It’s nice to know that with everything going on his life, including being flung out of the Assembly Liberals to a lonely existence on the cross benches, Richard Mulcahy has time to keep an eye on RiotACT.
To the point where his staff had time to threaten us with dire consequences for quoting the text on the AIRC’s website.
It started with this email:
Please see attached order from the Australian Industrial Relations Commission.
Weekly NewsletterEvery Thursday afternoon, we package up the most-read and trending RiotACT stories of the past seven days and deliver straight to your inbox..
In order to comply with the order of the Commission, please remove the below post.
Any subsequent posts attempting to publish transcripts from this matter should not be allowed to appear on the RiotAct.
Senior Adviser to Richard J Mulcahy MLA
Member for Molonglo
Legislative Assembly for the Australian Capital Territory
Civic Square, London Circuit (GPO Box 1020)
CANBERRA ACT 2601
PH: (02) 6205 0111
FAX: (02) 6205 3002
You should scan this message and any attached files for viruses. The author accepts no liability for any loss caused either directly or indirectly by a virus arising from the use of this message or any attached file. This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you are not the intended recipient then you should not disseminate, distribute or reproduce this email. If you have received this message in error, can you please notify the author immediately and delete the original message.
Please consider the environment before printing this email.
I can not see what all the fuss is about:
Australian Industrial Relations Commission
s.278(1) RAO Schedule – Commission to be advised of breaches of Part or rules Application/Notification by Australian Hotels Association-New South Wales Branch
15 November 2007
09 October 2007
18 September 2007
23 November 2006
Comment by sallyann60 — 12 December, 2007 @ 10:29 am
The attachment he’s referring to can be found here.
I had some problems with this and answered thusly:
From: John Griffiths [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
Sent: Wednesday, 12 December 2007 1:30 PM
To: Ayling, Robert
Subject: Re: Post on thread ‘So it goes.
I’m sorry Robert but I’m struggling to see how that order prohibits quoting from the AIRC website.
Which got me this reply:
Thank you for your response.
Suggest that you take legal advice on publication.
This exchange is coloured by a history of wild threats by Richard when he wants to silence comment he finds inconvenient.
So RA legal eagles… Surely if the AIRC has left it on it’s website we’re hardly in contempt to quote it?