Arthur Sinodinos – Perfect for Assistant Treasurer!

Originally posted on The Australian Independent Media Network:


Ok, there have been a lot of unfair remarks made about Mr Sinodinos. I can’t remember any of them specifically but I have a vague recollection that a number of people at a large dinner party were suggesting that he wasn’t fit to be Assistant Treasurer. At least I think it was a dinner party. There was food and wine and people were talking. Not wishing to appear greedy I refrained from eating and just concentrated on the wine. If I use the same standard that people are applying to Arthur, I’m not fit to be Assistant Treasurer either. Which is clearly nonsense because I have exactly the sort of skills Australia needs at the moment. I am good with money. It’s when I’m broke that I’m not so good. So if you want me to be good, just give me lots of money.

But I digress. We were talking…

View original 697 more words

About these ads


Filed under Uncategorized

3 responses to “Arthur Sinodinos – Perfect for Assistant Treasurer!

  1. Sir Bernard J. Hyphen-Anonymous XVII, Lord Dingittover-Hugh

    There’s an irony in Ross Leigh “just concentrat[ing] on the wine”, in that Arthur Sinodinos’ involvement in the Australian Water Holdings scandal has suddenly been overshadowed by the bottle of wine that former NSW premier Barry O’Farrell so fatefully ‘forgot’.

    There’s been a lot of shrill pushing-back against this turn of events, predicated on O’Farrell’s apparent clean-skin (boom-tish) image, but no response has been as stridently hysterical as Gerard Henderson’s discombobulated hissy-fit.

    Henderson blames ICAC for O’Farrell’s resignation, completely missing the facts of O’Farrell:

    1) not remembering his friendship and many meetings with Liberal fundraiser and AWH lobbyist Nick Di Girolamo

    2) not remembering to declare the wine when it was received

    3) not remembering that he sent a thank you note to Di Girolamo, mentioning the wine and acknowledging “all” of Di Girolamo’s “support”

    4) not remembering that he drank a $3000 bottle of Grange made in the year of his birth, even though O’Farrell said himself that he would very much remember doing so had it ever happened

    5) was not in any way pushed or reprimanded by ICAC – the Commission simply wanted to determine how favours might have been curried in the AWH scandal.

    Henderson needs to get a grip and understand that O’Farrell knows he did wrong, and that his only choice was to resign. He jumped ship as soon as the incontrovertible evidence appeared – there was not even time for the ICAC hearing to consider and deliberate on it before O’Farrell fronted the cameras.

    It’s not ICAC’s ‘fault’ that O’Farrell got caught engaging in dubious practices, it’s O’Farrell’s.

    And if O’Farrell really, truly doesn’t remember his mate and their meetings, or anything to do with a phenomenally well-recognised brand of wine, he would appear to be profoundly incapacitated for the job of premier of an Australian state, in which case the Grange scandal is a welcome and necessary spotlight on O’Farrell’s significant handicap.

    Henderson’s surely in the final running for Dummy-Spit of the Year.

  2. It was extraordinary but also not unexpected. I actually thought it might be Piers that went full Monty on it but then I certainly didn’t expect that Henderson would be invited onto the ABC after 6 and a bit years. He didn’t disappoint. He conveniently (and he coulf be reading from the LNP “how to” card) ignored the principle and focussed on what they conceive as the minor detail, that of the wine itself. What Gerard and the rest of the conservative wankers are depending on is the inability of like-minded idiots to determine whether the pricinple of lying to ICAC is actually inportant or not. I can only hope that even the most idiotic of conservative voters can feel uncomfortable with the tactic, in full knowledge that the apparent amnesia is merely a ruse and easily seen for what it is.