Lappy , I must be consistent, little johnny was doing better than okay with his PM gig , he coulda on his lonesome bailed out his brothers debts, but what did little johnny do Lappy?
He got the taxpayer to bail his brother out, I have utter contempt for him and any liberal that goes along with this disgusting episode.
" My question is to the Prime Minister. Are you aware that by insisting on a deed of arrangement you have prevented the liquidator from investigating the circumstances in which National Textiles made a payment of $450,000 to a family company of one of its directors simply to negotiate an extension of finance, the circumstances in which National Textiles insisted that a major customer pay for its goods by a cheque made payable directly to the company's financier, the circumstances in which the directors of National Textiles voted to increase their remuneration by $100,000 and the circumstances in which the directors of National Textiles voted to increase their insurance coverage to defend potential actions under the Corporations Law? Haven't you also—"
" the circumstances in which the directors of National Textiles voted to increase their remuneration by $100,000 and the circumstances in which the directors of National Textiles voted to increase their insurance coverage to defend potential actions under the Corporations"
Greed is good Lappy at the expense of others, especially when the bro can get the taxpayer to foot the bill.
Mr HOWARD (Prime Minister)—I am aware that what I and the other members of the government have done on this occasion is act in a way that guaranteed that those workers got their full entitlements, and I am unashamed of that. We have been prepared to do things in this area that you never did in 13 years. You left thousands and thousands of workers without their entitlements. Like the Johnnys-come-lately you are on this subject, you now pose your great compassionate concern for the workers who are left without their entitlements. Your own leader was up there in Rutherford, without let or hindrance, with no reference to conflicts of interest, yelling at me to go and do exactly what I did, and now you are trying to sleaze around and pretend that in some way the thing is improper. We acted to protect the interests of the workers. Those directors can be investigated by the Australian Securities and Investments Commission. That commission has the capacity to impose civil penalties, to take criminal proceedings, to require compensation. To suggest that we were motivated by anything other thanas your question impliesa desire to help those workers for the reasons I explained is absolute nonsense.
Good to know Lappy, if little johhny is the litmus test , all workers can now kick back and rejoice for the libs are on their side.
