Happy Dude
Established Member
- Joined
- Oct 13, 2006
- Posts
- 2,801
What's wrong with doing it for those reasons? Doing it at the time of the investigation would have removed any perception of bias (though it didn't seem to occur to the high court judges either), but now they are two of the best reasons for doing it. It doesn't appear to be a political stunt either, or even a publicised one for that matter. Journo got the 'scoop' from disclosures (in a gifts register presumably). Damned if you do, damned if you don't eh?While I commend their actions and believe the whole Chairman’s Lounge/Beyond Legalised Corruption Centres should be dissolved, I love how they only voluntarily relinquished their CL membership after the huge public outcry and backlash last year. Did they just recently develop a moral compass? This is just a political stunt to build trust with the public and present the <insert name of entity> as politically independent.