Skip to main content

How it pays to pay-up

Billionaire Richard Pratt is, it is reported, to plead guilty to breach of the Trade Practices Act. He will admit that he and his company, Visy Industries, engaged in conduct which probably resulted in all Australians paying more for their packaging.

The fine to be paid is said to be a record-breaking $40 million dollars. One would have thought that Pratt, despite all his money and with his company already having seriously breached the Trade Practices Act once before, would be somewhat on the nose. Oh no! The Australian PM and his Treasurer haven't taken that position at all - evidently if there is a substantial donor ["investor"?] to the Liberal Party - as Mike Carlton puts into context in his weekly column in the SMH:

"A quick trawl through the files of the Australian Electoral Commission reveals that the price-fixing Melbourne cardboard tycoon, Dick Pratt, has donated more than $1.6 million to various bits of the Liberal Party since 1999.

Most of this largesse went to the party's federal headquarters. Some went to the Free Enterprise Foundation, a Liberal Party front outfit, and some to the state divisions. Throw in handouts to the National Party and the figure heads towards $2 million.

No other individual or company has stumped up so much for the conservative cause. And Pratt might well have splashed out even more in this election year; the declarations for 2007 are not in yet.

Perhaps it was this lavish lubricating of the wheels of democracy that prompted the Prime Minister to rush to the crooked old mogul's defence on Tuesday.

Pratt was a generous Australian and a good citizen, he gushed. "My own dealings with him have always been very positive, and I like him."

How very loyal. Yet Pratt's private company, Visy, and its main competitor, Amcor, were engaged in a cartel (for cartel read racket) to rort prices in the cardboard packaging business, an industry turning over some $2 billion a year."

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Reading the Chilcot Inquiry Report more closely

Most commentary on the Chilcot Inquiry Report of and associated with the Iraq War, has been "lifted" from the Executive Summary.   The Intercept has actually gone and dug into the Report, with these revelations : "THE CHILCOT REPORT, the U.K.’s official inquiry into its participation in the Iraq War, has finally been released after seven years of investigation. Its executive summary certainly makes former Prime Minister Tony Blair, who led the British push for war, look terrible. According to the report, Blair made statements about Iraq’s nonexistent chemical, biological, and nuclear programs based on “what Mr. Blair believed” rather than the intelligence he had been given. The U.K. went to war despite the fact that “diplomatic options had not been exhausted.” Blair was warned by British intelligence that terrorism would “increase in the event of war, reflecting intensified anti-US/anti-Western sentiment in the Muslim world, including among Muslim communities in the

Robert Fisk's predictions for the Middle East in 2013

There is no gain-saying that Robert Fisk, fiercely independent and feisty to boot, is the veteran journalist and author covering the Middle East. Who doesn't he know or hasn't he met over the years in reporting from Beirut - where he lives?  In his latest op-ed piece for The Independent he lays out his predictions for the Middle East for 2013. Read the piece in full, here - well worthwhile - but an extract... "Never make predictions in the Middle East. My crystal ball broke long ago. But predicting the region has an honourable pedigree. “An Arab movement, newly-risen, is looming in the distance,” a French traveller to the Gulf and Baghdad wrote in 1883, “and a race hitherto downtrodden will presently claim its due place in the destinies of Islam.” A year earlier, a British diplomat in Jeddah confided that “it is within my knowledge... that the idea of freedom does at present agitate some minds even in Mecca...” So let’s say this for 2013: the “Arab Awakening” (the t

An unpalatable truth!

Quinoa has for the last years been the "new" food on the block for foodies. Known for its health properties, foodies the world over have taken to it. Many restaurants have added it to their menu. But, as this piece " Can vegans stomach the unpalatable truth about quinoa? " from The Guardian so clearly details, the cost to Bolivians and Peruvians - from where quinoa hails - has been substantial. "Not long ago, quinoa was just an obscure Peruvian grain you could only buy in wholefood shops. We struggled to pronounce it (it's keen-wa, not qui-no-a), yet it was feted by food lovers as a novel addition to the familiar ranks of couscous and rice. Dieticians clucked over quinoa approvingly because it ticked the low-fat box and fitted in with government healthy eating advice to "base your meals on starchy foods". Adventurous eaters liked its slightly bitter taste and the little white curls that formed around the grains. Vegans embraced quinoa as