• Welcome to the Green and Gold Rugby forums. As you can see we've upgraded the forums to new software. Your old logon details should work, just click the 'Login' button in the top right.

Australian Rugby / RA

barbarian

Phil Kearns (64)
Staff member
I listened to a bit of it today.

The Senator from WA (Linda Reynolds) was pretty aggressive, and the whole thing was fairly combative. Not sure if that's the best way to achieve a result.

It may give some satisfaction for those out West to see Pulver grilled, but in the grand scheme of things I don't think anything will come of it.
.
 

Braveheart81

Will Genia (78)
Staff member
It may give some satisfaction for those out West to see Pulver grilled, but in the grand scheme of things I don't think anything will come of it.
.


That's the feeling I get.

Beyond making it clear that the Western Force were treated pretty poorly I can't see what else it will achieve.
 
B

BLR

Guest
I listened to a bit of it today.

The Senator from WA (Linda Reynolds) was pretty aggressive, and the whole thing was fairly combative. Not sure if that's the best way to achieve a result.

It may give some satisfaction for those out West to see Pulver grilled, but in the grand scheme of things I don't think anything will come of it.
.

Well as mentioned by the Senators Bill Pulver came in saying he would co-operate then answered nearly every questions claiming it was confidential then diverting to BS about womens rugby and sevens rugby.

How the hell would you not get combative against clear obstruction of the hearing.
 

barbarian

Phil Kearns (64)
Staff member
How the hell would you not get combative against clear obstruction of the hearing.


What authority does the Senate have over the ARU? It's not a Government entity at all. Its funding relationships are primarily with State bodies.

If the Committee asks about confidential business deals with Imperium, Pulver is within his rights to tell them to get stuffed.

So the Senators can get as combative as they like, but really they can't achieve much when it comes to confidential documents.
.
 
B

BLR

Guest
What authority does the Senate have over the ARU? It's not a Government entity at all. Its funding relationships are primarily with State bodies.

If the Committee asks about confidential business deals with Imperium, Pulver is within his rights to tell them to get stuffed.

So the Senators can get as combative as they like, but really they can't achieve much when it comes to confidential documents.
.

Well the ARU didn't give a shit about confidentiality when they handed the Alliance Agreement to Tim North of the VRU during this process.
 

Strewthcobber

Mark Ella (57)
What authority does the Senate have over the ARU? It's not a Government entity at all. Its funding relationships are primarily with State bodies.

If the Committee asks about confidential business deals with Imperium, Pulver is within his rights to tell them to get stuffed.

So the Senators can get as combative as they like, but really they can't achieve much when it comes to confidential documents.
.

They do have some federal funding through the AIS for which they need to account https://www.ausport.gov.au/ais/australias_winning_edge/sports_tally/2015/sports/Rugby_7s_Rugby_Union The funding is primarily for high performance of the men's and women's 7s team, and participation (which is mainly development initiatives like "Game On" - which is probably why Pulver tried to keep coming back to those things
 

Merrow

Arch Winning (36)
I couldn't believe that the senators didn't have some background about SANZAAR. Sorry but the whole "we couldn't find anything about it on the internet". A shit load of time wasted going over very basic information. Haven't they heard of GAGR? :)
 

wamberal

Phil Kearns (64)
I couldn't believe that the senators didn't have some background about SANZAAR. Sorry but the whole "we couldn't find anything about it on the internet". A shit load of time wasted going over very basic information. Haven't they heard of GAGR? :)


What on earth did anybody expect? This is just a little showboating exercise. Means nothing, does nothing, costs heaps.
 

Merrow

Arch Winning (36)
Public flaying, crucifixion........the list would be fairly long actually. Haven't heard what Stooke said yet but apparently it was scathing.
 

kiap

Steve Williams (59)
What authority does the Senate have over the ARU? It's not a Government entity at all.

The senate doesn't but the federal government does have some authority over the ARU, questions of funding notwithstanding. I'm not sure what authority you're talking from.

In a similar way, perhaps, to RugbyWA being dependent on ARU authorisation to run a rugby union competition, domestic or otherwise, then government recognition is ultimately required for the ARU to function in international rugby.

Sure, it's not existential in either case. Any organisation can run their own sports comp but it doesn't mean there is independent authority to operate as administrative body for "rugby union" specifically.

If the Australian Sports Commission revoked its recognition of the ARU for any reason, then the folding in on itself would begin. I'm not claiming such a move will happen. Far from it, but the authority is there.

Straight away, I'd suggest, there would be no more Olympic Rugby and the ARU's membership of World Rugby would come under pressure. Other national federations have been booted from WR (World Rugby) for this. Perhaps, being a relatively influential member, they could pull a few strings behind closed doors to stave off expulsion.

Yes, this is melodramatic speculation. But even the AFL has been made to buckle to government intervention. The ARU is small beer by comparison.
 

Highlander35

Andrew Slack (58)
Anything we didn't already know/suspect, or is it basically this thread & where to for Super Rugby at the speed of politician?

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
 

mst

Peter Johnson (47)
What authority does the Senate have over the ARU? It's not a Government entity at all. Its funding relationships are primarily with State bodies.

If the Committee asks about confidential business deals with Imperium, Pulver is within his rights to tell them to get stuffed.

So the Senators can get as combative as they like, but really they can't achieve much when it comes to confidential documents.
.

Contempt of the Senate and remedies for contempt
When the actions of a witness or another person influencing a witness have the effect of obstructing the inquiries of a Senate committee (or future inquiries), those actions may be treated as contempts. Examples of such offences include:

Refusing without reasonable excuse to answer a question;
Giving false or misleading evidence;
Failing to attend or to produce documents when required to do so;
Intimidation of a witness;
Adverse treatment of a witness;
Wilfully disturbing a committee while it is meeting.
The Senate refers allegations of contempt to its Committee of Privileges for consideration and report. This committee has developed a considerable body of case law concerning parliamentary privilege, especially in respect of the rights and obligations of witnesses, interference with witnesses and the giving of misleading evidence.

The committee has, for example, inquired into a case where the chairman and senior members of a statutory body attempted to place restrictions on another member of the body from giving evidence. Although no contempt was found to have been committed, the committee was highly critical of the actions of the statutory body.

In another case, the Committee of Privileges investigated an allegation that a witness received adverse treatment from his superior officers as a result of his appearance at a joint committee hearing. Senior officers of a statutory body imposed a penalty on the junior officer, who had given evidence in a private capacity. The Committee of Privileges found that a contempt had been committed and was strongly critical of the officers and the organisation.

The Parliamentary Privileges Act 1987 provides that a House of Parliament may impose terms of imprisonment or substantial fines for individuals and corporations as a penalty for contempt. To date the Senate has not had occasion to use either of these penalties, preferring an educative and preventative approach. The Senate has accepted apologies and remedial action, and has encouraged government officials in particular to attend training courses on the rights and obligations of witnesses before parliamentary committees.
 
M

Moono75

Guest
What authority does the Senate have over the ARU? It's not a Government entity at all. Its funding relationships are primarily with State bodies.

If the Committee asks about confidential business deals with Imperium, Pulver is within his rights to tell them to get stuffed.

So the Senators can get as combative as they like, but really they can't achieve much when it comes to confidential documents.
.

What is does is show how the ARU were deceitful in their negotiations with the Force and are dragging their feet on providing any info because of their dealings with protecting the Rebels will come to light. It also shows that whilst they might not get as much from the Commonwealth Government there is reason to be cautious at a State Government level negotiating with an organisation who have shown no ability to grow the game, secure adequate financial backing and have show a massive disregard to the entire State of WA.
 
M

Moono75

Guest
The WA Rugby presentation to the Senate was very good. Hopefully there will be more probing into the fact that the Rebels were basically insolvent at which point their licence would have gone back to the ARU....except that the ARU kept bailing them out.

Access to the confidential Western Force Alliance Agreement to the VRU. Rob Clarkes questionable involvement in the process. There is plenty of muck which should be exposed because we know this decision was not a fair playing field.
 

stoff

Bill McLean (32)
The committee has, for example, inquired into a case where the chairman and senior members of a statutory body attempted to place restrictions on another member of the body from giving evidence. Although no contempt was found to have been committed, the committee was highly critical of the actions of the statutory body.

In another case, the Committee of Privileges investigated an allegation that a witness received adverse treatment from his superior officers as a result of his appearance at a joint committee hearing. Senior officers of a statutory body imposed a penalty on the junior officer, who had given evidence in a private capacity. The Committee of Privileges found that a contempt had been committed and was strongly critical of the officers and the organisation.

The ARU must be quaking in their boots at the thought of someone being strongly critical of them again!



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

mst

Peter Johnson (47)
The ARU must be quaking in their boots at the thought of someone being strongly critical of them again!



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yeah, i suppose when the Senate has the power to redefine the governance, make up of ARU and future funding for the game just to name a few elements there is not much that can be done to the ARU.

Worst case they will bounce this in to a full funding and governance review and involve the ANAO to do a full audit etc etc on every bit of funding and governance across every union. and force changes that will be be linked to funding entitlements and participation programs.

Its generally why the banks even with all their power generally concede and fall in line otherwise you end up suffering death buy audit, with everything available for public scrutiny and being heavily regulated. The reputational damage is a real risk to Rugby and could see sponsors and schools not wanting to be associated with the ARU and Unions until its cleaned up.

So here s silly basic one to give you a rough guide: https://www.anao.gov.au/work/performance-audit/active-after-school-communities-program

and a more serious one: https://www.anao.gov.au/work/performance-audit/australian-border-forces-use-statutory-powers
 
L

Leo86

Guest
So just about everyone on here has been critical of the ARU and wants change... (except Wamberal). This enquiry is not just the axing of the Force but how. So the old boys club no one is happy about. Yet everyone seems upset that the senate is using an undeniable example of their corruption.

What is it. Status quo or change?

Honestly this cant bring the Force back as much as i would like it to. But it could bring change.
 
B

BLR

Guest
Honestly this cant bring the Force back as much as i would like it to. But it could bring change.

Collapse of the ARU with Twiggy expanding his IPRC to take over the Super Rugby slot next year? ;)
 

Strewthcobber

Mark Ella (57)
The ARU already gets reviewed by the ASC each year as part of the AIS winning edge high performance strategy. The senate can only really review against the frameworks setup by the department - which the ARU will have no problem showing good compliance with.

Here's what was said about the sport's governance in 2016

Australian Rugby Union (ARU) is largely compliant with the ASC’s Mandatory Sports Governance Principles.

Over the previous 12 months, it has updated its constitution to embed a minimum of five board meetings per year and the CEO cannot be appointed to the board within three years of leaving the role.

The ARU continues to perform strongly with integrity matters and has developed a robust integrity framework underpinned by sound education and training programs. It should look to appoint an external and independent chartered accountant or certified practising accountant to the Audit and Risk Committee
 
Top