I would say it is different in the sense that he had already lobbied the Chief of Defence on the company's behalf - the defence department made a decision with all due consideration, and Oakeshott is looking to reverse that decision...on behalf of a company who is one of his campaign contributor.
How does that look to you?
- Forums
- Political Debate
- oakegate scandal update #2
oakegate scandal update #2, page-5
-
- There are more pages in this discussion • 32 more messages in this thread...
You’re viewing a single post only. To view the entire thread just sign in or Join Now (FREE)
Featured News
MND
Albemarle lithium downsize burns $200M hole in Monadelphous's pocket as latter's contracts terminated
GML
Gateway Mining sells WA Eastern Montague gold project to Brightstar for $14M – half of that in shares