I was thinking of Eliot Ness and co, was that not the plural form their title, aka the purest of the purest?
Speaking of James Hird, Gillon’s empathic response to Dean Solomon the go between man in The Sun today was almost
sickening. You are not fooling anyone Gilligan except yourself .
Speaking of James Hird, Gillon's empathic response to Dean Solomon the go between man in The Sun today was almost sickening. You are not fooling anyone Gilligan except yourself .
He doesn’t care either way, he just doesn’t want to LOOK like he doesn’t care.
In January 2017, J34 met with Richard Di Natale, Leader of The Greens and handed him a copy of the Petition signed by 7,374 supporters. The Australian Greens are very supportive of a call for a Senate Inquiry into ASADA. J34 will now be re-directing our attention into gaining support for this Senate Inquiry from one of the larger political parties. Below, Bob O'Dea, from J34, hands a copy of the Petition to Senator Richard Di Natale, Leader of the Australian Greens on 31 January 2017.
…by the way, J34 printed out every comment every petition supporter made, bound it into several folders, and handed that over to Senator Di Natale. You can read these comments on the Petition site
Only an independent investigation can uncover the truth now.
In January 2017, J34 met with Richard Di Natale, Leader of The Greens and handed him a copy of the Petition signed by 7,374 supporters. The Australian Greens are very supportive of a call for a Senate Inquiry into ASADA. J34 will now be re-directing our attention into gaining support for this Senate Inquiry from one of the larger political parties. Below, Bob O'Dea, from J34, hands a copy of the Petition to Senator Richard Di Natale, Leader of the Australian Greens on 31 January 2017.By the way, J34 printed out every comment a petition supporter made and handed that over in a bound folder to Di Natale as well.
Thanks Stabby, I am very grateful for the work of the j34. Thank goodness some Essendon supporters are taking up the cudgels instead of just debating. A senate inquiry and/or a judicial inquiry is the go because it gets to put ASADA/WADA/CAS, the AFL and the EFC Board under Evans on the spot. Keep up the good work.
In January 2017, J34 met with Richard Di Natale, Leader of The Greens and handed him a copy of the Petition signed by 7,374 supporters. The Australian Greens are very supportive of a call for a Senate Inquiry into ASADA. J34 will now be re-directing our attention into gaining support for this Senate Inquiry from one of the larger political parties. Below, Bob O'Dea, from J34, hands a copy of the Petition to Senator Richard Di Natale, Leader of the Australian Greens on 31 January 2017.By the way, J34 printed out every comment a petition supporter made and handed that over in a bound folder to Di Natale as well.
Thanks Stabby, I am very grateful for the work of the j34. Thank goodness some Essendon supporters are taking up the cudgels instead of just debating. A senate inquiry and/or a judicial inquiry is the go because it gets to put ASADA/WADA/CAS, the AFL and the EFC Board under Evans on the spot. Keep up the good work.
Thank you on behalf of all J34.
IMO, the comments carry more weight than the signatures.
Arguments found in the academic literature that petitions ‘foster a sense of unity and purpose within a community which is then publicly demonstrated when the petition is presented to the House’ have long been recognised by senators. In the words of Senator Button:
What is important, of course, about the collecting of petitions in this community, if we are frank and honest, is the involvement of members of the public in being concerned about an issue confronting this Parliament and discussing it with their neighbours, workmates and colleagues and getting them involved to the point at which they read the petition and say: ‘I am concerned about that, too. I will sign it’. That is the important community process.
http://www.aph.gov.au/~/~/link.aspx?_id=589D8A3C163043E6B5FCE93ACE9E92A1&_z=z
Focussed email campaign will start soon…
“…they’re (ASADA) supposed to be conducting an investigation into anti doping, and yet there they are taking direction from the AFL about what the Interim Report should say, and how it should be structured. Is that independent? Is that transparent? Is that ASADA doing its job? I don’t think so.” STEVEN AMENDOLA, LAWYER.
“….even Dean Robinson made it quite clear in his testimony that it wasn’t TB4, he had never heard of TB4. He said the only two Thymosins he (Dank) spoke about was Thymomodulin, and Thymosin…” BOB O’DEA, BIOCHEMIST.
“…I did my PHD in statistics….…when I looked as the CAS ruling, and tried to add up what I thought were the probabilities, I could get to not more than 20% and yet the CAS ruling said something above, what I interpreted as comfortable satisfaction meant really something above 60%+ range…thats how far they were below proving to an independent observer…” DR. KIM SAWYER.
Regulatory failure.
Possible corruption.
Withholding evidence.
Breaches of privacy.
Removal of a sporting players common law rights.
Bullying, blame-shifting and scapegoating.
What I find so disgraceful is these regulatory authorities and governing bodies are supposed to protect sport from cheating so as to preserve the integrity of sport for future generations. Unfortunately, I feel they have lost their way. This is a serious matter. It can only be addressed by an open Parliamentary inquiry which allows all parties to be presented, including sporting bodies, athletes and regulators.
So, if you’re willing to sign this petition, perhaps you’re willing to go a little further. Be a part of this action by sending an email (draft your own or use Create the email for me) to Liberal Senators requesting a Senate Inquiry into this whole sordid affair. It is in our national interest to get this right.
Thank you.
We have support from the Greens Senators, so here are the email addresses for the remaining Senators we need to make a Senate Inquiry possible:
[email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
Suggested message below, or write your own.
Dear Senators,
I am writing to you to request your support for a Senate Inquiry into Sports Anti-Doping in Australia. An inquiry is necessary for three reasons.
First, there is considerable concern internationally as to the operation of the World Anti-Doping Code. There are inquiries currently underway in both the UK and the US, and significant court challenges in France and Germany. These concerns were amplified in a letter in June last year by Senator John Thune, Chairman of the United States Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation. Secondly, the ASADA Act of 2005 needs review, not by ASADA or WADA, but by the Parliament that enabled it. As the Essendon case showed, the ASADA Act was not designed either for team sports or indigenous codes. It must be reviewed. Finally the Essendon case, which monopolised ASADA’s resources, is a case study in regulatory failure. As Senator Back rightly identified at Senate Estimates on March 3 last year
“The proportionality is the thing that gets to me. The proportionality, I think, is grossly unjust.”
It was unjust. Regulatory failure of this magnitude must be reviewed by the Parliament, not by the newspapers.
The Essendon case should be revisited as part of a Senate Inquiry. There are three reasons why. First, the Blackest Day in Sport press conference pre-determined an outcome for the Essendon players. They were targeted by ASADA; and when ASADA could not achieve the outcome they required before a properly constituted Australian Tribunal consisting of two ex-County Court judges and a senior barrister, they referred to a Court of Arbitration of Sport (CAS) Panel. However, relevant evidence was not submitted to the CAS. Secondly, the ASADA investigation was compromised by breaches of confidentiality, by lack of independence from the sport’s governing body, by lack of consultation with other government agencies, and by inconsistency over the course of the investigation. The players were penalised three times for the same infraction (banned from the 2013 finals, banned from the 2015 preseason, banned for the 2016 season); and were denied the right of appeal to an Australian court. Finally, and most importantly, there is evidence that shows the Essendon players were targeted. The evidence shows that:
(i) A program implemented at the Melbourne Football Club, similar to the Essendon program, was not subject to an ASADA investigation; no report was issued and there were no penalties. The program had similar injections as the Essendon program, the electronic communications were similar, the architect of the program was the same, but it escaped sanction. Melbourne did nothing wrong; and neither did Essendon.
(ii) The text messages relevant to the Melbourne program were not presented to CAS. The transcript of a relevant ABC 7.30 Report of April 18, 2013 relating to the Melbourne program was not presented to the CAS; yet a transcript of the ABC 7.30 Report program of May 2, 2013 relating to the Essendon program was presented to the CAS.
(iii) There has been a failure to present evidence relating to the Essendon program which clearly suggested the Essendon players being administered with a legal substance Thymomodulin, not the banned substance Thymosin Beta 4.
(iv) In the CAS Ruling para. 105, it states that “WADA is obliged to eliminate all possibilities which could point to the Players innocence.” Neither WADA nor CAS addressed this evidence.
Regulation requires regulators to act without fear or favour, not to target. In the Essendon case, ASADA does not appear to have applied a consistent set of regulatory standards which would have allowed athletes to prove their innocence. This is a most serious matter. It can only be addressed by an open Parliamentary inquiry which allows all parties to be presented, including sporting bodies, athletes and regulators. It is in the national interest.
Yours sincerely
Stabby, has anyone from J34 approached GetUp to join the campaign?
Stabby, has anyone from J34 approached GetUp to join the campaign?
Not that I know of.
Do you think an Inquiry into Anti Doping would be one they would be interested in?
Maybe if it was couched in a general enough way. If they didn’t I would save some $ by not donating to them again.
Stabby, has anyone from J34 approached GetUp to join the campaign?Not that I know of.
Do you think an Inquiry into Anti Doping would be one they would be interested in?
Considering it was their bosses that presided over it all, No.
So now we see the writ…hopefully Jackson Taylor goes through with it with the support he needs:
Melbourne lawyer Jackson Taylor has lodged a writ against outgoing AFL chairman Mike Fitzpatrick and chief executive Gillon McLachlan, alleging acts of deceptive or misleading conduct during Essendon’s supplements saga.
Taylor has lodged papers in the Victorian Supreme Court, and now awaits an AFL response.
The statement of claim includes allegations the AFL deceived the public over both the integrity of the joint investigation conducted by the AFL and the Australian Sports Anti-Doping Authority (ASADA) and the AFL’s responsibilities for player health and safety.
It cites interviews McLachlan has done with journalists and alleges “the AFL contributed significantly to the exposure of players to risks to their health and safety” by failing to regulate against the use of peptides before September 2012.
Taylor also takes aim Fitzpatrick over claims Fitzpatrick had said former Essendon coach James Hird would “never” be allowed back into football.
Taylor failed to get to court because of a lack of funds when he initially lodged papers against the AFL in September, 2015, with the league successfully seeking an order for security of costs. But this time Taylor believes he will have enough financial support to have McLachlan and Fitzpatrick take to the stand.
“You would be right to ask me: ‘If they rubbed you out last time, how do you think your chances are better this time?’ This time I think there are people out there who are concerned enough about the conduct, they will back me if the AFL does get an order for security,” Taylor said on Wednesday.
“The whole thing feels differently now. I think there are people out there now who would be willing to fund this litigation to force the AFL to confront the accusations made against them.”
Fitzpatrick, having revealed on Wednesday he was stepping down from the top role, said the AFL had no regrets over the manner in which it handled a saga that led to a doping suspension of 34 players and ultimately appears to have ended the AFL careers of Hird, former football-department chief Danny Corcoran and Hird’s senior assistant, Mark Thompson.
“The ultimate end game is to have a trial and to allow the public to have clarification the ways in which the AFL mishandled the investigation, including the way it treated Hird, Corcoran and Thompson,” Taylor said.
Taylor has worked with Arnold Bloch Leibler in Melbourne and Latham and Watkins in London.
A request to the AFL for comment was not successful.
He has NO conscience, how could he have any regrets? May all your chickens come home to roost and poop down your chimney.
Edited by me.
Lets hope in hell, Jackson is not just ‘hoping’ he has support.
Please may he ‘know’ he has support.
Petition at 7,496 supporters- c’mon Darli, Yaco, Barnz and Riolio!
ASADA CEO position now advertised, refers to responsibility, autonomy and accountability. If ASADA CEO is to have autonomy, to whom is he accountable? Seems that, as ASADA is a signatory to WADA he may be accountable to WADA, but, based on McD’s performance at Senate Estimates - and ASADA’s track record on FOI - he does not see himself as accountable to the Australian Parliament or to observing the norms of the obligations of the Australian public service.
All the more reason for scrutiny by a special Senate inquiry, which is what the petition is about. Do we want he new CEO to go down the same path as his predecessor? Occasional scrutiny at Senate Estimates has so far been inadequate to meet the accountability criterion for the ASADA CEO.
Lenore Taylor’s article in the Guardian on coal and the mining lobby illustrates how Parliamentary Committees allow other than the big end iof town, mining companies and multinationals, to have an effective voice, possibly leading to a bipartisan approach. She was talking about a standing committee, but it is relevant to a special committee of inquiry.
ASADA is just about due for a root and stack review by Parliament - These type of reviews usually occur every 5 to 7 years - A review will be more powerful than a Senate Inquiry - A Senate Inquiry will be more broader than ASADA’s role.
7,500 supporters
Essendon saga could see government inquiry as Greg Hunt is presented new information
Minister Hunt says he is approaching the information with an open mind.
“I will respectfully consider the material, I won’t try to pre-empt it. I think that’s the right and proper thing for me to do.”