Comments on: Epstein’s glaring conflict of interest

By: Bernard Keane

Bernard Keane — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000

Thank you David. Next time I will endeavour to project myself forward in time and watch that afternoon’s QT before writing my morning’s copy. Butn I don’t quite see how the Senator’s answer makes my article “redundant”. Badly-written rubbish, perhaps. Drivel of the worst kind, yes. But redundant? Hardly.

By: David

David — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000

May be useful Bernard if you check HANSARD for Minister of State Sen Faulkners answer to a question on that very subject in question time.Could well make the thrust of your article redundant.

By: dermot

dermot — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000

Bernard it burns my bum to have to agree with you but you are absolutely correct. it should not be this soon after his resignation.

By: Chris J

Chris J — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000

Is no one particularly concerned about the costs and pitfalls of people such as Epstein blurring the public and private sector lines. It’s what Burke did during the WA Inc era as Connell and Bond took that state and the nation for a ride. And when one slips through the loophole justs gets bigger. Rudd is feeling pretty comfortable with his ride so far and will make the most of the smoke and mirrors aspect to politics. As often as he tells you he’s a cut above Howard you can bet he isn’t.

By: dermot

dermot — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000

Bernard it burns my bum to have to agree with you but you are absolutely correct. it should not be this soon after his resignation.