless boat arrivals, and is seeing a number of its members including the PM facing serious criminal investigations.

  22. TJW

    What interests me is what is preventing others from asking the same questions we are? I went through the Victorian Parliamentary Committee submissions and kept saying the same thing to myself – “that’s a serious claim, now where’s the supporting evidence?” The committee never asked this question, and seemed very impressed by what was a series of unsubstantiated claims. The logic seems to be: authority figure makes claim, therefore claim must be true.

    I welcome the chance for an objective commissioner to critically assess all of the claims and draw conclusions that accurately reflect the quality of the evidence. Am I hoping for too much?

  23. Toiling Mass

    I think most people are part of the 3%.

  24. Ivan Denisovich

    Trial by jury remains the law of the land. Trial by ABC television is an innovation that should be resisted.

    http://www.quadrant.org.au/blogs/qed/2012/03/your-abc-has-done-it-again

  25. Scapula

    The fact that it will form part of the culture wars does not mean that it is a simple political diversion.

    If it were it would be a complete failure.

    The left is usually non-sectarian and the right not, so to have an inquiry that is in part one into conservative cultural institutions that have been the breeding grounds of criminal acts sets up a nice political narrative that pits the universality and impartiality of law against the cultural norms of religious tribes.

  26. If true, why are we having a Royal Commission? Why hasn’t Detective Chief Inspector Peter Fox of the New South Wales police force arrested the individuals he believes to have committed a crime?

    Well he seems to be saying he can’t because powerful institutions prevent him. I thought one of the functions of Royal Commissions was to fix such obstructions of justice etc. No doubt it’s very convenient for the government to run this now; the support is overwhelming and it may break Abbott.

    Depends on Fox’s evidence.

  27. Mother G

    As one who grew up in a children’s “home” and still bears the mental and physical scars I can, to a certian extend, understand the calls for blood.However,I am not a catholic but abhor the get the church” witch hunt going on. Just ask any of the girls sent to Hay in NSW or those sent to Goulburn and you will find the worst atrocities were in state run institutions.

    Nothing can give back to kids the childhhod they lost and I have to wonder if putting them again on the block is the right way to go about it.

    All institutions dealing with children have a hell of a lot to answer for but so does many of the family units that caused kids to be sent to homes in the first place.

    I will have nothing to do with the Royal commission. I made my submission to the Senate Inquiry in 2004, now I am just too old, too tired and too disgusted by a purely political move to want to go any further.

  28. Gab

    and it may break Abbott.

    Why? Are you saying he’s a paed0phile? Are you saying he is complicit in perverting the course of justice?

  29. JC

    One of the stupid steves sent me to the Fox interview he gave with fat Tony Jones.

    Either Fox or Fatty mentioned that he (Fox) was taken off the group or task force whose focus was on peds. Fox then suggested there was cover up at the highest levels of the police , NSW government and the RC.

    I reckon the fucker is a fruit loop.

  30. Scapula

    In other words, you are ‘wedged’ when you get painted as cultural relativists and your opponents get to paint themselves as the holders of the universal norms that the majority support, so Gillard just wedged the right in the same way that Howard wedged the left over the Intervention.

  31. Boambee John

    Just another opportunity for the secular bigots of the ALPBC to run riot!

  32. Gab

    Fox then suggested there was cover up at the highest levels of the police , NSW government and the RC

    I don’t believe the RC’s terms of reference will cover the police or any Labor government.

  33. jupes
    Am I hoping for too much?

    Yes you are.

    See the Bringing Them Home report for a good example of a biased enquiry. This one will be no different. The Commissioner will literally earn millions from this. Be interesting to see which Labor mate gets the guernsey.

  34. Gab

    Well said, Mother G.

    Yes, and thank you for commenting here.

  35. Tom

    In other words, you are ‘wedged’ when you get painted as cultural relativists and your opponents get to paint themselves as the holders of the universal norms that the majority support, so Gillard just wedged the right in the same way that Howard wedged the left over the Intervention.

    I’m tipping you rehearse this constipated smartarse gibberish in dreams.

  36. Token

    …so Gillard just wedged the right in the same way that Howard wedged the left over the Intervention.

    As I understand it, with the intervention there were actual crimes/rotten cultures that were not being addressed by state organisations and direct action by the Federal government actually could stop the abuse.

    How will a wide ranging review with a meandering scope address (rather than divert resources from) current day crimes?

  37. Token

    I will have nothing to do with the Royal commission. I made my submission to the Senate Inquiry in 2004, now I am just too old, too tired and too disgusted by a purely political move to want to go any further.

    Thank you from me as well for your comment.

    If this review was to do good, it needs to look at cases like the one you mention and address the reason the abuses developed.

    Like you I am suspicious as no terms of refernce has been announced and people with agendas are using this as a club to attack those they see as their political enemies.

  38. Scapula

    Defending the sanctity of the confessional can only be done on two classic leftist terrains:

    - human rights law

    - multiculturalism

    Once again, the right is wedged and there are actual crimes/rotten cultures even in religious institutions.

  39. Louis Hissink

    This royal commission will be maintained as a backdrop to the forthcoming election – this seems to be its only purpose – focus peoples minds on the public theatre of the RC and hold an election.

    I wonder if the ALP could stoop any lower?

  40. Pedro

    Perhaps it would be more accurate to say that 97% of respondents support having a royal commission. I’m one of them. But I think that this royal commission looks like being badly constructed and managed by the Govt. Given that not much has been announced, perhaps it will end up ok. The first hurdle is the commissioner. Do we get a Fink or a Fitzgerald?

  41. Scapula

    Howard did it with the Intervention.

    Howard did it with the Tampa.

  42. Scapula

    Michael Kirby would be a delightful choice as RC.

  43. Gab

    I wonder if the ALP could stoop any lower?

    Oh yes. Watch this space. You ain’t seen nothing yet, baby.

    There have also been tensions between journalists asking about the allegations and Gillard’s director of communications John McTernan, a former adviser to Tony Blair. Little wonder the press gallery refer to him as Malcolm Tucker in reference to the foul-mouthed political operator from The Thick of It.

  44. C.L.

    I am with David Marr (on Insiders yesterday) on this one…

    LOL.

    Like there are ‘ones’ that extremist Steve isn’t with David Marr on.

  45. candy

    I suppose julian Burnside would like to be commissioner? abbott/catholic hater that he is.

  46. C.L.

    Defending the sanctity of the confessional can only be done on two classic leftist terrains:

    - human rights law

    - multiculturalism

    No, it will be ‘defended’ on the slightly more ancient ‘terrain’ of we don’t give a fuck what the state says.

  47. Pedro

    “Michael Kirby would be a delightful choice as RC.”

    Yes he would.

    “I suppose julian Burnside would like to be commissioner”

    I’ll be shocked if it is not a judge.

  48. SteveC

    It’s no surprise to me to see Catallaxians out of touch with the concerns of the general population.

    Sinclair, you have stated many times that if crimes have been and are being committed, then why aren’t the police arresting and prosecuting people? Which is a very good question and a primary reason for having a Royal Commission.

    You ask “Why hasn’t Detective Chief Inspector Peter Fox of the New South Wales police force arrested the individuals he believes to have committed a crime? “. Well according to Fox, it’s because he was taken off the case.
    Later in the transcript: “ In a statement sent to us tonight the police saying that you were informed that Strike Force Lantle would be fully investigating the allegations. It was because they were under a different operational command or local area command than the one that you worked in, that you were not appropriately meant to be part of that strike force. … This is a statement from Assistant Commissioner Carlene York of the Northern Command NSW.”

    Despite the romantic notions portrayed by TV police shows, Detectives don’t get to choose what cases they do and don’t investigate.

    Your other concern above is that the issues should be investigated by the states, as that is where this part of law is administered. One if the problems with historic institutionalised child abuse is that the institutions have hidden the problem by moving offenders interstate. You would need 8 separate judicial inquiries to cover the whole country. It seems to me one inquiry would be more efficient give institutional offenders less ability to hide.

  49. Token

    I couldn’t resist and followed the link Samuel provided and noted the following polling results that seem to have been lost in the planned show-trial of the RCC.

    1. Offshore processing at Naura & PNG – 67% support, 27% oppose (i.e. 6% other)
    2. Federal Budget Surplus should be – 53% High priority, 41% Low priority
    3. Support on “Carbon Price” Jun12 33%/62% for/against, Nov12 39%/56% for/against

    There is a lot of bad news that needed to be covered up by the government and the secular jihad against Catholics is doing that well.

  50. C.L.

    One if the problems with historic institutionalised child abuse is that the institutions have hidden the problem by moving offenders interstate.

    Think of Bob Collins. The ALP sent him from Darwin to the Senate in the ACT. Keith Wright was also sent from Brisbane to Federal Parliament.

  51. SteveC

    I note that many of the “I’m part of the 3%” posters have previously called for a RC in the AWU slush fund story. I’m curious to know why a RC into that matter is justified, when a RC into the child abuse matter is not justified. For example, if a crime has been comitted in the AWU case, why haven’t the police arrested and prosecuted the alleged criminals? What would be the point if a RC?

  52. Scapula

    A Catholic terrorist enters the confessional at 10 am and tells a priest he has committed an act of terrorism by planting a bomb on an aircraft and that he has planted another bomb to go off at 6 pm that same day.

    He is now having second thoughts, but feels he must go through with it, and craves the Priest for absolution for his misdeeds.

    Does the priest simply advise him to report himself to authorities if he wants absolution?

    Tick! Tick! Tick!

  53. Jannie

    No, it will be ‘defended’ on the slightly more ancient ‘terrain’ of we don’t give a fuck what the state says.

    Thats right. It would be interesting to see the Leftist state force its hand.

  54. candy

    If a police inspector is taken off the case, wouldn’t the new one still investigate the crime – surely they wouldn’t just drop child abuse charges because they changed the investigating officer?

  55. Tom

    It’s no surprise to me to see Catallaxians out of touch with the concerns of the general population.

    Bwahahahahahahaha!!! One of the resident Green fruitcakes (12% of the voting population on current polling) thinks he knows more about community concerns than the Australian middle class.

  56. Jc 

    For a good reason

    The corruption touches the highest levels of government and its union allies . That’s what RCs are for.

    Why haven’t you asked for such an RC, yet you were breathlessly peddling that loon interview…. Fox

    In any event CL linked to that time when you suggested you were gloating over ped stories… Excited even

  57. C.L.

    Khalid Sheikh Mohammed is arrested and brought to Langley. A second 9/11 is in the works. Do you waterboard him to find out the details?*

    Lefties: ‘No no – you let all those people die.’

    Tick! Tick! Tick!

    * This actually happened and Los Angeles was saved.

  58. Gab

    Think of Bob Collins. The ALP sent him from Darwin to the Senate in the ACT. Keith Wright was also sent from Brisbane to Federal Parliament.

    I don’t believe this jihad against Catholics will delve into the ALP.

    How’s gillard’s form, eh? Announce a jihad and then scamper off to Cambodia with Emerson (did Tim go too?) comfortable in the knowledge that her ABC will go ahead and launch a full scale attack on the Catholic Church and only the Catholic Church and no other institution.

  59. Jannie

    Does the priest simply advise him to report himself to authorities if he wants absolution?

    Is that the best you can think of? Catholic primary age schoolkids have invented more complex moral dillemas than that.

  60. SteveC

    Candy, at the bottom of the transcript you will see this comment from NSW police Northern Region Commander:
    “Unless further evidence comes to light, the NSWP Force has fully investigated Strike Force Lantle matters. “. In other words, the police hierarchy decided their job was complete, which is quite at odds with Fox’s claims. I for one would like to see that discrepancy investigated. The NSW govt inquiry was to do exactly that, but ONLY that. It seems unlikely to me that the Lantle matter was an isolated incident.

  61. Sinclair Davidson

    Sinclair, you have stated many times that if crimes have been and are being committed, then why aren’t the police arresting and prosecuting people?

    I’m still asking that question.

    I note that many of the “I’m part of the 3%” posters have previously called for a RC in the AWU slush fund story.

    Have I really? Union corruption doesn’t need a RC it needs unions to be subject to the same governance mechanisms as publicly listed companies.

  62. SteveC

    In any event CL linked to that time when you suggested you were gloating over ped stories… Excited even

    Except CL was lying, as is his MO, and you foolishly simply took him at his untrustworthy word. As usual, you were too lazy to check for yourself.

  63. SteveC

    I’m still asking that question.

    See my answer to candy directly above.

    Have I really?

    No Sinc, I suspect you were not part of the “many” that I was referring to. Not to be confused with “several” ;)

  64. m0nty

    I note that many of the “I’m part of the 3%” posters have previously called for a RC in the AWU slush fund story. I’m curious to know why a RC into that matter is justified, when a RC into the child abuse matter is not justified. For example, if a crime has been comitted in the AWU case, why haven’t the police arrested and prosecuted the alleged criminals? What would be the point if a RC?

    No surprise that none of you lot who have called for a union RC but oppose the child abuse RC are brave enough to confront this double standard. Gutless as usual.

  65. Sinclair Davidson

    See my answer to candy directly above.

    I read that too. Perhaps his colleagues are not impressed by his “irrefutable” evidence? If so then we have trial by ABC television.

  66. m0nty

    From what I read, the catalysts for the RC seemed to be:

    a) a spate of reports about organised groups of priests including the majority of priests in some places being abusers, with the possibility of rings (i.e. victims exchanged between abusers) being canvassed (albeit denied);
    b) the problems that the state-based investigations were having with abusers moving interstate.

    Both of these suggest that a coordinated federal approach needs to be taken, not relying on state police who are getting the run around. Would siccing the AFP onto the relevant organisations solve the problem? Maybe, maybe not.

    95% though, that’s a big number.

  67. “Let’s get Church property”

    That sounds like post-revolutionary France, which started printing money using the church’s property values as collateral. The end results as hyper-inflation, mass executions, starvation and total economic collapse.

    It’s not a good precedent.

  68. jupes

    No surprise that none of you lot who have called for a union RC but oppose the child abuse RC are brave enough to confront this double standard. Gutless as usual.

    Dunno how you can be ‘gutless’ as an anonymous blogger M0nty, but I’ll explain the difference for you.

    The level of union corruption has reached epidemic proportions. The target of the RC would be unions and union officials. It would be openly stated. If conducted correctly the RC would have a profound effect on curruption.

    The level of child abuse by Catholic priests is on the decline. It will not be stated that the target of the RC is The Catholic Church and Catholics, even though it really will be. There is worse child abuse in Aborigine communities. This will not be looked at. No matter how well the RC is conducted, there will be a negligible effect on child abuse in Australia.

    In short one will be worthwhile, the other will be a witch hunt.

  69. Pedro

    A child abuse RC is a totally different thing to an AWU RC. A general union corruption RC would be more comparable.

    I don’t see how the rights and wrongs of the ABC or the ALP are relevant. I think the institutional child abuse question has been around long enough that there is a real public interest in a proper investigation into the question. Not to find and punish people so much as to understand what happened and the institutional arrangements that lead to the problems.

  70. Tiny Dancer

    How are the doughnuts going mOron?

  71. candy

    ” including the majority of priests in some places being abusers,”

    that be an awful lot of priests, Monty, like nearly all priests?

  72. JC

    No surprise that none of you lot who have called for a union RC but oppose the child abuse RC are brave enough to confront this double standard. Gutless as usual.

    Fat boy, you define gutless, you obese twerp.

    I have no real issue with a RC into child abuse. I think it’s politically motivated and won’t tell us more than we really know already.

    Do go support an RC into the unions and their political allies? Ummm?

  73. JC

    How are the doughnuts going mOron?

    He’s on his third large pack for the day.

  74. JC

    Pedro

    Far tony jones interviewee , Peter Fox said he has irrefutable evidence, so why aren’t the culprits charged?

    Fair question sinc raised, no?

    It would also be interesting to know why he was moved from the investigation group. Something about this fucker smells seriously fishy.

  75. m0nty

    that be an awful lot of priests, Monty, like nearly all priests?

    This is the sort of thing I’m talking about, candy:

    More than 70 per cent of the brothers in the St John of God order are suspected child abusers and Sydney Archbishop George Pell should immediately shut the order down, says a psychologist employed by the order to meet its scores of abuse victims.

  76. SteveC

    It would also be interesting to know why he was moved from the investigation group.

    The “official” answer given by the NSW Police at the bottom of the ABC transcript was that Fox was from Port Stephens LAC and the strikeforce was from Newcastle City LAC, i.e. the next suburb. If you believe that I’ve got a bridge to sell you. I’ll be interested to see the evidence of Assistant Commissioner York to the RC.

  77. Gab

    Claims were also made that two boys were allegedly beaten so badly they might have died but their deaths were not reported.

    Water tight evidence.

  78. SteveC

    Certainly mot worth investigating claims of murder, eh Gab?

  79. Gab

    She also alleged that the order had never properly supervised suspected paedophile brothers and hid documents relating to the child abuse around its properties in Australia in places where police ”would never find them”.

    But only now has she come forward. Think how many more children could have been saved had she said something sooner.

  80. Gab

    She also alleged that the order had never properly supervised suspected paed0phile brothers and hid documents relating to the child abuse around its properties in Australia in places where police ”would never find them”.

    But only now has she come forward. Think how many more children could have been saved had she said something sooner.

  81. Gab

    Almost 200 victims have sought compensation after alleging they were abused in special schools and homes run by the brothers in Victoria, NSW and New Zealand.

    They sought compensation. Why didn’t they seek out the police and report the abuse?

  82. candy

    Perhaps Peter Fox became unobjective after a dreadful case and the NSW Police felt it was better to move him to another line of police work, and he’s still struggling with the whole issue?

  83. Gab

    Dr Mulvihill worked with the order for nine years from 1998, sitting in on meetings involving negotiators from the order and about 150 victims across Victoria, NSW and New Zealand.

    But she quit in 2007 over fears that suspected paed0phile brothers still wielded too much power in the order and were interfering with victims’ compensation and treatment.

    Why didn’t she go to the police and report?

  84. m0nty

    The level of union corruption has reached epidemic proportions.

    This is an emotive statement, not backed up by anything more than anecdotes. Is it larger than corporate corruption? How about a RC into corporate fraud, which costs Australia well over $5 billion and rising annually? How about a RC into corporate corruption, which has little to no enforcement in Australia with us falling precipitously down world rankings?

  85. SteveC

    Good policy Gab, blame the victims. You should get a job with the St John of God brothers.

  86. Gab

    I’m blaming anyone just asking questions. Is that no longer allowed? You ask questions but what I’m not supposed to? But go ahead, call me a paed0phile. Oh wait…you just did.

  87. JC

    Fat boy

    What there is in the link is an allegation by one person. if what she’s saying is true why isn’t anyone charged?

    Let me remind you, you lying dishonest fat turd, when the creeper Thompson story was hot you were supporting the liars party talking point that creeper shouldn’t be accused without having his day in court.

    Go eat a dozen Krisys

  88. C.L.

    Except CL was lying, as is his MO, and you foolishly simply took him at his untrustworthy word.

    You said – direct quote – that you were “looking forward” to the Royal Commission, as analysed by me.

    You’re a sick weirdo.

  89. Jannie

    Gab, the logic is irrefutable, people who ask too many questions are definitely ideologically suspect. And probably misogynist.

  90. SamuelM

    “to sit back and sort of say, “Listen, each of these diocese are self-autonomous and there’s no-one above that knows what goes on at those lower levels,” we live in a real world and it would be as if, you know, I’m doing something in the police force at Raymond Terrace and I’m not accountable to somebody else at a higher level at Newcastle or in Sydney.

    That’s how the chain-of-command in any organisation works.”

    I didn’t realise Fox had said this. It’s utter nonsense.

    The Church isn’t “any organisation” it’s a church – it can structure itself however it likes. As it happens, each of the dioceses are self-governing and autonomous. And even within a diocese, most Bishops have very little power and authority in practice. But evidently Fox has decided that’s not the case because, well, just because.

  91. C.L.

    It would also be interesting to know why he was moved from the investigation group. Something about this fucker smells seriously fishy.

    He left the force last week.

    He claims Cardinal Pell – whom he calls “Mr Pell” – is part of a vast conspiracy, that his wife has had a mental breakdown and that some police (unnamed, of course) are out to get him.

    A smear campaign had also been launched against him, with rumours circulating in the police force that he was mentally unstable, Detective Inspector Fox said.

  92. JC

    It’s quite interesting that the two most excited about this case are fat boy, a 40 year virgin and SteveC a person who takes his blow up sex doll on holidays with him for company.

  93. Gab – Are you saying he’s a paed0phile? Are you saying he is complicit in perverting the course of justice?

    Um no. I’m not sure why but my comments always seem to inspire flights of fancy amongst some people.

    I’m not of the firm conviction that there’s some special need for a Royal Commission. If there is some endemic covering up and obstruction then there’s a case for it; if it’s just smoke then there isn’t.

    This is obviously return fire for the union corruption riff the Opposition keeps playing but just because it’s politicking doesn’t mean there’s not good reason as well.

    If the Church is exposed as particularly nefarious in covering for child abusers than it will be very incovenient for Mr Abbott who is no deft dancer when it comes to things that make him uncomfortable. If he’s politically noxious as a result they will replace him.

    That’s what I mean.

  94. JC

    Oh, that’s Fatty Jones impecable source… And the RC was based on his interview.

    Fme… This is turning into something like the live cattle trade.

  95. dd

    I am very surprised that 98 percent of Australians have heard about the recently announced royal commission.

  96. SteveC

    You said – direct quote – that you were “looking forward” to the Royal Commission

    Wrong CL, as always. Exactly what I said was I was “Looking forward to CL’s running commentary on the commission of inquiry”.
    So quite clearly what i was looking forward to was your commentary – blathering on anything and everything to deflect attention from the actual inquiry.
    And you did not disappoint – you have come through with flying colours.
    What I hadn’t realised at the time was how much I would also enjoy JC’s similarly mindless blathering.
    Please carry on both of you, it is most entertaining.

  97. Chris

    But only now has she come forward. Think how many more children could have been saved had she said something sooner.

    It appears she only became involved after the abuse had occurred when negotiating compensation on behalf of the church for the victims. But still, its a good question for the RC. Why didn’t those who worked for the Church refer the matters to police (they didn’t need to identify the victims if they didn’t want to be identified)?

    Its interesting that so many here are trying to shift blame to those who report the abuse away from those who are responsible for the abuse or who are responsible for their ongoing employment. But during a RC the Church will have legal representation to ask all of these sorts of questions.

  98. Jazza

    I don’t expect them to give the lolly to Tanner, do you? Maybe they will choose an ex Labor Premier? er, Bracks, Brumby(Juliar would owe him one),everyone’s feed of the chooks,Mr Everywhere,ie Beattie, surely not Cpt Blight,er,er Iemma, Reiss, or even Bambidoll… did I miss any?

  99. Gab

    WEST Australian Premier Colin Barnett fears the national royal commission into child sex abuse could destroy lives and various institutions around the country.

    Mr Barnett urged the government to “think very carefully” about the terms of reference and breadth of the inquiry, which he hoped would achieve positive outcomes.

    “But I also fear for the negativity that could come out of it,” he said.

    “I think you will see many people’s lives destroyed, I think you will see many of Australia’s institutions – which may have been at fault – also destroyed, and great divisions in the community.”

    Because as it seems now, the RC will only focus on the Catholic Church if it is handled in the same was as the media inquiry which only targeted News Ltd despite it being touted as inquiry into all media (except the ABC). And it’s no stretch of the imagination that innocent people will be accused. This is uncontroversial.

    WA held its own inquiry into child sex abuse this year, focused on events in the 1970s and 1980s at the St Andrews Hostel in Katanning, run by notorious paedophile brothers Dennis and Neil McKenna.

    The inquiry was later expanded to St Christopher’s hostel in Northam, Hardie House in South Hedland and St Michael’s House in Merredin.

    Former Supreme Court justice Peter Blaxell handed down his report on the abuse in September and Mr Barnett apologised to the victims, saying they could apply for up to $45,000 in compensation, an amount beyond Mr Blaxell’s recommendations.

    Are these Catholic run institutions? No. Will the RC focus on any other institution despite the terms of reference? No.

    I would hope that questions will be asked in the RC as to why survivors of abuse wait so long to report their abuse to police? Is it that they have no trust in the police? Or no faith in the judicial system?

    The abuse survivors marched on parliament earlier this month, threatening to sue the state government unless the compensation offer was increased – a demand the state government has refused.

    No amount of money will ever replace that which was lost in the abuse survivor’s childhood. It is a life destroyed, a “what could have been their path in life” question that haunts for a lifetime.

    I hope that all survivors of abuse, who want to come forward, will be heard regardless of the institution involved. I would hope that questions are asked as to why it has taken most so long to speak up in this day and age and awareness of abuse – not just the survivors of abuse but people like Fox and Mulvihill. Perhaps the answers would provide for prevention of child abuse in any institution in the future…but I gather that will not be the overwhelming reason for this particular RC.

  100. JC

    Chris

    You’re mistaken. It’s not really to do with the issue. No one here trusts the governments motivation and how they go about the RC like which trough sucker they appoint.

    I mean after the cattle trade fiasco and Finkelstien are you optimistic? Ummmm?

  101. Gab

    WEST Australian Premier Colin Barnett fears the national royal commission into child sex abuse could destroy lives and various institutions around the country.

    Mr Barnett urged the government to “think very carefully” about the terms of reference and breadth of the inquiry, which he hoped would achieve positive outcomes.

    “But I also fear for the negativity that could come out of it,” he said.

    “I think you will see many people’s lives destroyed, I think you will see many of Australia’s institutions – which may have been at fault – also destroyed, and great divisions in the community.”

    Because as it seems now, the RC will only focus on the Catholic Church if it is handled in the same was as the media inquiry which only targeted News Ltd despite it being touted as inquiry into all media (except the ABC). And it’s no stretch of the imagination that innocent people will be accused. This is uncontroversial.

    WA held its own inquiry into child sex abuse this year, focused on events in the 1970s and 1980s at the St Andrews Hostel in Katanning, run by notorious paed0phile brothers Dennis and Neil McKenna.

    The inquiry was later expanded to St Christopher’s hostel in Northam, Hardie House in South Hedland and St Michael’s House in Merredin.

    Former Supreme Court justice Peter Blaxell handed down his report on the abuse in September and Mr Barnett apologised to the victims, saying they could apply for up to $45,000 in compensation, an amount beyond Mr Blaxell’s recommendations.

    Are these Catholic run institutions? No. Will the RC focus on any other institution despite the terms of reference? No.

    I would hope that questions will be asked in the RC as to why survivors of abuse wait so long to report their abuse to police? Is it that they have no trust in the police? Or no faith in the judicial system?

    The abuse survivors marched on parliament earlier this month, threatening to sue the state government unless the compensation offer was increased – a demand the state government has refused.

    No amount of money will ever replace that which was lost in the abuse survivor’s childhood. It is a life destroyed, a “what could have been their path in life” question that haunts for a lifetime.

    I hope that all survivors of abuse, who want to come forward, will be heard regardless of the institution involved. I would hope that questions are asked as to why it has taken most so long to speak up in this day and age and awareness of abuse – not just the survivors of abuse but people like Fox and Mulvihill. Perhaps the answers would provide for prevention of child abuse in any institution in the future…but I gather that will not be the overwhelming reason for this particular RC.

  102. C.L.

    How are you enjoying the commission so far, Steve?

    As much fun as you anticipated?

  103. SteveC

    Jazza, what are you talking about? I would expect the Royal Commissioner to be a senior judge, as is usual.

  104. SteveC

    CL, as I said above, the entertainment value of your commentary so far has exceeded my expectations.

  105. Gab

    I’m not sure why but my comments always seem to inspire flights of fancy amongst some people.

    I was simply asking questions as your meaning of “it may break Abbott” was unclear to me. It is still customary to ask questions when one does not know the answer…unless that has changed.

    Why are lefties so averse to questions?

  106. Gab

    the entertainment value of your commentary so far has exceeded my expectations.

    Watch out Cl, any minute now stevec will also infer you are a paed0phile for not agreeing with him or for asking uncomfortable questions..

  107. SteveC

    Will the RC focus on any other institution despite the terms of reference? No.

    Brave prediction, Gab.

  108. Gab

    Are you going to label me a paed0phile for my predictions too?

  109. C.L.

    Why didn’t those who worked for the Church refer the matters to police…

    Why didn’t the ALP report their three child-raping leaders to police?

    Why didn’t Julia Gillard refer Wilson to police?

    So many questions.

    Its interesting that so many here are trying to shift blame to those who report the [alleged] abuse away from those who are [allegedly] responsible for the [alleged] abuse or who are [allegedly] responsible for their [alleged] ongoing employment.

    Last time I looked, Craig Thomson was still on the public tit, courtesy of Julia Gillard.

  110. “Perhaps his colleagues are not impressed by his “irrefutable” evidence? If so then we have trial by ABC television.”

    If he had írrefutable proof, Gillard would be waving the documents from the roof of Parliament House.
    She’s not, and he hasn’t.
    You’re right Sinclair – this is trial by the Media Arm of the Government, with McTernans grubby fingerprints all over it.
    I count myself a 3%er.

  111. C.L.

    So Steve was “looking forward” to reportage about a commission on child molestation and now says he’s entertained by it all.

  112. SteveC

    I don’t recall Thomson being accused of child abuse?

  113. Gab

    OMG. What a “gothcha”! stevec has got one over you. CL. !!!!!!!

  114. candy

    I wonder whether it will cover all the local sporting bodies all over Australia that deal with children too, which would be a massive undertaking but children are just as vulnerable in those settings too, they’re too scared to speak up because it’s the local coach.

  115. Gab

    Its interesting that so many here are trying to shift blame to those who report the abuse away from those who are responsible for the abuse or who are responsible for their ongoing employment.

    Fox and Mulhivil reported their knowledge of abuse? When? Oh that’s right, last week.

  116. C.L.

    I don’t recall Thomson being accused of child abuse?

    No, he was accused of stealing hundreds of thousands of dollars from low-paid female hospital orderlies to spend on prostitutes (of unknown ages and places).

    Julia Gillard made sure he kept his job.

    Her boyfriend, Wilson, stole hundreds of thousands under the pretext of health and safety expenditure – protecting people’s lives at work – but she didn’t go to police.

    How come?

  117. Gab

    I wonder whether it will cover all the local sporting bodies all over Australia that deal with children too,

    One thing’s for sure, it will not cover abuse of the elderly in institutions of private and state run facilities.

  118. candy

    Yes, elderly abuse is hushed up, awful. Really good point, there should be enquiries into that too.

  119. SteveC

    So Steve was “looking forward” to reportage about a commission on child molestation and now says he’s entertained by it all.

    You really can’t read interpret a simple sentence can you CL? I said I was looking forward to your commentary, not any general reportage. And yes, your continuing blather is most entertaining. A bit like watching a dog chase it’s own tail.

  120. Gab

    stevec sits around watching a dog chase its tail. That explains a great deal.

  121. Chris

    Are these Catholic run institutions? No. Will the RC focus on any other institution despite the terms of reference? No.

    You keep claiming this, with little to now justification for the claim

    You’re mistaken. It’s not really to do with the issue. No one here trusts the governments motivation and how they go about the RC like which trough sucker they appoint.

    I mean after the cattle trade fiasco and Finkelstien are you optimistic? Ummmm?

    I do believe that the RC will cover much more than just the Catholic Church. There already have been plenty of people saying they want to make submissions based on abuse they endured in non Catholic institutions. If their submissions are not accepted and studied they will be making a lot of noise. The RC won’t be able to ignore them. And if you think that RC are vulnerable to political persuasion, its likely that Abbott will be PM next year anyway so he could ensure that they do actually cover their terms of reference.

  122. Gab

    You keep claiming this, with little to now justification for the claim

    I refereed to this government’s Finkelstein Inquiry as the precedence.

  123. Chris

    I refereed to this government’s Finkelstein Inquiry as the precedence.

    That was not a Royal Commission though. And there are going to be multiple commissioners which not only will help get through the volume of material faster, but also reduces the impact of bias of just having one commissioner.

    This RC will have a much higher profile than Finkelstein and there will be a lot of public questioning if the RC ignores submissions about alleged abuse in non Catholic institutions.

  124. Gab

    Based on the last five years’ worth of incompetence and underhanded dealings, I have absolutley no faith in anything that this government puts their grubby little hands on nor anything this government proposes. Five years is not enough to convince then nothing will.

  125. JC

    That was not a Royal Commission though.

    Hair splitting much?

    And there are going to be multiple commissioners which not only will help get through the volume of material faster, but also reduces the impact of bias of just having one commissioner.

    Several halfwits and committed leftwing ideologues in the Finkelstien vein would make it worse, not better.

    This RC will have a much higher profile than Finkelstein and there will be a lot of public questioning if the RC ignores submissions about alleged abuse in non Catholic institutions.

    Yea and?

    Tell us Chris, you think the aboriginal problem with kiddie fiddling ought to be included or not?

    In fact what part of any problem in this area would you leave out. Name them.

  126. Mk50 of Brisbane

    What Gab said at 1753 – I cannot put it better. Count me in the 3%.

    The sectarian hatred on display from our leftwingnuts in this thread is amazing. All the comments are about the Catholic Church.

    Peds in the ALP? Silence.
    Peds in the Scouts? Silence.
    Peds in the union movement? Nothing.
    Peds in the muslims schools? Nothing.
    Peds in the aboriginal community? Nothing.
    Female genital mutilation in every mosque and madrassa? Nothing.
    Peds in the state institutions? Nothing.
    Peds in the police forces? Nothing.

    It’s 100% anti-Catholic bigotry 100% of the time from the left.

    How unexpected.

  127. JC

    Chris

    Any problems with the list above (MK’s)

    How about you fat boy

    And the Steve twins.

  128. Scapula

    I presume you read English, MK, the RC is about instituional responses so:

    ”To do its job, the Commission will need access to information held by state governments so that no individual, institution or organisation can avoid scrutiny if the Royal Commission considers there is a need for such scrutiny,” it says.

  129. Carpe Jugulum

    there will be a lot of public questioning if the RC ignores submissions about alleged abuse in non Catholic institutions.

    Not by Fauxfacts and the ALPBC.

  130. jupes

    Is it larger than corporate corruption?

    I reckon it is. Tell me M0nty, if you work in a low paid job in say, the hospital or building sector, who is more likely to rip you off, the employers or union officials?

    Are official documents more likely to go missing from an enquiry into union or corportate corruption?

  131. Gab

    Unions are not subjected to the same checks and balances as are corporations. Why not?

  132. jupes

    …no individual, institution or organisation can avoid scrutiny if the Royal Commission considers there is a need for such scrutiny,” it says.

    If. There’s the caveat. Pick the right Commissioner to get the result you want.

    What are the chances the Commissioner will consider there is a need for scrutiny of the Heiner affair?

  133. Brian of Moorabbin

    She also alleged that the order had never properly supervised suspected paedophile brothers and hid documents relating to the child abuse around its properties in Australia in places where police ”would never find them”.

    Kind of like the 4 sets of ‘missing’ documents relating to Gillard’s involvement in the AWU scandal….

  134. Gab – I’m not a ‘lefty’. I’m not a conservative nor exactly any species of rightist but I’m not an advocate of the change the world with rules and taxataion school of thought either. Lefties, if anything, mistrust me even more than you lot. And I’m definitely not adverse to questions.

    I was simply asking questions as your meaning of “it may break Abbott” was unclear to me. It is still customary to ask questions when one does not know the answer…unless that has changed.

    True, and fine. But I did not make any allegations about Abbott being a paedophile etc. Coming from a long line of Irish Catholics* I think I understand Mr Abbott’s predicament quite well. I’m not making any allegations; merely calling the plays. The validity of this Royal Commission will be judged by the evidence. Gillard’s play on it is almost certainly Machiavellian reptile shit or, as they call it in the backroom, good politics.

    * Not me; Grandad.

  135. This is a Catholic-bashing exercise generally and an Abbott-smearing exercise more specifically, wrapped in a moral cloak that nobody dare question.

    Well fuck them – I dare question. It’s no good doing the right thing if you’re going to do it as fucking awfully as these criminally stupid numpties have done EVERYTHING since the day they took power five years ago. Fuck the lot of them. With Satan’s genitalia. Forever.

  136. daggers


    prosecuted the alleged criminals? What would be the point if a RC?

    SteveC

    19 Nov 12 at 2:07 pm

    A Catholic terrorist enters the confessional at 10 am and tells a priest he has committed an act of terrorism


    There are no Catholic terrorists. Joining such groups, the IRA being one example, results in automatic excommunication.

  137. Chris

    JC/MK50 – Given the RC is being asked to look at problems with institutional sexual abuse I think the only two that may fall out on your lists are Aboriginal sexual abuse and sexual abuse by union officials where the abuse occurred outside of the responsibility of an institution (eg when it happened when the child was not in the care of an institution rather than an individual and the offender was not acting on behalf of the institution). So sexual abuse of aboriginal children in state care would be covered, as would sexual abuse of children (aboriginal or not) by say a child protection worker working as a child protection worker would be. If there’s evidence of union officials sexually abusing children as part of their work as as a union official or within say a union training program or union funded holiday camp for children then yes the RC should cover it.

    There are a whole bunch of recommendations out of the little children are sacred report which have not been followed up by the government (which the intervention did not particularly follow). I think there are many issues which the government needs to look at in respect to aboriginal child welfare as a whole. The Law report had a very interesting episode on just one aspect:

    http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/lawreport/hilary-hannam/4274540

    I would welcome an Australian wide inquiry just on the subject of aboriginal child welfare. It sounds very much like the bodies responsible, especially in regional areas are massively underfunded so they simply don’t have the resource to adequately protect aboriginal children.

    Not by Fauxfacts and the ALPBC.

    The ABC has in the past covered very closely inquiries into abuse at non Catholic institutions. For example, even very recently reporters have pushed for answers about the lack of adequate response and notification about abuse and child-child rape at a state run institution in Adelaide. So I don’t think your assertion will become true in the future.

    A couple of decades ago the focus by the media on sexual abuse was around the scouting movement rather than various churches. No doubt there will be a lot of interest in the Catholic church simply because cases related to the church were the ultimate trigger for the calling of the RC. But it certainly won’t, nor should be the only focus.

  138. Oh come on

    This is a politically risky move by the government. Sure, best case scenario for them is they manage to link Abbott to the abuse and tarnish him beyond redemption.

    Or an effective opposition counteroffensive to any government politicising of the RC could paint them as leading an anti-chopper witchhunt, alienating and possibly extinguishing a key ALP constituency in the process.

    Which scenario is more likely? Well, the Gillard government has a strong record of political grenades going off before it’s managed to throw them. Nuff said.

  139. This is a politically risky move by the government.

    It all depends on what the Royal Commission is able to find. It’s working so far. It’s got everyone talking about Catholic bashing even tho’ the inquiry is into institutions generally. Of course DCI Fox was talking specifically about the Church. But by specifically defending the Church, Gillard’s opponents assist her.

    Sure, best case scenario for them is they manage to link Abbott to the abuse

    They’d hit the jackpot there. I very much doubt they’re hoping for that. What they want is put Abbott in a position where he’s got to do one of two things neither of which he favours and both of which go right to the heart of his values. It doesn’t hurt that one of his main rivals is also Catholic and that the Liberal establishment is Anglican.

    Thing is, knowing this lot, it might very probably backfire. The Royal Commission could, for example, link Conroy to paedophilia by association. Or some individual or other in the Carr government etc.

  140. Mark

    The Catholic Church is the only organisation that stands between good and evil in this rapidly deteriorating and corrupt world. Given the expensive witch hunt that will ensue CLEARLY the Catholic Church must be destroyed by the atheistic forces. GOOD LUCK with that as this will backfire on Gillard and her PR Manager John McTernan the architect of the hate campaign against Tony Abbott.

    Remember : Christ founded the Catholic Church with St Peter. Anyone who thinks that he will allow it to be destroyed is delusional. Worldwide the Catholic Church has for decades done incredible charity work with AIDS suffers, orphans, the poor etc. Sadly this will be overlooked.

    The worst abuse cases occur in Govt run institutions.

  141. Steve of Glasshouse

    To use a country analogy, this government has charged yet another cause like a bull at a gate and had an ill considered crack at the rails .Trouble is , the farmer has picked up a piece of 2 inch poly pipe and whacked him over the head. That’s reality. The bull backs up, looks around, and mooches off, looking for sympathy.
    Farmer has the bull marked as non breeder due to incipient stupidity..

  142. .

    I agree with Adrien. It will backfire and the Catholic Church in Australia knows this, and wants to get rid of bad priests, help any victims and clear the names of its good men and women.

    Gillard will look like a Pillock with no agenda.

    If only Abbot had a less socialist agenda and would attack.

  143. Marky

    I’m wondering exactly what a Royal Commission would actually achieve in any case. I mean, I support the notion of an investigation into the sexual abuse of children – who wouldn’t? – but there are a few red flags that mark the outcome of this as either feckless or theatric, or both.

    The cynical timing, the ostentatious insistence that the Catholic Church isn’t being scapegoated or targeted specifically, and that it was appointed by Gillard and the ALP all give it a rancorous stink. The church and paedophile priests should pay for their crimes under our laws, not their own, but I’m struggling to see how that would eventuate from this Royal Commission.

  144. Hanyu

    I suggest a royal commission into royal commissions.

  145. Alice

    Tolling mass says

    I think most people are part of the 3%.”

    LOL

  146. Alice

    I am part of the 97%. I think the cathloic church has been covering up absuses that it has known about (and serial abusers) for decades and has tried to protect the offenders.

Comments are closed.