6 February 2006

Ooooh so brave to "name and shame" exploiters

| Jonathon Reynolds
Join the conversation

The ABC News online is reporting here that Senator Lundy is threatening to “name and shame” the Canberra restaurants at the centre of claims of exploiting Filipino workers.

Of course Sentor Lundy can feign being so “brave” in issuing threats such as she does, knowing that so long as she releases the names of the alleged businesses within the Senate chamber then she is fully protected from any libel or defamation action by parliamentary priviledge.

If she really had any balls (no pun intended) then she would issue the list straight to media!

On the ABC Website – here. As predicted Senator Lundy will be using the safety or Parliamentary priviledge to deliver her speech.

Join the conversation

All Comments
  • All Comments
  • Website Comments

sorry, wrong link in clipboard.

try this

Lucie, see here.

when’s this happening?

jr -> Exactly what is your problem with a senator delivering information in the Senate?

Seems appropriate to me. And, yes, parliamentary privilege applies, but political consequences still do too. One political consequence is that she goes up a notch in my opinion.

I would have thought the horse has already bolted.

WIN did a story around a week ago naming Zeffirelli, and talking to their affected staff.

Hospitality establishments screwing over the workers? Surely not! Anyway..as Indi asked…have any laws been broken?

No stories out there about the blatant exploitation of casual waiting staff? Unpaid “trials”, sexual harrassment, dismissal without reason or payment of monies owed?

The hospitality industry is founded on exploitation!

Bring it on. If she’s wrong the Privileges Committee will sort her out. I want to know who these businesses area as I certainly wouldn’t want to be eating or enjoying a cold beer at some establishment that was screwing over workers – foreign or otherwise.

I understand that there is good evidence to suggest that the businesses in question have breeched the conditions of their hosted employment visas (I assume that this would be covered under the Immigration Act or similar) which require them to pay award wages and provide award conditions and cover all medical and related expenses with respect to foreign workers they have brought to Australia – my guess is that these requirements would have been inserted at the behest of the pinko-left – eager to protect mediocrity in the workplace at the expense of more jobs rather than for any particular concern for the wellbeing of foreign chefs, kitchen-hands and dish-pigs.

My guess bulldog? Someone who wants to report it has fed the info to Kate so she can use parliamentary privilege and they can then use qualified privilege to report it.

This is a fairly common tactic to get defamatory information out there.

Just out of curiosity, how does Kate obtain this information? She’d want to be fairly certain that she’s got it right if she’s planning a smear-spree…

Either way – where has it been indicated that the businesses in question have broken any laws?

I agree. Why only name the names in coward’s castle. Why doesn’t she take it to the media or perhaps she’s not so confident that she has the facts straight????

Any defamation case in the ACT would depend on whether the owners of Holy Grail (if that’s who we’re talking about) are set up as a corporation or not wouldn’t it – with the changes to defo law announced by the CM last year. (Assuming they’ve already gone through, corporations have no right to sue for it in the ACT any more).

midnitecalla5:09 pm 05 Feb 06

its getting to be that you cant speak too loudly speak your mind lest the result is a writ slapped on you to keep you quiet or to raid you pocket books. at least those up there like lundy can turn that privilege to thier advantage as others turn the legal section of society to theirs. the bunker was designed to protect and so was the laws on parl priv. ill support any pollie not muzzled and willing to avago.

midnitecalla5:01 pm 05 Feb 06

good, About time that privelege is used properly

if the jely fish are outed and shamed all for the common good , better for all i say. for once a poliie(irresepctive of denomination) is working for the area outside the ring of power on Cap hill and not for themselves/ social standing.

it’s still going to be an interesting list though.

Daily Digest

Want the best Canberra news delivered daily? Every day we package the most popular Riotact stories and send them straight to your inbox. Sign-up now for trusted local news that will never be behind a paywall.

By submitting your email address you are agreeing to Region Group's terms and conditions and privacy policy.