A.R.S.E.

Even if Gillard does nothing else, cue a Bengatta interjection here, she should be applauded for starting the Royal Commission into those kiddie fiddling priests. You can bet you balls Abbott, the guy who trained to be a priest for a while, would never have kicked it off.

I was brought up Catholic. I spent a couple of years in a Christian Brothers school and the rest of the time being taught by Jesuits.

The Jesuits were alright but I reckon I was lucky to escape the other one intact.

Good to see she listened to Tony earlier today....

fucking hope the uncover a heap of shit, fuck em

gotta have this song in a thread like this

[youtube] [/youtube]

Yes, well it won't just be Catholics:

http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/politi ... 298kg.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Just be careful this doesn't end up a witch hunt. It's true - or seems to be from the Victorian government inquiry I sat in on the other day - most of the abuse in closed institutions seem to happen in the Catholic church. You kind of wonder how it could be isolated this way. The best way to rectify the situation is to try to understand it first and then take what ever punitive action is deemed necessary. If a Royal Commission works the same way as a coronial inquest, there is no power to charge. That can come later if the DPP sees fit to do it. But if you really want to make sure it stops, you have to understand why it starts.

I heard a victim support group recommend that confessional privilege be revoked. The other thing they recommended was that mandatory reporting be across the board: that is, anyone who suspects anyone else of this sort of thing be required by law to report it. I'm sure you can see how this could be perverted. If I wanted to exact revenge against someone, this would be a good way to do it. Remember; once even suspected of something like this, a person has almost no chance to survive in society, even if they are innocent, so you have to get it right. For these reasons, I think it's unlikely the Victorian government would mandate reporting in this way.

A Royal Commission can be a really good way of identifying solutions. They tend to be exhaustive and are rarely undertaken because they are incredibly expensive. They are run by highly intelligent people. Very often though, you get useful answers instead of knee-jerk reactions and that is what I'm hoping for here. For anyone who thinks I sound like a bleeding heart, think again. I know people who knew and were taught by Brother Ibar Keating. I actually met him myself. We used to occasionally go to a church which was run by Father Kevin O'Donnell. I also knew Monsignor Penn Jones who used to come to our house when I was a boy.

I know how close we came and it makes my skin crawl. I remember a clergyman putting his hand on my knee while talking about masturbation in a chapel (no shit). What I want is to make sure this shit is eradicated. If a few shirt lifting kiddie fiddlers go to prison as a result then I suppose the public will be satisfied. But that will not go far enough. The threat of retribution isn't enough. Measures - intelligent ones instead of reactionary ones - have to be put into place so that it never happens again. I was one of the lucky ones.

As much as I agree that Abbott was not likely to voluntarily kick off such a commission, let not kid ourselves here.

Gillard is only getting this going because one of the independents was planning to raise a private members bill to compel her to do something or to vote against it. As with Abbott, Gillard is not doing this because she wants to.

If what you say is true, it would have happened anyway.

This has only really come to a head in the last couple of weeks. It's always been there in the background but after police investigations and reports in both Victoria and NSW revealed endemic levels of abuse, it was only a matter of time.

J.D. wrote:If what you say is true, it would have happened anyway.

This has only really come to a head in the last couple of weeks. It's always been there in the background but after police investigations and reports in both Victoria and NSW revealed endemic levels of abuse, it was only a matter of time.

Oh, undoubtedly. This has been barreling its way towards a royal commission for months now.

The interesting thing will be to see what the terms of reference are. In my opinion, the parameters already defined by Gillard are an attempt to interfere with uncover the real nature of the problem. The government is saying that this will look at all forms of child abuse within any/all institutions. On the surface this sounds like a good idea, however there is a good chance that if the terms of reference are too broad then the commission will either become overwhelmed and hence unable to draw conclusions inside the time/budget allotted, or it will take so long to complete as to be almost useless.

I am also waiting to see whether the terms of reference limit what aspects of institutions can be investigated. As a hypothetical, will the commission be allowed to call Cardinal Pell and will it be permitted to make a finding that he knew what was going on and deliberately took steps to conceal crimes. Will the commission's parameters permit them to recommend charges against the senior hierarchy of the church?

Oh Christ Montey. Let's not make it political. We don't know yet. What possible advantage is there for Gillard to limit the terms of reference that way? Public support for this is overwhelmingly in favour of it so I can't see her worrying too much about upsetting a tiny minority.

It has to be broad. You can't just single out one institution when it's happened in others and there will be parallels. I have no doubt Pell will have to appear. He's the head of the Catholic Church in Australia. Without calling him the commission would look stupid. He also has connections with both Gerald Ridsdale and Robert Best. He has strenuously denied he knew anything about what was going on, even though he shared a house in Ballarat with Ridsdale. All that is well known but nobody has ever accused him of anything. On the other hand, he would be a very useful witness.

On top of that, Pell has been accused of turning a blind eye to this and shuffling these crunts around instead of de-frocking them or more importantly, calling the jacks in. That is already in the public domain.

I don't see how the time will make it useless. It depends on what conclusions they come to.

Well, I think it is not insubstantial that current and former members of the Catholic chaplaincy are saying that the terms of reference suggested so far are too broad.

Hope they burn ! Fucking cants were meant to protect the children not fuck them !!

I hope a lot of these arseholes go to prison and have to perform the thirsty alter boy themselves for eternity.

Montey wrote:Well, I think it is not insubstantial that current and former members of the Catholic chaplaincy are saying that the terms of reference suggested so far are too broad.

I would have thought that was to be expected. They want as little as possible looked into. They know they are in strife.

Edit : Seems Abbott has changed a bit in the last few years. http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/ap ... 1116620349" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I'm happy to see a Royal Commission into this. I think it really demonstrates how important government oversight is. The Church (and other institutions) has lied and covered up and impeded investigations (I heard on 7.30 report last night that some priests had been moved almost 20 times!), so much for self-regulation.

The Irish Commission took 10 years, so buckle up for a long and nasty ride.

I was brought up a Catholic, was a Boy Scout and my high school Cadets Master suicided some years back when he came under investigation for alleged kiddy-fiddling. I never got fiddled with but I had no idea I was skipping through such a minefield!

smith

Also brought up a Catholic and was even taught by Brother Kostka Chute who is currently serving 6 years for kiddy fiddling. That only came to light a few years back but I remember when I was at the school in the early 90s and he stopped teaching and just lived in the monastery people joked that it was because he was a molester. I was totally oblivous to what was going on but I guess there was truth in how those rumours started.

Political crap aside, I'm glad something like that this is happening. Too much crap goes on behind closed doors with the church.

This would not have happened if Labor were not in minority government. But it had to happen as it's been destroying lives for years.

I don't agree.

The politics are not very relevant. It's going to end up with bi-partisan support anyway or people are going to risk being accused of protecting sex offenders.

And the Commission has to be broad or risk ignoring what happened in other institutions. What sort of message does that send to people who were victims of scout masters or sports coaches?

I doubt if there is anything the clergy say which would seriously limit the investigation of anything criminal. On top of that, these sorts of statements from Pell and Denis Hart fly in the face of what investigators seem to have uncovered already:

http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/politi ... 298kg.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The committee I sat in on the other day heard from a police interviewer who said most of his work had involved that Catholic church. The impression I have is that they were by far the principal offenders. Hart's statement that the idea that systemic abuse in the Catholic church has no basis in fact borders on delusional. Why then did they see the need to sweep it all under the carpet? Why did they shift people like O'Donnell and Dowlan around so often when these things continually came up? That sounds like a systemic problem to me. Why did the church see fit to not report these matters to police? A media beat up Denis? Pfft. The police reports in Victoria and NSW are unambiguous.

One of the major problems is that the Catholic church has shifted massively to the right in the last 35 years, since the election of Pope John Paul II. George Pell and Denis Hart could give the Borgias pointers on maintaining a power base. That's why they have been so reluctant and no matter how they welcome it, they're not really very keen for it to come out into the open. That goes all the way up to the current Pope. Talking through gritted teeth will become a clergyman's modus operandi.

The commission will go for a couple of years but don't get the idea that its conclusions will be unworkable. There are no easy answers. There will be witch burners who are only interested in seeing offenders dealt with in whatever bizarre way they can think up but that will be a matter for the courts. Meanwhile, my concern is only that we don't replace a lack of rule of law with a stupid law. That's what would happen if a government bowed to some forms of public pressure.

Pell is serioulsy exposed here. anyone with a long-run role in the hierarchy will have his fingerprints all over coverups and payoffs. I predict very big heads will roll.

I think in the current age that the independents MP's and senators with a 24 hour news cycle and social media, now have a very loud voice. Given also the fact that we have a minority government that what they say will be heard as they've had so much focus on them in the past two years. With the coverage that these abuse cases are getting now, not to do something would look bad on the government. I just can't see a majority government announcing a royal commission. But I'm glad it has happened. Also with the BBC/Saville scandal of late, the government had to do this and it's good that all side are in agreement on this.

Yeah but I can't believe that any politician in Gillard's position - irrespective of party - would baulk at this. I don't even think Abbott could avoid it. The last time I can remember anything like this happening which could have triggered an enquiry of any sort would have been Hollingworth (though he wasn't a Catholic).

You can't just set up a court room on the basis of "where there's smoke, there's fire". Sure, there have been lots of examples of it in the past but the issue now is how the church protected criminals. Now we have enough evidence to make it worthwhile.

@smiss: I agree; Pell's head must be on the chopping block.

Pell is a slippery bastard isn't he.

Yep, but as a tweet I just saw said "A decent QC is going to tear this guy apart" (in reference to his live presser).

I reckon if he's got any brains he'd have to be considering stepping down.

I'm just not convinced he's wired that way though.

He's always going to defend the church and claim it was in the past and mistakes were made. It's starting already