Is it time the worlds worse PM gave the worlds worse speaker the tap on the shoulder, and said “Bronnie its time to go.” The last straw in the debacle that is Bronwyn Bishop has to be her spending of over $5,000 of tax payer money on a helicopter flight to attend a Liberal Party fundraiser, nothing what so ever to do with her duties as speaker or as a parliamentarian. This woman is an insulting joke at the best of times and now has been uncovered ripping off the hard working tax payer. Even Hockey could not defend the parliamentary sprooker when asked if her helicopter trip met the sniff test, Hockey said “Look, instinctively it doesn't."
Bronnie, it certainly is pay back time, bye bye, you won’t be missed.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-07-16/bronwyn-bishop-agrees-pay-back-helicopter-flight/6623900

Paul,

This is actually gaining momentum.

Together with her huge taxpayer-funded expenses bill for her job hunt overseas, it might just push her out.

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/bronwyn-bishop-job-bid-leaves-taxpayers-with-huge-expense-bill-20150715-gich1g.html

"Speaker Bronwyn Bishop has charged taxpayers almost $90,000 for a two-week European trip partly aimed at securing her a plum new job.

Mrs Bishop last year ran for the presidency of the Inter-Parliamentary Union, a democracy group based in Geneva, but she lost out to Bangladesh's candidate. It's believed her short-lived but controversial Parliament House burqa ban cruelled her chances.

In the two weeks leading up to the October 17 vote, Mrs Bishop led a small parliamentary delegation to Italy, Belgium, Austria before heading on to Switzerland - and she spent $88,084 in the process, according to Department of Finance documents."

Of course, Tones would be furious.

Yesterday they had the Murdoch press mock up a carbon tax thingy with zombie Shorten coming back from the grave...etc.

And it went nowhere coz Bronnie was the talk of the town.

Lol!...Zombie Shorten Day was a fizzer.

Hi Poirot,

Bishop is nothing but a total disgrace, yes $90 grand spent trying to sniff out a cushy job in Geneva, but she lost out to the Bangladesh's candidate. Gee any candidate including Spot the dog would be a better choice than Bronnie for any job, even fetch the stick! I don't expect much interest in this tread as the forums 'Usual Suspects' will be hard pressed to defend the crazy one.

Yes, Bronwyn Bishop is the same age as I am, and for that reason alone, she should have removed herself from politics. Yes, if there hadn't been a fuss, she wouldn't have been paying back the helicopter money. Yes, I believe she acted inappropriately, but not illegally because politicians just love their perks, and they are not going to change the rules. Senator Xenephon is the only one wanting "transparency", but he has no clout as is a twit to boot.

There is nothing unusual about Bishop's expectation that mug taxpayers should pay for a trip to a party function; it's happened before, and it will happen again. This time it was good for Labor, particularly as they have no policies, no leader, and we now know they would introduce an even more onerous carbon tax if elected anytime in the future. All politicians are on the make, and next time it will be a Labor rort. Why, because most Australians are no different from politicians - always after something for nothing. Perhaps they enjoy their own perks too much to demand honesty from politicians.

She has got to go.

No question.

They went after Slipper for a measly sum.
They went after Thomson.
They went after Gillard and now Shorten.

It all fairness - retire the old girl.
She's had a good run at our expense!

Yes I agree Bronwyn is a disgrace.
I never took much notice of any Speaker before her, but on the few occasions I have watched the Pollies playing together in Parliament, I noted how blatantly biased she was towards Liberal ministers.

What worries me is that, at least publicly, Tones doesn't seem one bit concerned re her latest costly spending sprees, or her nasty glares in Parliament.

ttbn, "Bronwyn Bishop is the same age as I am" but I would hope your IQ was at least a point or two higher than this nincompoop. In her years in parliament what has she actually achieved for anyone except herself! However judging by your apologists post you can't be serious. Xenephon is a twit, come come old chap, Abbott and co have turned twitism into an art form. Bishop has to be a leading contender for the title of 'Ultimate Liberal Twit' in a capacity field.

Paul,

Just on the subject of odd-bods and loons in the Coalition...did you see this?

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/victoria/mp-george-christensen-calls-out-keyboard-warriors-in-social-media-stoush/story-fni0fit3-1227444780725

George Christensen actually named a location to fight a troll....

"Where else but in ‘Straya’ would a government MP organise a punch-on with a random online ‘troll’ via Facebook?"

"“21 Milton Street, Mackay. See you there,” he wrote."

Lol!...classy!

Oh, and....

"Speaker Bronwyn Bishop procured a luxury helicopter for a jaunt between central Melbourne and a Geelong golf course when other less salubrious choppers were available for a fraction of the $5227 price tag her ride cost taxpayers."

"She is understood to have left Melbourne’s Docklands helipad in the deluxe twin-engine Agusta helicopter on November 5."

"Mr Burke noted that Mrs Bishop would have signed a form affirming the charter was “provided for official purposes” and acknowledging that “knowingly giving false or misleading inform­ation is a serious offence”.

“It was either within the rules or a serious offence has been committed,” he said.

Joe Hockey, who claims travel allowances to live in his wife’s Canberra home, said earlier he understood the public’s “white-hot anger” and suggested all MPs face “the court of the ­people” on such issues."

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/bronwyn-bishop-picked-top-flight-helicopter/story-fn59niix-1227444835330?utm_content=SocialFlow&utm_campaign=EditorialSF&utm_source=TheAustralian&utm_medium=Twitter

as sad as it is the Greens/Labour have no moral fabric in order to prosecute.Hanson Youngs latest stunt at taxpayer expense says it all. The corrupt heart of man.

Can't be all bad...

Angela Bishop's entertainment and celebrity reporting for Network Ten seems unaffected by any helicopter parenting.

"as sad as it is the Greens/Labour have no moral fabric in order to prosecute.Hanson Youngs latest stunt at taxpayer expense says it all. The corrupt heart of man."

Another run-by, runner?

I mean come on - what stunt...where's yer substance?

Your posts are akin to the actions of an urchin who turns up at your front door, deposits something nasty on the doorstep, rings the bell and then runs off down the street.

Poirot

you are the least qualified to ask the question
'..where's yer substance?' Your constant blathering of left wing propaganda despite the numerous words amount to hot air. Your abbottphobia really makes you irrational.

Hannson Youngs encouragement of the illegal boat trade speaks for itself.

This woman is a nasty piece of work and she rorts
the taxpayer to the hilt. Not only is she a terrible
speaker - whose role is clearly set out in the
Constitution where she is supposed to be independent
and objective. Her record in this regard has been
disgraceful. Over 400 Labor MPs evicted from the House
while only 8 Libs have been. She consistently disallows
MPs asking questions of the government and then shuts
people up on "points of order," even before she's heard them.

If you think that the "helicopter fiasco" was expensive -
from June to December 2014 - this woman has racked up over
$400,000 entitlements at taxpayer's expense. This includes
two overseas trips, with staff, that were not related to her
job in any way.

Anyway, read it for yourself:

http://newmatilda.com/2015/07/16/calls-grow-chop-her-will-tony-abbott-check-bishops-privilege

Thanks, runner....can't talk now - just nipping out to clean my front step.

Interesting how the political partisanship that is forever demanding absolute proof in the form of a decisive Court ruling and even then they dismiss it, do not apply the same high standard of proof and defence of the accused where their political opponents are concerned.

What is also interesting is the difference between Labor+Greens and the LNP. There is no way that Labor nor the Greens would ever hold one of their own to account and definitely not where their senior figures are concerned. However, senior LNP politicians have the principle and morality to question the Speaker, suggesting that the sum be paid back, which it was (another two differences where Labor and Greens are concerned).

Here is a Green in action and even now, ages later, there has apparently been no reply to the Courier Mail. Cop this Queensland taxpayers,

<GREENS Senator Larissa Waters spent a whopping $414,000 to fit out her trendy Paddington office – more than any of her Queensland political colleagues at the time.

The office, on the top floor of a pristine-condition, split-level building on Given Tce, includes a rooftop patio with timber outdoor furniture and artificial turf..>
http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/queensland/queensland-greens-senator-larissa-waters-spent-414000-on-fitout-for-paddington-office/story-fnihsrf2-1226889449998

Any wonder Greens leader in Qld always has that vacant 'Nancy Reagan' look and grin. Sauce for the goose is not sauce for the gander where politicians are concerned.

It goes without saying that the originator of the subject OP, Paul1405, a NSW Watermelon Green saw NO problem with Greens Larissa Waters' outrageous expenditure - even more so because Ms Waters preferred expensive, trendy Paddington whereas the 'burbs adjoining have heaps of cheap office space, just as good and offer some rent free and fit-out incentives.

I find it interesting that everyone calling for BB's resignation for spending $5k on a helicopter are those excusing Juliar's behaviour when she spent $140k on a jet to go to a Labor party fundraiser.

otb,

"Interesting how the political partisanship that is forever demanding absolute proof in the form of a decisive Court ruling and even then they dismiss it, do not apply the same high standard of proof and defence of the accused where their political opponents are concerned...."

"It goes without saying that the originator of the subject OP, Paul1405, a NSW Watermelon Green..."

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-06-30/department-of-finance-spends-millions-refitting-mps-offices/6585122

Finance just love showering MPs with fit-outs...

"Federal parliamentarians have criticised the Department of Finance's spend of more than $4.5 million on office "fit-outs" for MPs and senators in the final six months of last year."

(But don't let that stop you bashing the Greens or being generally partisan while criticising others' partisanship!)

contd.,

Anyone with any maturity at all realises that the minute politicians are elected, they seem to rise to the occasion where using available taxpayer money is concerned.

It has always been a standing joke among politicians and the press corps that backbenchers and especially Senators spend their days working out what new entitlements to claim, particularly associated with travel.

The partisanship in the thread is one-eyed and that is always a hindrance to improvement. First, the benefits for the large and growing number of wasler ex-PMs needs to be cut back and NO, they should not be paid in lieu for any entitlements lost.

In the (vain) hope of elevating the thread above the usual trite 'Gotcha' games of partisan politics, taking advantage of entitlements and more is common among leaders in the public bureaucracies and in private sector too.

Regrettably, CEO's (and senior managers) are in the perfect position to take advantage if they wish. Some take the highly unethical step further, where they come to regard the organisation's/agency's assets as their own. That syndrome has become apparent where leaders of unions are concerned too.

The only protection is for Boards and members to insist on regular independent audits. The red flag for corruption is decision-makers refusing, delaying, restricting the scope and otherwise rolling logs in front of audits.

The lessons for the taxpayer are obvious but lost in the murky world of partisan politics and spin. Of course executive producers and journalists like to claim some entitlements too.

@Poirot, Friday, 17 July 2015 11:27:29 AM

If you held your feverish forum game of 'tit for tat' for a while you might realise that the example is from State politics, where the procedures are different to federal refurbishments being reported recently. Faulty comparison for a number of reasons.

Now what about addressing the nub of the problem, which extends across political parties and public and private sectors?

Dear runner,

You are concerned about the "illegal boat trade."

I am concerned about the lack of compassion for those risking the perils of the boat trade.

Currently there are around fifty million refugees. Poverty, war and oppression have caused them to flee their homes. There is no pressure on me to leave my home. I doubt that I would be better anywhere else. I sympathise with those who are not as fortunate. The government of Australia has passed laws who penalise people who have worked at or observed what goes on the detention centres and write or speak about what is happening in those centres. It is reasonable to think that conditions there are deplorable. Why else would the government want to prevent those conditions from being made public?

We can only take in a small portion of the refugees, and we can only alleviate the conditions that cause the situation to a limited extent. However, we are not doing what we can do. Foreign aid wisely applied can alleviate the conditions which cause the flow of refugees. The Abbott government has cut back on foreign aid. Returning refugees to the source of their oppression will condemn some of them to more oppression and even death. The Australian Navy has turned Tamils fleeing Sri Lanka over to the Sri Lankan Navy. The Australian Labor Party has concurred in the actions of the current Australian government. The Australian government and the Labor opposition share a lack of compassion.

Perhaps some of the animosity against the Greens is their compassion and caring in regard to asylum seekers. This reflects poorly on the other parties.

We can try to get together with other fortunate nations to change the situation. We can try to alleviate the desperate conditions in some countries. Limiting the flow of arms, population control, education – especially for women and equitable sharing of the earth’s resources are some of what can be done. Instead of seeing how tough and mean we can be let’s do what we can to make matters better.

Good question, otb.

"Now what about addressing the nub of the problem, which extends across political parties and public and private sectors?"

Now there's a "nub" of the problem is there?

So you weren't just using it to bash the Greens?

"If you held your feverish forum game of 'tit for tat' for a while..."

Lol! - that's rich coming from you : )

Paul,

I not interested in IQs. But if you believe Xenephon, who talks a lot but has never achieved anything, is not a twit, then we are on different pages.

Taxpayers are being taken for the proverbial ride.

From July - December last year Madam Speaker racked up
over $400,000 of taxpayers funds for overseas travel.
And not only that but now she's racked up over $5,000
dollars on a helicopter ride to attend a Liberal Fund-raising
event in Victoria while being provided with a driver and a
car to travel the 75 kilometre trip. She opted for a dramatic
entrance via helicopter instead. Mind you this was in no way
related to her job as Speaker. Neither was
this fund raiser in her electorate. Not job connected in any way.

Obviously no one told Madam Speaker that the Age of Entitlement
was over.

How many PMs are we keeping at the moment. not to mention
GGs, state members and so on.

While Mr Abbott pursued Slipper with a passion and did not allow
the man to pay back his car fare fees - and destroyed his career.
One can't help but wonder what if any action will be taken
regarding Madam Speaker's behaviour.

What's good for the gander should be good for the goose.
However - we should not hold our breathes. It seems that
fingers can only be pointed to just one-side of politics,
and that side gets pursued by Royal Commissions whilst the
Liberals continue with their noses in the public trough
telling the rest of us to "tighten out belts," and that the
"Age of entitlement" is over. Not for some it seems!

http://newmatilda.com/2015/07/16/calls-grow-chop-her-will-tony-abbott-check-bishops-privilege

Here's another website on the kind of Speaker we
have in our House of Reps:

http://www.canberratimes.com.au/comment/why-is-bronwyn-bishop-meddling-in-matters-that-don't-concern-her-20150619-ghs7as.html

Fox,

Six of one and half a dozen of the other.

What about Quentin Bryce's travel as GG during Ms Gillard's days? Did you spit the 'outrage' dummy over that and if not why not? See here,

<Governor-General Quentin Bryce's Africa trip cost $700,000

TAXPAYERS paid a huge $700,000 for Governor-General Quentin Bryce's controversial trek to Africa to help win a seat for Australia on the UN Security Council.

The Herald Sun can reveal the spending blow-out includes nearly $300,000 paid to diplomats and government officials to organise the 18-day odyssey in March and April.

The Governor-General, who has been heavily criticised over her lobbying for the Federal Government, spent $64,000 on food, accommodation and gifts during the 10-country visit.

Flying Ms Bryce and her entourage to Africa on a VIP aircraft cost at least $350,000, based on estimates of similar overseas travel.

The revelation comes days after Parliament was told 30 of Ms Bryce's staff of 85 quit since her appointment a year ago.
..
Ms Bryce said her office "takes a prudent approach in relation to all expenditure".>
http://www.news.com.au/national/governor-general-quentin-bryces-africa-trip-cost-700000/story-e6frfkvr-1225791918139

While one should expect a reasonable standard of travel and sometimes it is necessary and prudent to provide transport and support to ensure a quicker and more reliable travel, the Parliament is there to question and apply the 'sniff' test of discretion.

In the case of the Speaker, the LNP was quick to step forward to query what had been arranged. Someone erred in judgement and it cost the Speaker from her own money. Paid back, move on.

Beach,

Isn't representing Australia's interests overseas part of our acting head of state's job?

Party fundraising events are certainly not the job of the Speaker of the House.

Good to see you're resisting "tit-for-tat", otb....

(Btw, Bronnie's been referred to the AFP)

Abbott knights people, and Bishop thinks she's a Queen. However, Bishop is a pawn for Abbott. It's a bored game, and the taxpayer gets bored.

Oh I don't know, maybe Bronny isn't the worst of the Pollies out spending our money.
Check out Chrissy Pyne and his wife's April trip to Europe:

http://m.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/questions-arise-over-christopher-pynes-taxpayerfunded-trip-with-his-wife-to-london-and-rome-20140922-10k6zr.html?stb=twt

Fancy arranging a $1,000+ room for the day to 'work' in before flying home?
Surely a laptop and a chair in a cafe etc at the airport would be sufficient?

You speak with much wisedom I think david F all the peoples from Africa who will drown at sea if the Europesn people don't help them all, is very cruel I think. And what it is you say is very right we must have a brave heart and help all the poor people who come to Europe by boat. Please a big question for you david f. please? Why don't Australie help all the people do you think? Is it they are racest and don't like the black people or mean here in Australie? We have a very big nation here with lots of land all around and can fit millions and millions of more people here. Plenty of water and cows and grains and know how to make many things so why not bring the African people here who know how to live in the desterts and the bush properly?

Dear misanthrope,

I appreciate your compliments. Although we are a big country our resources are limited. Although we have an area approximately the size of the US we only have 3% of the fresh water that the US has. Our soil is leached out and much of it is unsuitable for agriculture. Spreading cities and mining are taking up arable land. In 2013 Australia had 23.13 million people. It is estimated that at about 30 million people we will no longer be able to export food. Above that we will need to import food to feed our population. What do we get it from? Most other countries have their own expanding population. We can't easily absorb millions more.

Like the Australian people most African people do not live in the deserts. African deserts are very large but also thinly populated. We can only take in a small number of asylum seekers. However, we do not have to place asylum seekers in detention centres like concentration camps, and there is no reason we cannot get together with other nations and try to make things better in countries where people are suffering from poverty, oppression and war.

As I wrote in my previous post “Limiting the flow of arms, population control, education – especially for women and equitable sharing of the earth’s resources are some of what can be done. Instead of seeing how tough and mean we can be let’s do what we can to make matters better.”

Still waiting for a left whinger to comment on Juliar's $140 000 jet ride to a labor fundraiser.

There have been abuses of entitlements by people in all the major parties. However, since the speaker is supposed to act as a neutral person whose duties include keeping the house in order perhaps the speaker should be a person who has not been politically active in any party. I see no reason that the speaker should be a member of parliament and associated with a political party. That is a built-in conflict of interest. Bronnie is acting as a Lib partisan. A Labor member can be expected to act as a Labor partisan. The speaker should be neutral and not associated with a party.

David,

Don't you remember questions being asked about Harry Jenkins throwing elaborate receptions for Labor party donors at taxpayers' expense?

Are the left whingers suffering from collective amnesia?

Personally I would prefer a zero tolerance approach for every politician who gets caught out. No excuses what-so-ever and no second chances. And that includes any of them who received donations that go unreported until they are discovered.

If the pollies knew the jig would be up if they get caught, they wouldn't try, unless they were completely greedy and/or stupid (which many of them probably are).

These people are on $200,000+ salaries and then try to diddle the tax payers for a $20 taxi ride. Get out, we don't want you! Stretching that to tax payer funded holidays, chartering private jets and helicopter rides, these crooks deserve no mercy because they know damn well what they are doing is wrong.

Weed out the crooks, no matter who they are.

Dear Shadow Minister,

You apparently are stuck with arguing right winger - left winger. You just can't see a neutral person in there who would be above party. Rather than argue with, "Your side are worse dirty dogs." it would seem better to have a no tolerance approach as CH suggested. No party is immune to dirty doggery. No party is immune to people who, when one of their party is caught doing the dirty, instead of acknowledging that, will talk about the dirty dogs in the other party.

Matthew 7:3 King James Version (KJV)

3 And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?

//This woman is an insulting joke at the best of times and now has been uncovered ripping off the hard working tax payer.//

Disgusting. Play the ball and not the woman. If you can't find solid grounds on which to attack policy then you should remain silent. Attacking politicians when you should be attacking their policies is just weak.

I heard that Juliar Just spent $450k of taxpayers money upgrading her office.

Lets call the feds.

Shadow
The whole point about your old gal Bishop is did she spend tax payers funds illegally.if so let's string her up, figuratively speaking.. It was your bloke Tone who set the standard as to how Speakers should be dealt with, just ask Slippery Pete.

Self importance and blinding faith, not what Tony wanted right now. Abbott wants to run a DD election against the workers, we can only hope it don't take forever to get off the ground. We need to get this country going again, the experiment has failed miserably.

I think Browyn should go however the pathetically low standard set by the Greens/Labour in appointing Gillard, Hanson Young and Shorten leave them with zero moral authority. What a sad state of affairs. The poor ex NSW Premier that was badgered out of leadership over a bottle of wine could only shake his head. At least he can live with himself I suppose.

Dear Shadow Minister,

It seems that what David F., pointed out to you had no
impact whatsoever - and you're back with the same
finger-pointing tactics.

We could all use the advice he gave
you because as we know no political party is immune from
corruption and as Conservative-Hippie stated - those that
do commit fraud should be punished - especially the Speaker
of the House who is supposed to set behavioural standards
for politicians. Therefore she should be called to explain
her recent behaviour - which clearly had nothing to do with
her job.

You brought up the issue of our former Prime Minister spending
on an office-fit out. That is within her entitlement -
unfortunately for the taxpayer.

All of our former Prime Ministers
currently receive their six figure pensions plus a driver for life,
an office and staff, and free travel for themselves and their
families.

According to various
sources on the web - our former PMs cost taxpayers almost $1 million
each - in office expenses and travel in the space of 12 months.

Isn't the point of retirements - to retire, not set up shop
in another office paid for by the taxpayer. Surely a $100,000 pension
would suffice?

Hi Foxy,
I disagree I actually support the 'looking after' of X-PM's in the way we do. I think they made a significant contribution as PM then still can be of service after retirement . That is something we should recognise. Even Howard made his contribution in his own way. Bishop has had a long stint in parliament but her contribution amounts to zero. a self serving individual if ever there was one.

Paul,

Other long serving MPs that have made zero contribution, Bob Brown. Sarah Hansen Young, Christine Milne, Lea Rhiannon, Juliar Gillard, K Rudd etc.

The singular problem that the Pedogreens and labor have in going after BB is that they all agreed to the Minchin protocol which allows MPs to claim expenses subject to review by the dept of Finance, and to repay expenses that don't comply. The sole requirement is that all expenses are submitted to Finance. Thus the reason that the federal police told labor to piss off.

Foxy,

You still haven't addressed the issue of Juliar using a jet to travel to a labor fundraiser. She has neither paid the money back nor been prosecuted.

Dear Shadow Minister,

When you begin to address issues regarding the
wrong-doings of all political parties instead of just
singling out the Labor party - I shall be happy
to continue the discussion with you.

Dear Paul,

Surely receiving huge pension payouts (six figures) is sufficient
for any former PM. All the added perks and entitlements
at the taxpayer's expense for life seems more than generous.
Especially when the rest of the population has to "tighten
its belts."

Don't agree Shadow,
I will acknowledge that say Liberal Phil Ruddock in a long career has made a significant contribution but Bishop has been nothing more than a waste of space. Put up anything of value this woman has done. Anything that has not been self serving and to her own benefit.

Foxy,

When you begin to address issues regarding the
wrong-doings of all political parties instead of just
singling out the Liberal party - I shall believe you.

Paul,

Bishop held ministerial portfolios during the Howard Government, serving as Minister for Defence Industry, Science and Personnel from 1996 to 1998 and as Minister for Aged Care from 1998 to 2001. In October 2014, she surpassed Kathy Sullivan's record for the longest period of parliamentary service by a woman.

That's for starters, far more than Brown, Rhiannon, Milne or SHY. So please stop presenting your ignorant opinions as fact.

Bronnie just told us she came all the way from Queensland to Melbourne to take her helicopter ride to Geelong.

Were there "any" govt commitments on this trip?

Or was the whole itinerary a means to an end to the fundraiser?

More questions - flights, com cars, accommodation.

Of course, Bronnie keeps bleating that it was all "within guidelines", taking time out as the "independent" Speaker during her press conference to slam Bill Shorten and the carbon tax : )

SM,

If I was to link to articles demonstrating Coalition rorts, it would probably take up my whole 8 daily posts in the general section.

What usually happens is they stage a quick press conference or waft through a hospital on their way to the fundraiser so it's "within guidelines".

(Poor old Bronnie slipped up there)

Barnaby hitched a taxpayer-funded lift back to Oz from the Indian Wedding for he and his wife, by staging a one day "study tour" in Malaysia on the way home...producing a "report" which could have just as easily been sourced from Wikipedia.

Here's a good one...

"TONY Abbott has flown to Sydney for a 20-minute press conference on foreign investment during a parliamentary sitting week despite the nation’s political journalists all remaining in Canberra.

The Prime Minister fired up the VIP jet, with its RAAF flight attendants and first class service, for a quick trip to Sydney to unveil the government’s foreign investment options paper along with his Treasurer Joe Hockey."

http://www.news.com.au/national/politics/tony-abbott-uses-vip-jet-to-fly-to-sydney-for-a-20-minute-press-conference-on-foreign-investment/story-fns0jze1-1227238411558

Lol!

Last year Madam Speaker spent $309,000 on overseas
travel including $88,000 on a two week-trip to Europe
in pursuit of a plum job.

Madam Speaker, according to
the Sydney Morning Herald also hosts Liberal Party
fund-raisers in her Parliament House Speaker's suite.

The Speaker's office if meant to be owned by Parliament.
It is not a venue for hire.

The Parliament is not owned
by the government of the day. It is owned by the people and
it is highly inappropriate for the people's home to be used
as a fund-raising arm of a political party. The Speaker is also supposed to be impartial politically.

An Editorial in The Age also states that this woman should depart
the Speaker's chair and why:

http://www.theage.com.au/comment/the-age-editorial/bronwyn-bishop-should-depart-the-speakers-chair-20150717-gieznj.html

Dear Shadow Minister,

I have pointed out things that other political parties
have done wrong in the past and I shall continue to do so.
However, the current government has done the most wrong
to date. And, I therefore feel obliged as a good
citizen to continue to point out their wrong-doings, otherwise
they will simply continue.

What is your excuse for continuing to sledge Labor and the
Greens, neither party is in government - whilst remaining
silent on the wrongs committed by the current government?

Nothing can excuse this hags rorting and disgraceful conduct as speaker.
Resign leaner!

Juliar spent $140 000 on a jet to fly to a labor fund raising event. I take from the dumb silence that everyone here acknowledges that she is a crook?

Everyone keeps on throwing in figures about money spent. The problem is that every single speaker in the past has done pretty much the same. It should be taken as compensation for BB having continually remove the trash from parliament.

SM,

".... The problem is that every single speaker in the past has done pretty much the same..."

Lol!....where's yer evidence?

You just blather away these days.

Shadow,
All you are telling us from your posts is that the old sow has had her snout in the taxpayer trough for a long time. As a minister she was about the worse we ever had!

Quoting from The Age Editorial, given earlier:

"As the Speaker of the House of Representatives it is Mrs
Bishop's role to set an example of fairness and propriety
to her fellow members of Parliament and, to represent those
values to the community at large for the greater benefit of the
institution."

"Time and again Mrs Bishop has demonstrated she has little
regard for the important principle that the Speaker, while
normally selected by the governing party, should seek to act
impartially while in the position. According to the Parliamentary
website - "Members are entitled to expect that the Speaker
functions will be carried out impartially."

"In this regard Mrs Bishop's performance in the chair has been
poor. She has set a record for ejecting Opposition Members.
Her tally at last count stood at 400 (Labor) to 7 (Coalition)."

Her position is untenable.

cont'd ...

No other Speaker in the past Labor or Liberal
has behaved in such a biased manner to the
detriment of the Parliamentary image and the
role of the Speaker.

She will go down in history as an example of
unacceptable behaviour in the Speaker's Chair.
Unfortunately the damage has already been done and
the only way to save the disaster is to remove her
from this position so that further damage will not
occur.

"Her tally at last count stood at 400 (Labor) to 7 (Coalition)"

However it is largely the same members being ejected for the same un-Parliamentary behaviour.

The Labor Opposition has a goal of 'proving' something by having its members ejected.

The Public is awake to that.

The Labor Opposition is short on policies. The Public, referred to sneeringly by the ABC(!) and Labor as 'punters' - the ABC must have a lot of gamblers on its staff - have a lot of commonsense and can be trusted to remember at election time Labor's foolish time-wasting in the federal Parliament.

She is going to go...it's just a matter of when.

She managed to dig herself deeper into the hole during today's presser.

Regarding her role as Speaker - and the ridiculous anomalies that exist between her treatment of the govt and the Opposition.

One only has to watch her in action...

She regularly condones and even abets the govt in its efforts not to be relevant to the questions.

She regularly overlooks unparliamentary language - doesn't pull govt members into line for failing to address members opposite by their appropriate title - says nothing when they purposely abuse members opposite in an unarliamentary fashion...eg, "Electricity Bill" (merely one example).

I've lost count of the number of times she's dismissed points of order without listening to them...and many a time a point of order is raised because she has allowed govt speakers to run rampant.

She's booted members under 94A for raising legitimate points of order.

She consistently screws up member's titles or the gets confused as to what or whom she is calling.

She is an unmitigated disgrace in the role of Speaker.

@ remunerations of $250,000pa plus, taxpayers would like to see some return for their money.

The antics in the federal Parliament are an insult to the hardworking men and women who are the exasperated taxpayers who must pay for that juvenile behaviour.

It is not true is it, that higher pay for politicians results in improved performance.

The position of parliamentary speaker has been compromised spectacularly with a $65 / km junket on a mates chopper.
She will be held to account by public opinion. The worst act of pigery we have ever seen.

doog,

Julia Gillard lived high on the hog, especially where international travel was concerned.

Maybe you and some others here are not taxpayers. Otherwise you and they would be more concerned about paying so much for so many members of parliament, only to have the money wasted on shabby antics and time-wasting.

As it stands, few of them would survive five days in the private sector.

Of course, while the tabloid media dumbs you out, what else might be expected? The ABC is doing its best (worst!) to earn its gathering reputation for being trite, sensationalist and tabloid.

Go for it, otb - I think you'll be battling to scratch around for someone to top Bronnie's taxpayer- funded decadence.

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/bronwyn-bishop-slugs-taxpayers-1000-a-day-for-private-limo-costs-20150718-gifasi.html

Fairfax Media can reveal the Speaker racked up a $14,000 limo bill in a little over a fortnight during her European trip in October.

On the same trip, Mrs Bishop's four fellow delegates spent between $1200 and $2800 each on ground transport. They typically travelled by public transport or in more modest embassy-arranged cars.

"There was a black BMW carting her around like royalty," said a source involved with the trip. "She wasn't about to take her eight-inch heels on the subway."

"Mrs Bishop and her staff also spent $42,000 on flights and $25,000 on meals and accommodation. The other parliamentarians – the Coalition's Nola Marino and Cory Bernardi and Labor's Glenn Sterle and Tony Zappia – each spent a fraction of those amounts.

The trip was partly aimed at securing Mrs Bishop a plum new job. She was running for president of the Inter-Parliamentary Union, a democracy group based in Switzerland. She lost the vote to Bangladesh's candidate."

Good old Bangladesh done Australia, not surprising on the quality of our applicant. Even the Swiss need something to look at.

Snorters at the trough. It be good to see some of that parliamentary privilege be left over, handed back and donated to a charity.

LOL, what with Julia Gillard, Quentin Bryce and now Bronwyn Bishop the women have set a very high bar for any who follow that is for sure. That is in how to live high on the hog.

However the rules such as they are and the measures, the necessarily subjective and flexible yard-sticks, are set by the politicians, who say that they are answerable in the House and ultimately, to the people.

Of course where Australia's first female PM saw herself as deserving pay higher than O'bummer, President of the USofA and the British PM, it is only to be expected that she and other pollies too might regard themselves as worthy of a limo and a flight or few.

Leaving all of that to one side, I don't particularly care who it is, private sector CEO or politician, they can all fall prey to the syndrome where they believe in their own importance and may even regard the organisation's or government's assets as their own. Not implying any of that in respect of the Speaker, where the result of the Labor inspired AFP investigation must be awaited.

Also, most taxpayers, shareholders too, don't really mind if their leaders gain some status benefits to make up for their exhausting, demanding roles that leave little room for a personal life.

They (taxpayers and shareholders) want to see some productivity and quality in return and the politicians who would criticise the Speaker haven't exactly been so helpful in maintaining order, productivity and efficiency in the House either.

Taking Shorten and Labor as the example, they have shown no interest whatsoever in the problems of Struggle-town (ABC), but they are long on same sex marriage and playing the fool in the Parliament. That represents no return whatsoever for the $250,000+pa each gets paid, let alone their other personal overheads (that they aren't talking about).

otb,

A minor correction for you:

The Remuneration Tribunal, an independent statutory body
is the body that determines pay raises for MPs.
The Remuneration for Members of Parliament is set entirely
independently of government and of Members of Parliament.
It is appropriate that this is a non-political process.
Blaming former Prime Minsters is simply wrong.
Parliament does not have the power to knock back or approve
pay raises. The pay raises are automatic.

The Tribunal has said it - "considers it important that
remuneration in its jurisdiction is maintained at appropriate
levels over the longer term to attract and retain people of the
calibre required for these important high level offices."

That seems fair enough - when you consider that company
CEOs and others in top paying positions earn in the millions.
What we do need to question are the mis-used entitlements and perks
that come on top of their salaries and the entitlements of our
former PMs, GGs, and other retired politicians. These do need
closer scrutiny and questioning as the recent incident with
Madam Speaker shows.

Fox,

Did Julia Gillard ever vote to receive that increase?

Now, what about addressing what I said, instead of deciding the question uou want to answer and ignoring everything else?

Here, copied for you,

<Leaving all of that to one side, I don't particularly care who it is, private sector CEO or politician, they can all fall prey to the syndrome where they believe in their own importance and may even regard the organisation's or government's assets as their own. Not implying any of that in respect of the Speaker, where the result of the Labor inspired AFP investigation must be awaited.

Also, most taxpayers, shareholders too, don't really mind if their leaders gain some status benefits to make up for their exhausting, demanding roles that leave little room for a personal life.

They (taxpayers and shareholders) want to see some productivity and quality in return and the politicians who would criticise the Speaker haven't exactly been so helpful in maintaining order, productivity and efficiency in the House either.

Taking Shorten and Labor as the example, they have shown no interest whatsoever in the problems of Struggle-town (ABC), but they are long on same sex marriage and playing the fool in the Parliament. That represents no return whatsoever for the $250,000+pa each gets paid, let alone their other personal overheads (that they aren't talking about).>
[onthebeach, Sunday, 19 July 2015 9:55:52 AM]

As with senior managers and particularly CEOs in private enterprise, their equivalents in the public sector and politicians must exercise discretion in the use of their powers and their use of benefits and assets.

It should come as no surprise that travel is very often problematical.

Public disclosure, transparency and reporting should be supplemented by regular independent audits.

Labor sought and obtained AFP investigation. In that case I assume that all here would be happy and apologising if the Speaker has done nothing illegal.

My concern though is that each and every one of those well remunerated politicians should be producing quality decisions to the value of their Executive level (APS, SES) remuneration and conditions.

"FORMER Prime Minister Kevin ‘747’ Rudd lived up to his nickname in his final weeks in office, splurging $500,000 on taxpayer-funded VIP plane flights in just five weeks. New documents tabled in Parliament reveal after Mr Rudd was reinstalled by the ALP caucus in June, 2013, his VIP travel bill was running at $100,000 a week. That was the average weekly cost of his VIP flights until he called the federal election on August 4."

"AUSTRALIAN Federal Police have widened an investigation into alleged rorting in the parliamentary office of new labor Speaker Peter Slipper, as scrutiny of his taxpayer-funded entitlements shows he claimed nearly $1100 a day on travel and other expenses during the first half of the year."

Labor leads the way on taxpayer funded expenditure.

SM,

It's useless to get involved in a slanging match about pollies expenses if you're set on defending the Coalition.

Actually, I'm a little surprised #choppergate has taken off like it has. These things are usually toughed out - and eventually they blow over.

Not this time methinks....

Bronnies got a lot of righties calling for her to resign.

http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/opinion/party-games-precedent-gives-pm-tony-abbott-no-cause-to-complain-about-bronwyn-bishops-helicopter-ride-being-referred-to-police/story-fnihsr9v-1227446371591

Dennis Atkins

"TONY Abbott is the last person who should complain about Labor referring to the Federal Police the rorted helicopter ride undertaken by his Speaker Bronwyn Bishop.

In his time in Opposition and as Prime Minister, Abbott has done more than any other Australian politician to criminalise politics in this country.

Along with George Brandis, now Attorney-General, Abbott was always keen to refer to the police any suggested wrongdoing by any Labor MP.

After winning power, Abbott set up two royal commissions with the express aim of litigating behaviour of existing and previous Labor politicians, in particular the former prime ministers Kevin Rudd and Julia Gillard.

The royal commission into trade union activities has more recently turned into political pursuit of Labor leader Bill Shorten.

Now Abbott’s hand-picked Speaker has been caught out billing $5000 to the taxpayer for a luxury helicopter ride from Melbourne to Geelong, a journey that might take an hour and a bit by cab for a few hundred dollars.

To make this absence of decorum worse, Bishop fleeced the public purse to attend a Liberal Party fundraising lunch which cannot in any way be labelled official business related to her role as a presiding officer of the Parliament."

"Abbott and his party have been hit by the inevitable payback from Labor and they have no one to blame but themselves."

otb,

Neither Julia Gillard nor Tony Abbott nor any other
MP have the power to knock back or approve pay raises.
The pay raises are automatic and as stated earlier -
The Remuneration Tribunal - an independent statutory body is
the body that determines pay raises for MPs. The remuneration for
members of parliament is set entirely independently of government
and of members of parliament. It is appropriate that we
don't have a political process. We have a non-political process.
Stop trying to make it political.

Now back to the topic.

Mrs Bishop has not set a good record in her role as Speaker.
And considering the Coalition's attempted pursuits of Labor's
"wrong-doings" in the past and currently of Mr Shorten, it is mot
surprising that Labor is now pursuing Mrs Bishop's mis-use
of MPs entitlements to the full letter of the law.

Pointing out the facts that "this side or that side did it
much worse" - only muddies the waters as David F., and
Conservative-Hippie pointed out earlier. It does not change the
fact that it should not have happened - and for someone who is
supposed to set an example for others - the role of the Speaker
must be above reproach. Mrs Bishop in punishing others for their
behaviour in parliament should now resign for her own bad behaviour.
She has lost the confidence of many of her parliamentary members.
Her position in untenable.

The coalition defenders seem to live in the past or is that me seeing things that are not there.
They should come up to present day and argue their point out allowed.

The payrise dispute goes through parliament because it is an expense on taxpayers. A formality which is never questioned.

Labour are very good people who look after working people like me and my brother and my wife and kids. This lady is stealing from the people who pay her wages by going in a helacoptor a very short way. Me if I did such a stealing thing I would be in the jail I think but she is very big in the Australien government and the cops don't catch her. I think it is wrong what she did $5000 dollars is very lot of money for me and my family so why did she fly at such a cost?

The Libs deleted Abbott's doorstop from the their site on the 15th....but ohno's! it's still urking around the web.

here's what Tony Abbott thinks is appropriate for a Speaker under a cloud:

http://web.archive.org/web/20120511152707/http://liberal.org.au/Latest-News/2012/04/21/Tony-Abbott-Doorstop-Peter-Slipper-MP.aspx

Tony Abbott:

"The Speaker is the guardian of parliamentary standards. The Speakership is one of the most important offices in the Parliament. The Speaker is there to uphold the integrity of the Parliament and now we have very, very serious allegations against the incumbent Speaker, allegations of sexual harassment and allegations of potentially criminal misuse of entitlements. These are very serious allegations indeed. Yes, the Speaker is entitled to the presumption of innocence but he does have quite a lot of explaining to do.

It’s also very important that the Prime Minister act to ensure the integrity of the Parliament. The Speaker is only in that office because the Prime Minister used her numbers late last year to install him. The Prime Minister, to uphold the integrity of the Parliament, needs now to require the Speaker to step down until these matters are resolved. It’s also incumbent upon the Australian Federal Police to swiftly investigate the potentially criminal allegations that have been made against the Speaker.

I can’t underestimate the seriousness of this. The Speaker is required to maintain parliamentary standards and yet there are now these extremely serious allegations against the Speaker himself. So in order to maintain the respect and the reputation of the Parliament, in order to preserve the integrity of the Government and our institutions, it is very important that the Prime Minister act swiftly to require the Speaker to step aside and it’s very important that the Australian Federal Police quickly investigate these matters so that they can be resolved as soon as is humanly possible."

....

SM,

I'll see your Gillard jet to a fundraiser - and raise you one Abbott jet to a fundraiser...

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/pm-tony-abbott-flies-on-taxpayer-funded-jet-to-liberal-donors-birthday-bash-at-huntingdale-golf-club/story-fni0fiyv-1227275585102#content

(What is it with Libs and taxpayer-funded frolics to the golf?)

Don't think we ever did find out what his official engagement was : )

Fox,

Once again you deliberately miss the point.

Here, copied for you again,

<Leaving all of that to one side, I don't particularly care who it is, private sector CEO or politician, they can all fall prey to the syndrome where they believe in their own importance and may even regard the organisation's or government's assets as their own. Not implying any of that in respect of the Speaker, where the result of the Labor inspired AFP investigation must be awaited.

Also, most taxpayers, shareholders too, don't really mind if their leaders gain some status benefits to make up for their exhausting, demanding roles that leave little room for a personal life.

They (taxpayers and shareholders) want to see some productivity and quality in return and the politicians who would criticise the Speaker haven't exactly been so helpful in maintaining order, productivity and efficiency in the House either.

Taking Shorten and Labor as the example, they have shown no interest whatsoever in the problems of Struggle-town (ABC), but they are long on same sex marriage and playing the fool in the Parliament. That represents no return whatsoever for the $250,000+pa each gets paid, let alone their other personal overheads (that they aren't talking about).>
[onthebeach, Sunday, 19 July 2015 9:55:52 AM]

and here,

<My concern though is that each and every one of those well remunerated politicians should be producing quality decisions to the value of their Executive level (APS, SES) remuneration and conditions.>

Perhaps you are happy with the childish displays and time-wasting in the federal Parliament but most taxpayers are not and their displeasure will be felt soon enough, in the next election.

Yes, it's certainly not a good look from our illustrious Speaker to indulge in such a public display of political munificence all funded by the wretched taxpayer ? Still I have absolutely no doubt she not the only politician who's engaged in such unconscionable behaviour ? In fact there's probable not a politician of ANY party who's not greedily fed at the public trough, all for their own benefit !

In fact, if we were all to be absolutely honest about it, most of us have sought (and received) a benefit of one sort or another, above that which we're not strictly entitled ?

The only way to stop it, is if the pollies themselves, enact strict measures to prevent ANY benefit from being given as a gift, inducement, bribe or whatever, on penalty of immediate expulsion from parliament, and as a sitting member of that parliament. That is until the next election takes place ! Then it's up to that (former) member's electorate to determine their judgement on that individual !

You can only have one party in power at a time, what exactly would you like Shorten to do.

Lets not say why he should be an alternative govt; There is no election as yet is there.
The coalition would love to know what the Labor camp is working on. Best not to please them.

One thing you can be assured it will not be fictitious like the coalitions last effort and took the people to the polls on a fraud. Lets have some decency please.

Just relax and let the world pass by like Abbott has done for 2 years and spent 100 billion on credit. A great deal of it on something we are not allowed to know about.

With respect POIROT, I do sometimes wonder, if deep down you don't harbour some sort of intensely held affection for our, outwardly, ill at ease Prime Minister ? According to some members of the 'Young Labour Women's League', he does cut a somewhat fetching athletic figure, when he's astride his publically funded surfboard, while bravely riding in mountainous seas off our rugged coastline ?

I'm reliably informed, his 'Close Protection' officers can only watch on, helplessly in vain, apparently not one of them, can hope to keep up with our hyper-active PM !

But that's OK, we all possess some deeply held secrets of our own personal nirvana. Or is it perhaps a case of requited endearment, brought about by a distant enviable 'love-hate' relationship ? Only to immerge when we allow ourselves to submit to 'in vino veritas' ? When all a our defences are impuissant ? And there's no doubt POIROT, you're always been vocally reproachful of Tony ABBOTT in everything he says, he does, in fact his entire existence, I should think ?

The point in the Speaker's case is that
she had access to a federally-funded, chauffeur-driven
ComCar that would have taken her to Geelong just as
quickly as the helicopter.
The helicopter was unnecessary. She could have
taken a car. She chose the helicopter without a second
thought.

The role of the Speaker is enshrined in Westminster convention.
The Speaker is meant to be independent, and her behaviour
above reproach.

Quite obviously, the Speaker
should not be using her taxpayer entitlements to raise money
for her own political party.

The fund-raiser was not official
parliamentary business. And, as Andrew Bolt pointed out (and
Peter Costello agreed) on today's "Bolt Report,"
Her behaviour was inexcusable.

And, - "it gets worse,"
there's even more to come that is currently under investigation.
A Report will be released shortly.

Hopefully out of all this - the
MPs perks and entitlements will receive closer scrutiny in the
future so this does not happen again.

In the meantime Mrs Bishop should follow Peter Slipper's
example and simply resign. It will be interesting to see
where Mr Abbott stands on this matter.
Perhaps he's waiting until the Report is released before he
acts.

For me this discussion has now run its course.
I'll see you all elsewhere on this forum.

Interesting times ahead as far as Canberra is
concerned.

Enjoy your evening.

Poirot,

I love it when you cock it up. The article to which you referred was TA flying to Melbourne on business where he also attended a birthday party that was not a fund raiser which was entirely within the rules.

Juliar flew to Brisbane solely for a labor fundraiser, which was an abuse, and Labor is still far ahead on abuse of taxpayers' money.

P.S. Brandis only referred Thomson to the police based on solid documentary evidence, on which he was later convicted. Slipper was referred by Ashby. Labor has referred many more cases to the AFP, all of which have been dismissed by the AFP as frivolous.

SM,

"....The article to which you referred was TA flying to Melbourne on business where he also attended a birthday party that was not a fund raiser which was entirely within the rules."

Keeping in mind that your utterances are usually just blatherings of hot air - can we have some details please?

"He started the day in Brisbane and flew to Sydney for the NSW Liberal election campaign launch with Premier Mike Baird before flying with a small group aboard the RAAF VIP plane to Melbourne.

Once he arrived at Huntingdale, the PM shed his tie and mingled with guests, enjoying crayfish and aged Wagyu beef with a glass of chardonnay. He also gave a speech in honour of Mr Marks."

Cough up the "business" particulars in Melbourne - because T.Abbott is amongst the most gifted rorters of the Coalition.

"....Slipper was referred by Ashby. Labor has referred many more cases to the AFP, all of which have been dismissed by the AFP as frivolous."

Erm...the original allegation by Ashby was thrown out by the AFP - who for some reason decided to go a-diggin' for more - and came up with the cab charges.

Which gives one a lot of faith in the AFP - since Abbott is currently embedded with them - oh look, they chucked it straight back to Finance, which is now overseen by the woman who covered up Howard's children overboard!

Poirot,

There is only one case of Any MP referred to the AFP by the libs, yet just recently we have Bishop and Dutton referred to the AFP by labor

Dear Shadow Minister,

I feel obliged to correct you regarding the former
PM, Julia Gillard's flight to Brisbane. You will
find that the rules surrounding the way the aircraft
are used for the Governor General, Minister of Defence,
and the Prime Minister, has been the same under successive
governments.

For example, former Prime Minister John Howard's use of the jet,
was exactly the same, including the Boxing Day Test at the
Melbourne Cricket Ground in 2006.

Ordinary MPs including the Speaker - were banned from using entitlements for party business
and of course the same rules should apply at the top.
But apparently they don't and Prime Ministers, Governor
Generals, and the Minister of Defence are in a class by themselves.

See you on another discussion.

I think it's time for The Liberals to do the right thing. With Abbott on one arm, and Pyne on the other, they should escort the old bag from the house to the nearest Canberra bus shelter, chuck her on the seat, leave her with a '$2.50 pensioner ticket', and say "Brommie, the next bus is in 2 hours, so, hasta la vista baby, love ya big time, good riddance, that's it sister, on ya bike! She might protests; "Where's my helicopter? Where's my helicopter?"

SM,

You'll enjoy this...

http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/07/18/1058035200830.html

"John Howard, too, was busy overseas last year, you'll remember.Very busy. And, like Trudy Clark and Heather Ruddock, Janette Howard went along as well, also at public cost. You'll likely be a bit stunned to learn what that cost was. That is, the cost during the calendar year 2002 of the overseas travels of the Prime Minister, wife and entourage. Total: $3,551,035. Yes, I blinked, too. For this the Howards went to the United States twice last year - for 10 days in January-February ($1.15 million) that included Singapore and Indonesia, and a week in June ($467,480). They also went to Britain twice, in March and April (total cost: $323,730), which included the Queen Mother's funeral.

Then there was the trek through Europe - Germany, Greece, Italy, Belgium and France - in the first fortnight of July. That was the trip that got all the publicity a few months back after we learnt, at Senate estimates, that our own Kirribilli royal couple had paid $171,000 - including a $10,000 late checkout fee - to spend four nights in the so-called royal suite of a swank Rome hotel. Those two weeks in Europe ended up costing Australian taxpayers a tick over a million dollars - $1,025,638. We got the final cost a few weeks ago on Parliament's last day before the winter recess."

(No I haven't been trawling - just happened to note it on twitter)

That is....."the cost during the calendar year 2002 of the overseas travels of the Prime Minister, wife and entourage. Total: $3,551,035."

We elect governments and give them the power to make laws that govern us.
One mistake we made though was allowing them to make laws that govern themselves.
I think "we the people" should make those laws and they should be set in stone, so that no elected government can change them.

I agree with David F and CH.
But I believe we should go one step further and put imprisonment for wrongdoing on the table for politicians to keep them honest.
Paying the money back is no deterrent for someone who gets a lifetime of entitlements, and I want to see them keep their election promises - the campaign they made to win office with - by law.

Right now, if Labor is in no position to criticise, because of its own past wrongdoings, then what we have to accept is that our system of government is not working for us.
- Its not working in our best interests.

Toni Lavis,
While I disagree with you in that I think that the witch-hunt against BB is at least somewhat valid, that I think if she treats her job as speaker with bias and therefore contempt for the Australian people then its only fair the Australian people have every right to treat her with contempt when she does wrongdoing herself... That said, In the bigger context you are right.

Going after these politicians for doing the wrong thing is really a pointless exercise if we aren't going to take steps to prevent if from happening.
In fact, getting mad detracts from doing what needs to be done and changing the system.

Really, its not the politicians fault.
We've done this to ourselves.

It's our fault for giving them the tools that enabled them to take us for a ride in the first place.

Its really only fair you know.
If they have the power to make the laws which govern us, then there should be a balance of power and we should make laws that govern them.

They should not have the power to make laws which govern themselves.

AC

We the people do not have the power to spontaneously make laws, how do you propose we overcome that?

Poirot, too right, King Johnny and Queen Janette were easily our biggest spenders both in and out of office. I think it has something to do with The Liberals belief that they have a divine right to rule.

Hmmm...there appears to be no level to which Abbott won't sink in his attempts to hang onto the services of his most biased Speaker.

According to Emperor Tones - Bronnie is now "on probation". (oddly something that suggests some sort of conviction!)

"Tony Abbott says embattled Speaker Bronwyn Bishop is on probation after copping a "justifiable hiding" over her travel expenses.

"She will learn a very salutary lesson, a very, very salutary lesson," he told reporters in Sydney amid renewed Labor calls for her head.

Mr Abbott confirmed the Speaker still enjoyed his confidence.

"But like everyone who has done something like this, inevitably, for a period of time, they are on probation."

http://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/2015/07/20/bronwyn-bishop-probation-abbott-0

Lol! - not just a very salutary lesson - but a "very very" salutary lesson!

Heaps of shock, horror over the Speaker's indiscretion, now repaid in full plus a penalty.

Nothing from Labor on Struggle Streets though. It is all a question of priorities, apparently.

<[Ex-Labor Leader Mark Latham] said the biggest social issue facing Austalia was unemployment, drug use and homelessness in suburbs such as Mt Druitt which was the focus of the SBS documentary, Struggle Street.

“If you are interested in equality and social justice in Australia then what was the really big event in the month of May,” he said. “We had the Struggle Street documentary which revealed that in the nation’s public housing estate, most notably in Mt Druit people live in conditions that you wouldn’t wish upon your dogs. Absolute chaos, despair and hopelessness in their lives.

“And surely, you would have expected a serious national response from the party of social justice?

“We didn’t hear anything.

“They’re obsessed, instead, by gay marriage.” (and pursuing 'that' woman)
http://tinyurl.com/p6kts6c

Poirot,

I think that we have shown that inappropriate expenditure of taxpayers' money is a charge that can be leveled at just about every politician at any stage. It is just wildly hypocritical for Labor to be calling for BB to resign whilst supporting Shorten's $40 000 bribe, and doing nothing about their members that were caught spending more.

I'm sure that BB has learnt her lesson and will continue doing a fine job as speaker.

Paul1405, "..they should escort the old bag from the house to the nearest Canberra bus shelter, chuck her on the seat, leave her with a '$2.50 pensioner ticket', and say "Brommie, the next bus is in 2 hours, so, hasta la vista baby, love ya big time, good riddance, that's it sister, on ya bike!"

The ageism of the Greens.

"Whoever you vote for you get a politician!" [and all that encapsulates rather than a 'true' representative of the people] . . . and whose fault is that I hear some of the ubiquitous 'they' intone . . . .

Its not often I agree with Poirot and Paul but I do agree Bronwyn Bishop should step down... all the way down, resign from politics. It would be even better if Abbott showed the balls to force her out, but we know he won't.

Unfortunately for us, a person who says 'get your facts right, it wasn't $90,000 it was $88,000', shows just how arrogant she really is.

Poirot, I don't understand why you used this quote as though it proves ones again TA is terrible "Tony Abbott says embattled Speaker Bronwyn Bishop is on probation after copping a "justifiable hiding" over her travel expenses." To me it shows he recognises exactly what is going on and he's put her on notice.

Abbott was speaking about taking action (putting her on probation) when it was revealed she has used another helicopter since the Geelong incident.

Come on Poirot, you hate TA, that's clear, but is Abbott's support for Bishop any different than Gillard's when she was protecting Craig Thompson? You were defending her back then, spouting Thompson was innocent until proven guilty BS, but no such latitude for Bishop, who really has done nothing compared to the outright crook Thompson. This is an example of the true to form Poirot that really gets up my nose.

Hi CH,

"Poirot, I don't understand why you used this quote as though it proves ones again TA is terrible "Tony Abbott says embattled Speaker Bronwyn Bishop is on probation after copping a "justifiable hiding" over her travel expenses." To me it shows he recognises exactly what is going on and he's put her on notice."

This is Abbott holding onto Bronwyn for dear life. This is an example of Abbott not reading the writing on the wall.

We now have a Speaker "on probation".

I agree with you, CH. If it's good enough for Abbott to spout that she's on probation - then he should ask her to step down.

"On probation" - have you ever heard of such a thing?

My take is that it's a last ditch effort to douse the inferno with a bucket of water.

Yup - I did defend the process of law regarding Thomson - as at the time I was arguing he hadn't been found guilty (and has since had the findings of guilt overturned, if my memory serves)

Have you got a problem with that?

And where is the corollary between Bishop and Thomson?

She took a ride in a copter to a Lib fundraiser on Taxpayer's money. She's admitted that. She says she paid it back coz it was "large".

Why, if she maintains it was within guidelines, would she pay it back because it was "large"?

Because it wasn't within guidelines, and she knows it. Going to a Lib fundraiser to talk about the role of Speaker doesn't make it official business.

She hasn't apologised - except to say that she's sorry it all overshadowed the govt's attack on Shorten.

How's that for an "independent" Speaker?

What a joke!

This speaker Bronnie Biship is very bad to waste money on flying a short way in a helicoptor instead of a car ride. Onthebeach you say some silly things about labour party when they are the only ones who look after all the working peoples and the people on the boats and the poor people. I think you get lots of money from the pension department yourself and yet you critise the Labour party for doing all this being the right thing. Please be grateful instead of nasty all the time Onthebeach you are a strange man I think, take government money you critise still why?

Poirot is a man who seems rude to everybody all the time and I ask why is he like that to? No need to be angery just be nice to every person if you do not like them or do not agree with them, no need to be angery with every persons. I think maybe you are a bit ill or sick maybe, or even a lonely man I think?

"Poirot is a man who seems rude to everybody all the time and I ask why is he like that to? No need to be angery just be nice to every person if you do not like them or do not agree with them, no need to be angery with every persons. I think maybe you are a bit ill or sick maybe, or even a lonely man I think?"

Lol!

"On probation" - have you ever heard of such a thing? Cue the faux dumb expression.

Yes I have, it is a very common practice in employment and disciplinary procedures.

Don't try to make such a big deal out of nothing. Obviously Abbott is using the term probation to indicate he won't tolerate more screw-ups.

Poirot, everyone in the country new Craig Thompson was a crook and guilty of the allegations against him. Everyone in the country knew the only reason Gillard was saving him was to save her fragile balance of power. It was never about waiting until he had his day in court. Gillard blew her integrity with just about everyone except you, over the Thompson affair. Don't pretend you can't see a correlation, you are smarter than that.

What colour is the eye patch, just out of curiosity? Red I suppose.

A matter of time, it is not possible to head parliament any more she has overstepped her position with collective arrogance and bias. Her political leanings keep rising to the top.

Not what Abbott wanted right now but he is not making anything easier for himself either. Probation is for new starters not old boilers.

As usual Abbott does not take any notice of his own party, this could even start another leadership row. So be it he doesn't enjoy much of his party's faith, not surprising at all.

What makes Abbott think his antics at the last election will be forgiven. He went to an election with fraudulent promises, to deceive the electorate, and now wants to tell the electorate what Bishop done is ok. Abbott and Bishop are showing unprecedented arrogance

LOL, misanthrope,

It was ex-Labor Leader Mark Latham who criticised Labor and the quotes and source are there for you.

Your English teacher is losing her fight with you to improve your reading comprehension.

Here you go, read it again and maybe out loud,

<Former Labor leader Mark Latham slams Labor over gay marriage
[Ex-Labor Leader Mark Latham] said the biggest social issue facing Austalia was unemployment, drug use and homelessness in suburbs such as Mt Druitt which was the focus of the SBS documentary, Struggle Street.

“If you are interested in equality and social justice in Australia then what was the really big event in the month of May,” he said. “We had the Struggle Street documentary which revealed that in the nation’s public housing estate, most notably in Mt Druit people live in conditions that you wouldn’t wish upon your dogs. Absolute chaos, despair and hopelessness in their lives.

“And surely, you would have expected a serious national response from the party of social justice?

“We didn’t hear anything.

“They’re obsessed, instead, by gay marriage.” (and pursuing 'that' woman)>
http://tinyurl.com/p6kts6c
Posted by onthebeach, Monday, 20 July 2015 3:01:44 PM

CH,

"Poirot, everyone in the country new Craig Thompson was a crook and guilty of the allegations against him...."

Not surprising at all that you should comment thus. I suppose you would also be a fan of tossing out the rule of law a la Peter "You don't need too much evidence. It's an administrative decision" Dutton.

I quite like the rule of law...but of course it's not a patch on right-wingers telling us all what they "knew".

What's the correlation, CH?

Bishop admits a chopper flight on taxpayer's money - says it's within guidelines...and then when she's sprung, pays it back because it's "large".

Not to mention all the other largesse she's showered upon herself that now seems to be trickling out into common knowledge.

My point being that if Abbott sees fit to put an experienced pollie on notice - a grand dame of the party, no less - "on probation" as some mealy-mouthed gesture to shut down the debacle then something is very wrong.

If the situation is serious enough to put someone like Bishop on probation, then it's obvious she should step down.

She's not an inexperienced and green novice who took a faltering step - she's well-versed in all the rules and regulations...in the past coming down hard on those who flouted them.

Probation, my foot!

Don't hang her out to dry yet. Save it for another payback Royal Commission to be launched by the next post-Lib Government to repay them for their witch-hunts against Rudd, Gillard and Shorten and the public furors over Q and A and over Professor Triggs. Future Royal Commissions should be specified and promised during the election campaign and acted on without fail to show that Labor delivers on election promises.

Actually the first payback should bring on the election: block supply to pay for 1975.

What a gas,

Bill Shorten just got caught out spending taxpayers money on travelling to a fundraiser in 2013.

What a hypocrite.

What about a Royal Commission or maybe just a powerful microscope to find Labor's concern for the big social issues such as unemployment, drug use and homelessness in suburbs such as Mt Druitt which was the focus of the SBS documentary, Struggle Street.

Call Mark Latham as the first witness.

I would like to add one final website for
people to read. It presents quite a few facts
that I did not know and some others on this forum
may not know them either. It has made me see things
from another perspective, which I don't think can be a
bad thing for others to consider as well.

The article is written by Paula Mattewson, about 9 hours
ago. Paula Mattewson is a freelance communications adviser
and corporate writer. She was media advisor to John Howard
in the early 1990s:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-07-20/matthewson-bishop-should-resign-over-incompetence-not-bias/6632516

Bishop has been a member of the Federal Parliament since 1987, almost 30 years now in both the Senate and the House of Reps. Over that long period Bishop has cost the ever suffering taxpayer literally millions in pay, as well as all the lurks and perks she has freely availed herself of. Can anyone say with honesty this woman has been value for money for the taxpayer, what have been her finest achievement? Was it her 1994 support for tobacco advertising. Was it her parading around in a army tank in 1997, or was it her failure as Aged Care Minister and the kerosene baths scandal in her department in 2000, or was it being drop kicked from the ministry in 2001. No, all those wonderful achievements pale into insignificance compared to Bronnie's co-star roll with the one and only Phony Tony in the apt named production 'WE'RE A COUPLE OF SWELLS in 2007! Bronnie you are a legend in your own lunchtime!

Yes, another one out of their depth who has fallen on her sword.

To think the Abbott government is so much on e nose yet they remain head and shoulders above any alternative on offer.

The race to the bottom continues.

Dear Paul,

Bronwyn Bishop has always been a factional warrior and
a fiercely loyal conservative.

It is now up to the Prime Minister what happens next.

My advice would be to persuade her to resign on her own accord,
(for the sake of the party that she loves).

Royal Commissions are too blunt an instrument for airing policy differences. They need to go after malfeasance. Bronwyn Bishop would be a doozey, especially if there was lots of questioning of Abbott for appointing her and how they conspired together. But my favourite would be an exhaustive inquiry into Howard and Co. lying about Iraqi WMDs to involve us in war for a foreign country. And on the subject of foreign loyalties, there needs to be a Royal Commission into whether Abbott had knowingly breached Section 44(i) of the Constitution (Google it), and whether there could be criminal charges Then there's Kevin Andrews' abuse of his powers in pursuit of Dr Haneef. Could malice be established, or at least pursued insistently enough to make the news media?

And of course corruption -- offering legislative and administrative favours in return for party funding. The IPA would include a rich harvest of witnesses – who offered what to whom for what. One field for a Royal Commission to go after would be what Morrison and Dutton had been hiding about Operation Sovereign Borders. Some brasshats could be dragged through the mud along with Morrison and Dutton, not to forget Abbott.

I would suggest Labor and the Greens could profitably put together some dirt teams (oops – focus groups) to draw up some subjects for Royal Commissions, to promise in advance in election manifestoes.

MP Bronwyn Bishop is also working with representations on behalf of electorates constituents concerning opportunities of absolutely significant national environment and economic importance.
I know this first hand.
It is now clear that AGW UN IPCC and Kyoto associated science has not measured and assessessed photosynthesis linked warmth in ocean algae plant matter, yet look at the cost to all of us due to carbon tax.

And BB' representations were instrumental in me making a submission to the Agricultural Competitiveness Green Paper, the latter that could make billions fir Australia.

Besides, BB did not use travel allowance for a taxi to go drink wine at a vineyard.

At least BB is a person of integrity and uses her real name instead of cowering behind a pseudonym while spruiking pitiful unjustified criticism like some people.

Cheers,
John C Fairfax.

JF Aus,

"Besides, BB did not use travel allowance for a taxi to go drink wine at a vineyard."

No - she swanned around Europe spending $88,000 of taxpayer's money on a job-seeking junket.

(But I agree that does put her in a different league!)

And the helicopter ride was to an event to raise money for the Liberal Party - not for any official "Speaker" duties.

"At least BB is a person of integrity and uses her real name instead of cowering behind a pseudonym while spruiking pitiful unjustified criticism like some people."

Couldn't agree more...

Cheers
Hercule Poirot.

This gets more bizarre by the hour.

JF Aus writes, and Poirot endorses, the folloing astounding comment:

""At least BB is a person of integrity and uses her real name instead of cowering behind a pseudonym while spruiking pitiful unjustified criticism like some people."

As for use of real name I have explained more than once (under my real name) on OLO how I got trapped into entering a pen-name as required by Disqus and am stuck with it in every forum which makes use of Disqus. In all non-Disqus fora I use my real name.

But what astounds me is that JF and Poirot can see integrity in the blatant malfeasance of Ms Bishop who unlike Mr Slipper, a meticulous and effective Speaker, abused her position by swanning around squandering massive amounts on party (and in one case arguably personal) business, plainly not proper for a Speaker, and improperly attending party room meetings to enhance use of her chair to further her party's on-the-floor strategies and tactics. This is not "pitiful unjustified criticism", indeed to present that conduct as "integrity" bespeaks a broken moral compass.

Dion Giles
Western Australia

P,

Countries vie for these "jobs" for their incumbents, as it gives the government a platform to promote its interests.

You forget that labor diverted nearly $3bn of aid to African countries to buy votes for the seat on the security council.

You also forget that Shorten was also caught out using taxpayer money to travel to a labor fundraiser.

Would somebody please provide reference to law that confines the House of Representatives Speaker to speaker business only and no electorate or political party business.

As for right or wrong using a pseudonym, surely unsubstantiated criticism about a real person should be backed up with the name of the person dishing out the abuse or unproven criticism.

As for travel overseas, these days Australia has to do business worldwide. And any sensible PM would do well to send a reliable and sober person like BB to accomplish such task.

@Foxy, Monday, 20 July 2015 7:22:06 PM, "I would like to add one final website for people to read. It presents quite a few facts
that I did not know"

From that article you recommended,

<Labor will only get so far complaining about Bishop's partisan behaviour. Before Jenkins and Burke, Labor speakers were similarly tribal. Even the most impartial speakers we've had - Jenkins, Burke and Slipper - between them threw out non-government MPs 89.5 per cent of the time.

And considering it was a personal decision by Jenkins and Burke to place themselves at arms length from Labor, there's no guarantee the next Labor speaker will be any less partisan than Bishop.

The Opposition is also treading on thin ice if it pursues the notion that being a guest speaker at a party fundraising event is not "official business" for a speaker. Inconveniently for Labor, there is no legal definition of the term. The criticism does raise the question, however, of whether it is official business when a minister or shadow minister attends a similar event as guest speaker, and travels to the event in a taxpayer-funded car. This is a fairly common practice.>

Short Memories
BTW, wasn't it Julia Gillard who in a very cynical move to further her personal ambitions, retired Harry Jenkins and put Slipper in his place?

Labor under the first womyn PM, Julia Gillard, plummeted to new depths, rock bottom, as far as the Speaker is concerned. Willie Shorten and many of his senior Labor (wo)men were part of that shabby crew and figured strongly in the game playing.

Emperor Julian,

"JF Aus writes, and Poirot endorses, the folloing astounding comment:"

I endorsed it?

I quoted it - where did I endorse it?

I quoted it to highlight the ridiculous premise that Bishop is a person of integrity. By my calculations, she is a person who is very light on actual substance, very big on entitlement and spending taxpayer's money to feather her particular political nest - that doesn't add up to integrity.

The other reason I quoted it was again to highlight Jf Aus's premise that because she "uses her own name" that somehow makes some sort of difference to her plight....and then signing his real name as if that somehow puts him a cut above the rest of us who use pseudonyms online for perfectly sensible reasons.

SM,

As I mentioned, it's pointless for you to try and score points flinging about examples like that...the Coalition are rorters extraordinaire.

As for Bronnie...

http://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2015/jul/21/bronwyn-bishop-has-never-welcomed-the-kind-of-scrutiny-she-applies-to-others?CMP=share_btn_tw

"The other damning assessment of her – and this from many of her own colleagues – was that she possessed a genius for getting people offside, for being alarmingly short on policy substance while being driven by personal ambition.

After being dumped from John Hewson’s shadow ministry in 1990 she poured her considerable energy into becoming – as Sydney Morning Herald columnist Alan Ramsey said at the time – “the Arnold Schwarzenegger of the estimates committee system”."

"One senior Liberal party staffer told me that “it was one of the most obscene displays [they had] ever seen”.

That same week Bishop was forced to release details of her own travel costs, which – for a backbencher – were simply staggering: $93,456 spent on airfares and car hire from July 1992 to June 1993.

And that was before allegations from ex-staffer Ellis Glover were made to this writer that shortly after entering the Senate in 1987 she had hired a helicopter – at tax payer’s expense – to get from a fete to a dog show, so as not to be late for the opening."

Oh golly gosh, Emperor Julian... I now see why you thought I endorsed it - I said "Couldn't agree more."

You see, that was sarcasm....I was being sarcastic, which is why I signed off as Hercule Poirot.

(One day they'll invent a sarc font - and then these niggling misunderstandings will cease to occur:)

Here's a good one...from 2014

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/tony-abbotts-visit-to-cancer-hospital-used-to-justify-fundraising-visit-20140826-108nxo.html

"Prime Minister Tony Abbott told government MPs he had to schedule an early morning visit to a cancer research centre in Melbourne on Tuesday so that he could justify billing taxpayers to be in the city for a "private function" the night before.

Mr Abbott made the admission at the regular meeting of Liberal and Nationals MPs after being taken to task by one his own senators for turning up an hour late.

Several MPs told Fairfax Media that the Prime Minister described the private function as a "fund-raiser" to the party room.

The issue came to a head when LNP senator Ian Macdonald, who has been a frequent critic of his own side since he was demoted from the frontbench after the election, told Mr Abbott his priority should have been the regular party room meeting, which is held every Tuesday morning when Parliament is sitting.

But Senator Macdonald was swiftly rebuked by colleagues including backbencher Ewen Jones, who said Senator Macdonald's constant criticism of his own team had "overstepped the mark"."

"Several government sources told Fairfax Media they were stunned to hear the Prime Minister respond to Senator Macdonald's complaint by saying he had to schedule an official function on Tuesday morning so he could justify being in Melbourne for a fund-raiser the night before under entitlements."

Charming....
(that's sarcasm:)

otb,

You seem to have missed the main point that the author
was making of the article I cited earlier.

Nobody is denying the fact as the author states that
the privileged culture that mostly turns a blind eye to
the misuse of entitlements - by politicians on all sides
of the political spectrum must be exposed and changed so
that the entitlements system can be made more transparent and
MPs more accountable for how they spend public money.

However the main point that the author is making is that
Bronwyn Bishop is unfit for the office of Speaker.
She is no longer competent.
Not only has she lost her judgement, as her helicopter flight
clearly indicates. She did not do anything about it until
the news hit the tabloids. But she regularly struggles to
call MPs by their correct titles, as even a casual observer
of Question Time would notice.

The author tells us that the Manager of Opposition Business, Tony
Burke, is often called the Member for Burke, and some MPs
have been called by the names of electorates they'd held in
previous parliaments.

We've told that even ministers assist the Speaker with their
correct titles when she calls them to the dispatch box.

Tony Burke has begun to exploit Mrs Bishop's failing acuity and
has at times managed to fluster the Speaker who once had an
encyclopaedic recall of "the practice" on parliamentary
procedural matters.

The author says that in response Mrs Bishop has taken to
lashing out at the Opposition - ejecting one Labor MP for laughing
another for saying "Madam Speaker."

We are reminded what Mr Abbott said in 2012 when referring for
Peter Slipper to stand aside:

"It is important that the Prime Minister act to ensure the
integrity of Parliament."

Indeed, and on that basis, the author states that Prime Minister
Abbott knows exactly what he needs to do.

Fox,

I quoted the author you pushed, but as usual, you only want to take the bits that suit you.

Just think though, if only your over-ambitious Julia Galah'd (Obama got that right) had not leaned on Harry Jenkins and initiated all of those other unprincipled manipulations she became infamous for, the political scene could have been very different indeed.

It's always entertaining watching otb, OLO's faux defender of all things feminine, attempting to type the word "women" without having apoplexy.

He's struggling, but he managed to type "womyn" - and (wo)men...making progress.

Let's not beat about the bush regarding BBishop as Speaker.

There's not even the merest skerrick of pretension with that "woman" that she is either independent or bipartisan when she's sitting in the chair....not a skerrick.

400 to 7 94A removals speaks for itself.

How about her bleating the other day that the only thing she would apologise for is getting in the way of the govt's planned attack on Shorten...that's from an "independent" Speaker - one who regularly attends cabinet meetings.

The folly of Gillard appointing Slipper, of course, had it's play out, the second scene is being played out now, with the AFP and Finance apparently applying polar opposite method in their dealings with Bishop's case to that which they applied in the Slipper case.

LOL, much hissing, but sauce for the goose should be sauce for the gander.

Bronwyn Bishop has erred through her politician's frivolousness (let 'them' knock the travel claim back if it might not meet the vague and subjective tests) which is shared by many, but she isn't the first to do it, as is easily demonstrated by the high life and frequent travel of Australia's First Womyn PM.

-There are always many people of solid achievement around, but the manipulative, scheming Juliar got the geurnsey after knifing her leader.

As is so often the case where the fish rots from the head as it did with Gillard and her treacherous Greens sidekicks at the helm of government, Gillard's sorry, cynical treatment of Harry Jenkins who was a Speaker satisfactory to all comers (although the same miscreants played their childish games in the House) has led to a very negative focus on the Speaker, to the detriment of Parliamentary business.

The Speaker's chair was tainted by Gillard's cynical ploys and by the appointment of her man, Slipper, well before Bishop.

It is apparent that the entitlement conditions of politicians will always be contentious and that applies hugely in the case of the Speaker, whose role was politicised and very cynically so by Gillard.

Well might Gillard be re-writing history and buffing up her dark image. It is damned pity that the exasperated taxpayer has to be so generous in providing such golden handshakes as an office (along with Rudd she claimed two didn't she, but was knocked back), staff and travel to revisit their parliamentary records.

Labor's Mark Latham was right about the 'Progressive' career politicians who infest Labor, their social concern and morality are all B.S. and gay marriage and playing the fool in the Parliament are far more important than the Struggle Streets. Australia's cynical, egocentric and above all else, frivolous, First Womyn PM and her 'Handbag Bit Squad' led that charge.

http://tinyurl.com/p6kts6c

no calls of misogyny from the sisterhod? What a surprise. Every incompetency and lie Gillard told was because of misogyny.

Because of past misdemeanors is no excuse for current misdemeanors especially when you are caught out. Bishops arrogance comes through like a light house beacon.
Entitlements have to be made public, so the people that employ these people are held account. Acts of piggery are not acceptable, and Bishop has committed one of the worst in history, her sword awaits.
We have money leaching into the hands of acquaintances for personal reasons, hardly inline with Hockey’s predictions.
Hockey says we are in dire straits as to our debt burden, which stood at 250 B $ when Abbott took over, does anybody know where we are now.

otb,

You chose to leave out the main points the author
was making in the article I cited earlier and you
as usual, only wanted to quote the bits that suit you.
Now you have the audacity to accuse me of what in fact
you are doing. You have more front than Bronwyn Bishop.
But you keep right at it - you're doing such a good job.

Also using derogatory terms to refer to our political
leaders and their parties is a perfect way for someone
of your capabilities - to argue.
You certainly know how to lift the bar in all discussions
down to your level.

You also happen to be so observant.

Fancy your noticing that -

Harry Jenkins and Anna Burke
decided to distance themselves from their party in order to
protect the dignity of the Speaker's office.

You picked up on the author's explanation that - compared with the determination of
Jenkins and Burke to make the Speaker's role as impartial as
possible, Mrs Bishop's flagrant tribalism is particularly
shocking to political observers. And you didn't miss the
fact that it was pointed out that
Mrs Bishop has always been a political warrior, more like
the politicians of old. That - she is not like Jenkins or Burke.

Well done!

Foxy,

"...Mrs Bishop's flagrant tribalism is particularly
shocking to political observers..."

Ain't that the truth!

Commentators from both sides are dumbstruck by this Speaker's overt bias.

We've never seen anything like it before - and it's an indictment on our system that there is no mechanism to remove such a blatant partisan from her role.

Fox,

Fat lot of good it did Harry Jenkins to be such a good Speaker. Julia Gillard shafted him just the same.

-To install her man, Slipper as Speaker. Gillard the infallible misogynist detector (where a man looking at his watch was concerned), fought long and hard to protect and shield Slipper through thick and thin (with the full agreement of some notable OLO Grrls, maybe yourself, eh Fox?). Here is a report from the time,

http://www.news.com.au/national/revealed-what-peter-slippers-sexist-text-messages-actually-said/story-fndo4eg9-1226492172640

However you DO defend Gillard's record, right?

Fact is, all you, Labor and the treacherous, headline-hunting Greens are doing is reveling in kicking up a political stink, at gutter level, where if you really had the superior morality you claim to have you would have simply noted the error, the agreement to pay back along with a loading and moved on to devote some time to those serious problems of the Struggle Streets identified by 'your' ABC.

Mark Latham is right about the 'Progressive' career politicians who infest Labor, their social concern and morality are all B.S. - Gay marriage and playing the fool in the Parliament are far more pressing things than the Struggle Streets.

http://tinyurl.com/p6kts6c

If you forget your partisanship and Abbottphobia for an instant you might recognise that both sides of politics support the Minchin Protocols for travel and politicians and neither side including the Greens have ever been on the front foot to introduce tighter, more specific controls. Rhetoric at times, but NO action.

You might also note that particularly since the political parties have moved to put their own (wo)men in senior public appointments and to corporatise public agencies, the ethical difficulties involving travel and other entitlements appear to have increased there too.

Bluntly, you are cocking you leg to pee on a shrub while refusing to acknowledge the forest behind (or the problem-stricken slums that are 'Struggle Street').

When will the ubiquitous "they" realise that career pollies are only interested in their career - travel, study trips, perks, prestige (albeit somewhat questionable the prestige bit as most are [all?] can be lumped together in the grouping of the lady who plays the piano in the 'House of the Rising' song fame while those that sell second hand cars are unfairly 'discriminated' against by all and sundry. No, I'm not one of those but I digress . . . We need a referendum on how much perks federal pollies should receive when they are serving and supposed to retire after a 'wonderful career serving either the Party line and/or themselves' - Jesus wept!

Dear Poirot,

It is all up to Mr Abbott to now put his money where
his mouth was regarding his pursuit of Peter Slipper.
It was Mr Abbott who stated to Julia Gillard on the
need for Peter Slipper to stand down -

"It is very important that the PM acts to ensure the
integrity of the Parliament."

Indeed, and on that basis PM Abbott knows exactly what
he has to do.

otb,

What you are doing is trying to pee on my leg
and tell me it's raining.

Not a good look.

It's already been pointed out to you
that - "the privileged culture that mostly turns a
blind eye to such behaviour (from all political sides)
must be exposed and changed so that the
entitlements system can be made more transparent and
MPs (all MPs) more accountable for how they spend public
money."

Yet you still continue to point to and sledge only one side of
politics - while defending the other. And then accusing others
for precisely your own behaviour.

Give it a rest.
You have no moral authority here.

Our Bronnie's a doozy!

They just keep coming....

"Under-fire Speaker Bronwyn Bishop has defended charging taxpayers thousands for expensive car trips on days when she went to the opera.

A Fairfax Media analysis of Mrs Bishop's travel entitlement claims between 2010 and 2013 showed the Speaker has charged taxpayers more than $3300 across at least eight days she attended the theatre and other arts events.

On February 2, 2013, Mrs Bishop - then shadow special minister of state and for seniors - charged taxpayers more than $1000 for the use of a car."

"The $1000 in charges by Mrs Bishop that Saturday were expensed in two amounts, both classified as "taxi". But politicians are not required to provide details of their expenditure on car transport.

In the past, Mrs Bishop has displayed a preference for hire cars from Royale Limousines - which offers chauffeured car hire for the "discerning executive" - that were also classified as "taxis" on expense reports.

Fairfax Media has previously obtained under freedom-of-information laws details of Mrs Bishop's transport on about 17 days between 2011 and 2012. On 11 of those, Mrs Bishop hired a car from Royale Limousines for amounts of up to $700 a day, also listed as "taxis"."

"The rules governing MP expenses say taxpayers can be charged for car travel for official parliamentary or party business or "official business as a minister"."

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/bronwyn-bishop-expense-scandal-speaker-defends-trips-to-the-opera-20150722-gihrxv.html#ixzz3gapi86yN

Here, gain some perspective,

http://www.sbs.com.au/ondemand/video/433209411782/struggle-street

Couldn't the whole issue of entitlements, especially travel be resolved by simply giving them a budget for the year.

Bronnie, Tony, Billy et al, you get $50,000/year for travel related expenses to use however you like, taxis, limos, helicopters, chartered flights, etc... but when its spent, its spent, and you have to dig into your own pocket for the rest of the year.

What's so hard about giving each politician a travel budget? Oh, I know, it requires politicians to make that decision.

otb,

Most intelligent people
are aware of the problems that exist in some of our
poorer communities - be they in this country,
or overseas. Many of us grew up in the Western
suburbs of Sydney - and know these areas very well
and the problems that some people are faced with there.

You could put your time to better use by lobbying
MPs to not cut back program funding that help these
communities - and also ask for changes to be made to the
politicians' entitlements system so that it can be more
transparent and MPs more accountable for how they spend
public money.

It is not only about "perspective" it is also about the
choices we make in our lives - both living in "Struggle Street,"
and in the decisions of MPs.

Re Foxy: Couldn't agree more, especially over the attempts to exculpate Abbott and BBishop by going on about someone else's alleged malfeasance. I have long wondered why the Opposition doesn't stage a disciplined, well-planned and well-publicised walkout over the co-ordinated and sustained assault on the proper functioning of Parliament.

Dear Emperor Julian,

Thank You.

EmperorJulian, "I have long wondered why the Opposition doesn't stage a disciplined, well-planned and well-publicised walkout over the co-ordinated and sustained assault on the proper functioning of Parliament"

If you had been following the happenings in the federal parliament, or even watching a credible news outlet you would be aware that Willie Shorten and Labor walked out on fulfilling the role of an opposition immediately after being tipped out of government in Canberra.

Shorten is under threat as leader precisely because he has been incapable of developing policy and presenting an alternative to the Abbott government. Labor is bereft of policy for its members and the party faithful to unite behind.

That is also why Tanya Plibersek is coming up often as the replacement for Shorten. Plibersek is easily able to present as a far stronger leader than L'il Willie 'Whatever She Says' Shorten.

See here,
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opinion/columnists/bill-shorten-causes-labor-dismay-over-lack-of-ideas/story-fnbcok0h-1227272018488

Beach, its not often that I agree with you, but your last post is spot on. I have never been a fan of Shorten, maybe not for the same reasons as you, and given the shortcomings of Abbott, who even you would have to admit is no Winston Churchill when it comes to leadership, OL Shorten should be top of the pops at the present time, but he falls a long way short of that lofty goal. At best I can only describe Shorten's performance as lackluster and mundane. Granted, he has had the distraction of Abbott's union bashing RC, I don't blame Abbott for bring it on, a good political move to get his man.
Normally if there is no one decent in the federal sphere the Labor Party can look to the union movement or the states for leadership material, but unfortunately at the moment those areas look rather threadbare as well. No matter how much we might deny it political parties in Australia stand or fall on the ability of their leaders.

Do not underestimate Bill Shorten as the Leader of
the Labor Party. It is a role that he has been
aiming for quite a long time and according to
John Hewson - he will make an excellent Prime Minister.
He certainly could not be any worse than the dud we
currently have.

Mr Shorten - knows exactly what he is doing. As Hewson
pointed out recently - Mr Shorten is waiting for an
election announcement from the PM - then we will see
Mr Shorten change his tactics of "lying low," which is
what he is currently doing - and allowing the PM and
his Party to mess things up. Mr Shorten doesn't need to do
much at the moment. Mr Abbott's doing it all for him -
and he's doing it beautifully - as is the rest of his team.

I simply can't understand why 'The Wicked Witch of the West' can't just use her broomstick to get around on. Why does she need a helicopter?

I would mot describe Bronnie as the "discerning executive" type unless of course it comes to her penchant for riding around in $1000 a day luxury limousines, naturally at taxpayers expense, something she refers to as her "taxi"! Not even on government business, rather to attend the opera no less. Not once did she do this but on 17 separate occasions. I am sure Bronnie must be a VIP customer down at Royale Limousines.
Managed to snap a video of Bronnie stepping out for a quick kebab and a pint of milk, naturally at taxpayers expence.

The short trip;

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=irnNyiOW80s

The long trip;

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p8Y8rhLirRw

Fox, "Mr Shorten doesn't need to do much at the moment"

Say what?! Shorten and his slack crew -most left over from the failed Rudd and Gillard governments- damned well OUGHT to be producing and publicising alternative policies that DESERVE the Senior Executive remunerations they take from the exasperated taxpayer.

Politicians got their massive increases in pay from claiming not only that they as 'bosses' should be taking home better pay and conditions than their 'servants' and 'employees' (federal public servants), but that they were entitled to compare themselves with the senior management cream of the federal public service, the Senior Executive Service (SES).

Having done that, they set up an 'independent' remuneration tribunal to deliver same through the hugely self-complimentary, highly advantageous comparisons with the highly educated and skilled SES. Some even have the considerable hide to demand comparison with the remuneration and other benefits of the CEOs of major companies.

There should be no surprise when politicians interpret their entitlements, especially travel entitlements, according to their view of what SOME, usually unprincipled, senior executive and Board members get away with in private enterprise.

I don't mind that politicians are paid so well, but I would like to see them earn their money like the SES and CEOs they like to be compared with when getting those 30 and 40% pay rises and othet entitlements.

On travel and other entitlements:

- BOTH sides of the federal Parliament, including the griping Greens, have demonstrated they have a vested interest in hazy, complex (guess why!) 'rules', and they very much like the 'referee' to be a public servant (again, guess why!); and

- ALL of the Parliament is aware or should be of the repetitive observations, diplomatic criticisms frequently made, by the government's own auditor, the ANAO, of the slack rules and soft requirements.

The new discovered morality of Shorten and his crew is complete BS. Why didn't Shorten and his mob -who would have seen relevant ANAO reports tabled in the parliament during the terms of Rudd and Gillard+Greens- ever make the conditions more stringent?

Mark Kenny, in an article in the Sydney Morning Herald
explains:

"Self evidently, Bill Shorten's practice of
giving as little ground to the government as possible while
keeping his own powder dry is learned behaviour. It worked for
Mr Abbott, who now in government is having it done back to him
and again it is proving devastatingly effective.
Just look at the government's paralysis in the Senate."

"Both men know that when there's a perception of chaos in politics,
the government of the day is blamed."

"It will become clearer when Bill Shorten explains what he
will do on emissions trading, on a revised resources rent tax,
on other contentious tax policies and of course how he intends
to get the deficit down."

I agree with John Hewson - who knows Bill Shorten quite well.
Hewson tells us that Bill Shorten will make a good, consultative
Prime Minister - steering the country in the right direction.

What a pleasant change that will be !

Foxy,

You can also bet that Abbott is keeping his powder dry with respect to Shorten and the unions. I can imagine the posters in Labor areas detailing the huge amounts that the AWU ripped off their workers under Bill. This combined with the new ridiculously high RET that will nearly double electricity prices again, and a new carbon tax.

BS is a dead man walking.

PS, I see that BS has accepted boat turn backs as the most humane method of dealing with illegal boats.

Dear Shadow Minister,

The next election will certainly be an interesting one
that's for sure.

And I think the outcome it not going to be an easy one
to predict.

Fox,

As a long standing, current union member and with fingers in the refugee pie as you have recently admitted, it is only to be expected that you would be taking the political line every time and ducking inconvenient facts.

Facts such as the TABLED findings, observations and recommendations of the Government's own auditor, the ANAO and available to the previous Labor+Greens administrations too.

However for the remainder of the public who are tired of political spin, the bald fact remains that the public are demanding production and accountability from the politicians who represent them and are paid as executive managers.

Your man Shorten and his crew from the previous Rudd and Gillard+Greens governments were there when ANAO reports were tabled that were critical of the 'rules'(sic) and conditions for claiming travel entitlements. Shorten et all did nothing and they were aware of their own members too who have abused politicians' entitlements and further allegations that were outstanding.

Not a good look by any stretch for all federal politicians.

otb,

What refugee pie do I have my fingers in?
And what union do I belong to?

Please do tell, and let me know.

cont'd ...

The only Membership that I hold is of ALIA -
(Australian Library Information Association).
We refer to it as a "union." In actual fact its
a professional association.

And, as for your "refugee pie" assertion.
I actually give of my own free time - to several
organisations. It's called volunteering.

The rest of your post isn't worth commenting on.

Fox,

Recently in your replies to other posters it was you who claimed current and longstanding UNION membership.

Union Membership
As I recall but others might be able to point to the subject post, you did that to make some point. Now you object to being quoted as being a union member, which is precisely what you were claiming at the time.

Your claimed involvement in refugee organisations
Similarly, in a reply to a poster where you were at pains to show your extensive familiarity of matters affecting refugees you did as I recall refer to your involvement with several refugee organisations. The impression was that these were NGOs involved in refugee representation and advocacy, but could clarify if not.

On both you could make up your mind. Because it is very difficult to understand exactly what you are objecting to.

Fox, "The rest of your post isn't worth commenting on"

But of course you would be a denialist where the Australian National Audit Reports tabled in Parliament are concerned, because it doesn't suit your spin.

It simply wouldn't do to admit that all in the Parliament and partiocularly those from the Rudd and Gillard+Greens administrations are aware or should be aware of the (ANAO) audit findings on the travel entitlements.

I have stated the relevant background simply in my posts, but do try to muddy the waters and divert the attention elsewhere.

otb,

What I said and it was - in defence of unions and
it has to be taken in the context of
that issue was - to quote exactly:

"I'm a member of a union, but I've never been put
in a position where I've had to go out
on strike. And although I'm sometimes frustrated when the union
does its job badly. I support without reservation the right of
all working people to join together so as to preserve and
protect their livelihoods."

I did also add that of course, unions need to be more sensitive
to the realities of modern economic conditions. That sectarian
attitudes and greed serve the cause of labour badly.

You immediately leap at the chance of accusing me of
lifetime union membership, and more.

As usual - a totally wrong assumption - which I have hopefully now
clarified for you.

Also, my reference to refugee organisations - has again to
be taken in context. I have been/and continue to be both
professionally and socially involved with refugees both in
this country and overseas. Your reference to my having my
fingers in the "refugee pie," as you put it is totally out
of line and extremely rude. What kind of a man says that to
someone they do not know. And why?
Besides of what concern is
it of yours.?I don't question you of how many fingers in how
many pies you may have. And then you dare to have the affront
to wonder why I am upset.

What a totally ridiculous little man you are.
I should just simply ignore you.
You're a creep! And thick as a brick to boot!

Claiming volunteer status in the refugee (pie) business and then admitting professional involvement, would surely amount to a lot more in the purse than the wrong helicopter to Geelong.

Well done otb, and ignore the unjust insults.

Foxy, I recall OTB once posting and boasting how he had ripped off some unsuspecting city slickers on some land deal! Beach, do you have your fingers in some kind of unscrupulous land scamming pie? Is scamming your profession, or do you do it purely on a opportunistic amateur basis? Just like to set the record straight. LOL

Paul1405,

That is a fabrication.

Ho hum...otb is trolling Foxy - again....

Dear JF Aus,

My professional involvement did not come with
a salary.

It's best not to comment unless you know what
you are talking about.

As for "unjust" insults.

No. They were earned!

Dear Paul,

I'm reminded of the English proverb:

"Every ass loves to hear himself bray."

No more needs to be said.

Dear Poirot,

I don't know what his problem is but I bet
its hard to pronounce.

BTT

As said previously, the new discovered morality of Shorten and his crew is complete BS. Why didn't Shorten and his mob -who would have seen relevant ANAO reports tabled in the parliament during the terms of Rudd and Gillard+Greens- ever make the conditions more stringent?
[Posted by onthebeach, Thursday, 23 July 2015 12:13:22 PM]

What about this ANAO report? Refer in particular to the findings and conclusions.

ANAO Audit Report No.3 2009–10
Administration of Parliamentarians' Entitlements
by the Department of Finance and Deregulation
http://www.anao.gov.au/uploads/documents/2009-10_ANAO_Audit_Report_3_.pdf

-Tabled in the House of Representatives and Senate, 8 September 2009

As a reminder, Rudd Government 2007–10, Gillard 24 June 2010 – 27 June 2013 and Rudd 27 June 2013 - 18 September 2013.

For interest, Bill Shorten and some of his colleagues served in the Rudd and Gillard governments.

I have been a fully paid up union member for about 45 years, and proud of it, still hold union membership, been an activist and "paid my dues", many times over. I even maintained my membership over a number of years when I ran my own successful small consulting and design business in engineering, employing several people, nothing altruistic about that, it was valuable and necessary, so I have seen it from both sides of the fence so to speak. I am well satisfied every penny I have contributed has been used for the betterment of myself and others, including you Beach, yes including you! I am sure you have availed yourself of a decent pay packet, better working conditions and partaken of the benefits achieved by others through the work of unionism, over many years, I don't need to list them, you know what they are. Can you say the same, I think not, or have you been one of those non contributors incessantly sniping from the sidelines, whilst taking everything you can get. My word for such a person is PARASITE! I hope I am wrong about you, but I don't see any evidence posted here which makes me think to the contrary.

Lol!,

Otb gets called out - and surprise, surprise he immediately yodels:

"BTT"

Right on cue.

(and this thread is about Bronwyn Bishop, not Shorten, so he can't even get his BTT's right)

More irrelevant slurs and all avoiding the obvious disingenuousness and contributory culpability of Labor Leader Shorten and his crew, who were advised by the government's own auditor, the ANAO, when they were in office of the wide open gate that is the 'rules' concerning politicians entitlements and not just the travel, but Labor DID NOTHING about it.

As can be seen from the ANAO report, the administering department and the ANAO had previously flagged the same concerns, but NIL, NADA, NOTHING was done about by Shorten and Labor who are now assuming a high moral platform. They are shameless.

The ANAO report has already been linked to by me. Its findings were very plain indeed, the so-called 'rules' that apply are a vague and complex, there is no definition of the words that matter and it is an invitation for for politicians to stretch the envelope with complete impunity.

While I appreciate the need for politicians to do their job and under awkward circumstances at times, as a taxpayer I cannot accept that the same politicians - specifically the members of the Labor and Greens governments who were presented with the ANAO report - could be so petty and restrictive where (say) nurses' tax claims for travel to work outside public transport times are concerned, BUT where politicians concerned, it is make your own rules!

So much for greedy, elitist Shorten and Labor caring about politicians' travel and costs, let alone the conditions of workers.

It takes tremendous bare-faced gall and hypocrisy for Shorten et al to be attacking Bishop, when they themselves refused to amend the 'rules' that advantaged them as well and especially when they were in office.

This says it all:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BuqIxzVCEAExNj4.jpg

I pity all the union members that have paid a chunk of their salaries to sleazy union reps that spent the money on themselves and their political ambitions. Bullshiten is the epitamy of sleazy back stabbers that were happy to sell union members down the road for a few bucks.

I reckon that the reason that foxy, paul and parrot defend the unions is avoid having to admit that they have been mugs for decades.

BTT - otb,

What would you like to discuss....?

Bronwyn Bishop's taxpayer-funded chopper ride to the LNP fundraiser?

Bronwyn Bishop's $ 88,000 taxpayer-funded job-seeking jaunt around Europe?

Bronwyn Bishop's tax-payer-funded limousines to the opera?

Bronwyn Bishop's taxpayer-funded largesse to herself in general over many years?

Bronwyn Bishop's 94A 400-7 bias fest in the chamber during question time?

You see, there's loads of aspects to Bronnie - no need to skew the convo...

(BTT)

I do know this, Foxy one, the people smuggling industry does not pay salaries.

As I have previously said, Hon Bronwyn Bishop applied integrity and courage to find if warmth in ocean algae has been included in AGW science, but what did contributors with relevant insight on OLO do? Nothing, just silence.
Where are the professional volunteers to overcome worsening maternal mortality among Australia's neighbouring Pacific Islands people impacted by algae devastated seafood food-web nurseries?

Some of the virtual speakers of the OLO house of commentators could do more before being so unfairly critical.
In Parliament it's apparent BB is endeavouring to develop respect and national business of the day instead of having to put up with school yard noise, bullying, abuse and disrespect.

I think BB should be provided with a helicopter of her own and so should an equivalent hard working opposition member. Why not if it's good for the nation and the helicopter industry?

Think beyond the petty or imagined problems and inspire innovation and new productivity, instead of whinging
Be nice to others and put up reasoning instead of ad hom abuse.

Who knows if BB was delayed with government business and could not get to Geelong in time by car or scheduled flight. Who knows if similar did not happen to Shorten at their fundraiser?
And where would politics be without fundraiser's?
Should fundraising be banned and just let dictators pay election bribes.

Better to give BB a helicopter to help the nation make billions.
Maybe all hard working MP's should have one.
Years ago they would have been provided a horse and now it's a limousine.
Why not a helicopter at least when they need it in this vast country.

Dear Poirot,

Here is what former Speakers think of Bronwyn
Bishop's behaviour as Speaker:

http://thenewdaily.com.au/news/2015/07/21/former-speakers-chide-bishop/

She has shown her bias far to often to be an upstanding speaker, and that is without unfettered piggery.

Currently in hiding, she knows the consequences of her actions. To make excuses for acts of selfishness and arrogance is unjustifiable.

Thanks, Foxy.

JF Aus,

"Better to give BB a helicopter to help the nation make billions."

So your solution is that the taxpayers should now provide Bronnie with her own helicopter?

To get to Lib Party fundraisers?

And how would that assist "the nation to make billions"?...(billions of twitter memes, perhaps:)

That's the silliest post on this thread - but at least it's on topic.

It takes tremendous bare-faced gall and hypocrisy for Shorten et al to be attacking Bishop,

or for any other politician including past Speakers to be doing so,

when they themselves refused to amend the 'rules' that advantaged them as well and especially when their 'side' was in office.

Bishop was ill-advised, but there is NO private member's Bill from Shorten or anyone else (unlike Gay marriage!) to make the rules pertaining to politicians' entitlements more rigorous and to increase public transparency and reporting.

Shorten and others do not want to increase their own accountability, NO Siree!

It is all shabby politics isn't it!

I think all are equal there aint they. Surprises are hard to find, especially where trust is involved.
We can only deal with the present, and now. So lets see Abbott deal with the loophole at hand.
We have already seen his allegiance of dealing with a willful community fraudster. After what he wrote about his accusations of slipper ,the man who voted for Abbott instead of Turnbull.

That mob kept Slippers misdemeanors to themselves until he became speaker.

"when they themselves refused to amend the 'rules' that advantaged them as well and especially when their 'side' was in office."

One imagines the degree to which entitlements are abused does depend on the audacity of individual members.

"Soon after the Coalition was elected in 2013, Senator George Brandis became the first Abbott government minister forced to repay the public almost $1700 in expenses claimed to attend the wedding of shock jock Michael Smith.

High-profile ministers Scott Morrison and Barnaby Joyce soon had to follow suit, repaying taxpayer money they claimed for travel to weddings.

Prime Minister Tony Abbott himself repaid $1600 worth of airfares, car transport and allowances claimed for attending the weddings of two Liberal colleagues, Peter Slipper and Sophie Mirabella.

"To avoid doubt, I paid the relevant money back," he said in a warning to his colleagues. "That's what people should do."

"Embattled Speaker Bronwyn Bishop claimed $600 for return flights from Sydney to Albury for Mrs Mirabella's wedding in 2006 – and she has never repaid the money, Fairfax Media has confirmed.

Previously unreported documents released under freedom of information laws show Mrs Bishop told bureaucrats that the trip constituted government business.

An expense document written in Mrs Bishop's own hand lists only "committee chair business" when asked the purpose of flights, which took her to three cities, including Albury, from where she travelled to the Wangaratta wedding."

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/bronwyn-bishop-claimed-sophie-mirabella-wedding-trip-as-official-business-20150724-gijde1.html#ixzz3gmCoHlPt

Or Abbott's hastily scheduled pit stop at a cancer hospital so his trip to a Lib fundraiser the night previously would be within guidelines - something he openly admitted to the party room:

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/tony-abbotts-visit-to-cancer-hospital-used-to-justify-fundraising-visit-20140826-108nxo.html

Like I said - it's about audacity and a lack of ethics.

Dear Poirot,

ABBOTT IN 2012 STATED:

"In court documents lodged yesterday there are further serious
allegations regarding potentially criminal misuse of taxpayer
funds and breaches of entitlements."

"For any parliamentarian, let alone the Speaker, these would
be very serious allegations."

"Against the Speaker such allegations go to the integrity of
the highest parliamentary office in the House of Representatives."

"While Mr Slipper is entitled to the presumption of innocence
these allegations unquestionably have the potential to damage
the reputation of the office of Speaker and the standing of
the parliament."

"It is therefore incumbent on the Prime Minister, who used
her numbers to install Mr Slipper as Speaker last year, to
require him to stand aside until these matters are concluded
before the courts."

"The Australian Federal Police must immediately investigate
these new allegations relating to criminal misuse of taxpayer
funded entitlements."

ABBOTT IN 2015 STATES:

"I don't think its appropriate to stand aside simply
because the finance department might be having a look at
something."

It takes tremendous bare-faced gall and hypocrisy for
Abbott to be defending Bishop.

Foxy,

I see you are suffering from selective amnesia!

Slipper got done for submitting forged documents to dept of Finance, not entitlements abuse. That is rank hypocrisy.

SM,

Really?

First:

"Chief Magistrate Lorraine Walker, found Mr Slipper had intentionally filled in the dockets with false information, including using general terms such as "suburbs" to describe his pick-up and drop-off locations, to conceal the fact he was not on parliamentary business.

Ms Walker said the vouchers Mr Slipper filled out did not "realistically reflect" the journeys he took on any of the trips, and his use of the term "suburbs" to refer to the regional wineries was "implausible".

The magistrate sentenced the former member for Fisher to 300 hours community service and ordered him to repay $954."

then:

"A Canberra court has thrown out Peter Slipper's conviction for defrauding the Commonwealth.

Justice John Burns on Thursday found the prosecution had not proven Mr Slipper did not conduct parliamentary business on his visits to Canberra region wineries.

"It follows that it was not open to the magistrate, viewing the evidence as a whole, to convict," the judge found.

Justice Burns ordered the appeal be upheld and the convictions and penalties imposed by the magistrate be set aside."

"Verdicts of not guilty will be substituted with respect to each charge."

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/peter-slipper-conviction-overturned-by-canberra-court-20150226-13p7b1.html#ixzz3gmOnzYFW

Can't see anything about forged documents, SM.

Can you be more specific please on the exact charges pertaining to "forged" documents?

As per your quote:

"Chief Magistrate Lorraine Walker, found Mr Slipper had intentionally filled in the dockets with false information"

Deliberate fraud.

SM,

Submitting forged documents would mean submitting forged documents - in that the documents themselves would be forged.

As opposed to intentionally filling in the dockets with false information.

Something of which Slipper was ultimately found not guilty in respect of each charge.

C'mon, SM,

You burst into the convo with:

"I see you are suffering from selective amnesia!

Slipper got done for submitting forged documents to dept of Finance, not entitlements abuse. That is rank hypocrisy."

When I ask for further and better particulars, you write:

"Chief Magistrate Lorraine Walker, found Mr Slipper had intentionally filled in the dockets with false information"

Deliberate fraud."

As usual, no substance from SM!

......

Would "yous" all like to have a gander at the grandeur of Bronnie's places of repose on her taxpayer-funded European job-seeking jaunt?

Here we go...

http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/national/inside-the-lavish-hotels-where-speaker-bronwyn-bishop-stayed-during-her-european-tour/story-fntzoymf-1227453074074?sv=d9f0775153663b2bd18cabb24d9e0de3#.VbHHpTLN-UU.twitter

"Whether renowned for room comfort, personal service or fine cuisine, the Bronwyn Bishop led delegation found the best of each in luxury five star establishments across Europe during their two-week sojourn.

The trip began on October 4 in Rome and the plush 180-year-old Grand Hotel Plaza on the Via Del Corso in central baroque Rome, overlooking the famous Spanish Steps and the Trinita dei Monti church on one side and the 1612 Basilica dei Santi Ambrogio e Carlo on the other.

It is deemed to be one of the most prestigious old hotels in the capital, celebrated through the years by visits including popes, kings and princesses and travelling nobles and noted statesmen including Henry Kissinger and Charles de Gaulle as well as stars of screen from famed Italian filmmaker Federico Fellini to more recently turned into a film set for Brad Pitt and George Clooney in Ocean’s 12."

etc....(there's loads more!)

Check it out, there's pics and all.

But keep banging on about Slipper.....his folly pales in significance to Bronnie's taxpayer-funded odysseys .

Dear Poirot,

Thanks for that.
Very revealing.

We just don't get it.

JohnC of Gosford NSW wrote in an article on
the web:

"When you are a member of the "born to rule" class you
simply assume high office and make sure that your electorate
is not located in the heartland of the "great unwashed."
They demonstrably simply don't understand the justifiable
rights of their betters and expect their representatives to
be accountable.
Marxism, nothing more nothing less - Madam Speaker intones."

Parrot,

Now you are talking complete crap, If you recall, there was a stink because Slipper racked up expenses as speaker at a record rate. And if you want to see expense, KRudd as FM broke all records.

LOL, Fox quoting as her 'authority' a 'JohnC of Gosford NSW' who penned one of those crackpot, rude, Class War comments that so appeal to the lunar green left.

Fox, this is from another post where the criticism of Bishop was balanced with,

"It's also all very well for Labor members, Tony Burke to carry on, after all, it was Rudd who also galavanted around the world, after being knifed, resorting to back bench, but using 'privilege' to globe trot seeking UN appointments at our expense. None of our current crop of politicians can hold their heads high."

That is a much fairer, adult position most would think, but you did not find it.

Dear Shadow Minister,

Here are the top ten spenders (excluding office fit out
costs). These expenses come on top of their salaries.

1) Tony Abbott - $1,057,675
2) Julie Bishop - 865,887
3) Andrew Robb - 541,755
4) Scott Morrison - 465,064
5) Ian Macfarlene - 442,760
6) Barnaby Joyce - 411,074
7) Bronwyn Bishop - 398,563
8) Bill Shorten - 390,287
9) Joe Hocky - 387,693
10) Bob Katter - 386,074

(As given in the Sydney Morning Herald).

That could have something to do with being in government, as the PM for example and the representational roles.

What do you have on Ms Gillard and her ministers and Speaker, and similarly on Kevin Rudd and his 'team'?

- Remembering your oft-repeated sermons,

Fox, "My point as always is to present alternative
perspectives to any issue for consideration.

To try to broaden the discussion so to speak.

To make people think and take another look at
what we're being presented with by our politicians
and mainstream media (that runs along mostly
predictable lines)."

Poirot would make a great defence attorney as he/she has absolutely no scruples when it comes to defending a crook... a la Peter Slipper, Craig Thompson, and Man Monis to name a few of her favourites.

If you can get them off on a technicality, they are innocent, even if they did the crime, right?

God inspector, it must be great being the genius you are. No man is your match.

With so much publicity Bronnie is getting with the 'Choppergate' scandal, she is in demand. A Melbourne ALP branch Clifton Hill, has invited Bronnie to attend their fundraiser. Taking Bronnie at her word "I speak to community groups, I'll speak to Liberal groups, I'll even speak to Labor groups". The Labor mob have invited the old gal to their next shin dig. The official invite reads as follows;

"We do not normally charge for these events but upon reading that you are available for fundraisers we thought we would make our next event a fundraiser.
"The event can take place at a time and date of your choosing but the sooner the better."

Given Bronnie is a raving monarchist, the subject for her talk will be 'What role will the Westminster system play in an Australian Republic?'"

Don't hold your breath fellas, Bronnie will be a no show for this one, even if you do supply the helicopter!

Here is an interesting article which explains
why - Mrs Bishop is truly the world's
worst Speaker:

http://independentaustralia.net/politics/politics-display/Bronwyn-bishop-the-worlds-worst-speaker,7107

Barry Everingham, senior correspondent writes:

"One of the great traditions inherited by the Australian
House of Representatives from Britain's House of Commons
has been the rule of the impartiality of the Speaker.
Indeed, in the Commons the Speaker remains "in situ" even
after the elections, where he or she may not remain a member
of the ruling party."

Everingham states that "in the main, our Speakers have been
good, a few bad, but none, with only two who broke the rule:
both ALP Members - Leo McLeay in the Whitlam years and way
back to the character Sol Rosvear, who began as Speaker
under Curtin."

Today, we're told things are different.

"The current Speaker is Bronwyn Bishop - an absolute disgrace
whose behaviour in the Chair has brough the Parliament into
disrepute."

Everingham in preparing this story tells us he interviewed
diplomats from three Commonwealth Countries whose Parliaments
work on the Westminster System - Canada, New Zealand and,
of course - the UK.

Everingham says, "I asked if the behaviour of Bishop would
be tolerated in their Parliaments and the answer was a
resounding "NO!"

He explains, "One of them told me of his experience accompanying
a visiting MP from his country to "Question Time," in Canberra.
The MP was just incredulous and said had he been told of
her behaviour he wouldn't have believed it - but seeing her in
full flight really shocked him."

Bishop as Everingham says, "is of course a disciple of Tony
Abbott's - she admires his thuggery and take no prisoners
attitude."

"Bishop today told Parliament that outside the Chamber, she
can do anything she likes, as long as it is legal..."

The website is worth a read for more of Mrs Bishop's antics.
As for whether she has broken the law, I guess we
shall have to wait and see

Here is Mrs Bishop "doing anything she likes,"
funded of course by the taxpayer:

BRONWYN BISHOP'S EXPENSES BY CATEGORY
July 1 - Dec 31, 2014:

Travel allowance - 24,406
Overseas travel = 131,714
Domestic travel - 31,928
Charter flights - 5,227
Car costs - 20,595
Office facilities -169,247
Office Admin costs- 11,309
Phones - 4,136
TOTAL - 398,563

(as given by the Sydney Morning Herald).

The only MPs who spent more were Prime Minister Tony Abbott and
five front benchers required to do a lot of travel.

Mrs Bishop's expenses come on top of her - $341,000 salary.

strange how nasty the sisterhood are to each other especially when they have different world views.

Fox, "As for whether she has broken the law, I guess we shall have to wait and see"

Says smug Fox, not yet satiated for blood, whose Kangaroo Court has damned, convicted and sentenced Bronwyn Bishop from the start.

runner,

Bronwyn Bishop
<Bronwyn Bishop says she never wants to see the Liberal Party embrace affirmative action as it would entrench women as ''permanent second-class citizens''.
"They didn't choose me then but I didn't go away and whinge about it either. I just worked hard so they chose me subsequently."> [SMH, 2013]

The Sisterhood is unrelentingly savage, beastly, to any woman who is not on the leftist Emily's List for preferential treatment as one of their 'networking'(sic) mates. Such arrogance that they make their mateship obvious.

Should the public take it on faith that the women Labor and Greens politicians who are Emily's Listers would declare any use of their parliamentary entitlements or other application of public funds or assets where their membership or participation as 'Listers' is concerned?

'The Sisterhood is unrelentingly savage, beastly, to any woman who is not on the leftist Emily's List for preferential treatment as one of their 'networking'(sic) mates. Such arrogance that they make their mateship obvious.'

thanks otb that explains Foxy/Poirot Pauls selective demonising.

ConservativeHippie,

"Poirot would make a great defence attorney as he/she has absolutely no scruples when it comes to defending a crook... a la Peter Slipper, Craig Thompson, and Man Monis to name a few of her favourites."

Lol!...okay CH....you've now decided you're going to wing it. Got a bit of an inkling that if you link Poirot to the defence of Monis that you're onto something, eh?

So you're quite prepared to post a statement like that even though it's only really some nebulous waffle flitting around in your mental basement...what the heck, let's go for it, says CH to himself.

That's the kind of mental stature that comes out with mendacious crap like that.

So, Mr Conservative-high-and-mighty - he who is always swooning with indignation at other poster's opinions...produce the posts where I've defended Man Monis?

Go ahead - go and have a scratch about.

Good luck - because you'll need it!

You're obviously Jayb Mark II, who yodelled much the same thing - and failed to produce the evidence....but don't let that stop you, ConservativeHippie.

You go right ahead and prove to everyone here that you're not a misrepresentative, unscrupulous, shifty clod who runs off at mouth because he lacks real debating skills - so decides to say anything that comes to mind to blacken the name of another poster.

Off you go and prove you're not of that ilk.

Grab your basket and pluck up every post where Poirot defended Man Monis - and bring your bounty back to the OLO table for all your fans to feast upon!

I hope they're not hungry....

As for Slipper and Thomson, you'll find that I was defending the "rule of law" - something you seem to think is a "technicality"...but there you go.

Dear Poirot,

There's quite a few people who don't seem to have a
clue about the rule of law and what it means.
They don't seem to understand why set a different
standard for the Speaker, someone meant to uphold
the standards of our Parliament.

Interestingly Andrew Bolt asks this very question in
the Herald Sun. He states that "Bronwyn Bishop must
resign - or prove she didn't try to cheat taxpayers
by charging them $5000 for her notorious helicopter
jaunt. What employee would go unpunished for
apparently trying to diddle their boss of that kind of
money? So why set a different standard for the Speaker,
someone meant to uphold the standards of our Parliament."

John Hewson, Peter Costello, and other Liberal MPs
fully agree. More voices are joining the chorus
condemning Mrs Bishop's behaviour. And Mr Abbott who so
relentlessly pursued Mr Slipper - now knows exactly what he
needs to do.

"For any Parliamentarian, let alone the Speaker ... such
allegations go to the integrity of the highest parliamentary
office in the House of Representatives... it is therefore
incumbent for the PM ...to require him to stand aside
until these matters are concluded before the courts."
(Mr Abbott in 2012).

Fox, "There's quite a few people who don't seem to have a
clue about the rule of law and what it means"

Is that so? Then do tell us about the rule of law where federal politicians' entitlements are concerned.

Have you referred to that ANAO report yet? Because the government's own auditor and the administering department might benefit from your advice. See here,

<ANAO Audit Report No.3 2009–10
Administration of Parliamentarians' Entitlements
by the Department of Finance and Deregulation
http://www.anao.gov.au/uploads/documents/2009-10_ANAO_Audit_Report_3_.pdf

-Tabled in the House of Representatives and Senate, 8 September 2009

As a reminder, Rudd Government 2007–10, Gillard 24 June 2010 – 27 June 2013 and Rudd 27 June 2013 - 18 September 2013.

For interest, Bill Shorten and some of his colleagues served in the Rudd and Gillard governments.
[Posted by onthebeach, Friday, 24 July 2015 12:59:37 AM]>

Foxy one.
What is the total dollar cost of all the salaries to operate the Parliament and of Australia, that is wasted on schoolyard rabble type noise and interruption PER MINUTE, that Speaker Bishop is endeavouring to overcome to get the nation to progress with worthwhile business debate?

Dear JF Aus,

Bronwyn Bishop is an absolute disgrace whose
behaviour in the Chair has brought the
Parliament into disrepute, Her behaviour as
Speaker would not be tolerated in the Parliaments of other
Commonwealth countries that also have the
Westminster System like Canada, New Zealand, and of course -
the UK.

The following website is worth a read:

http://independentaustralia.net/politics/politics-display/browyn-bishop-the-worlds-worst-speaker,7107

If you really believe that her ejecting 400 Labor MPs
compared to only 7 Coalition Members is being "even-handed,"
behaviour of a supposedly impartial Speaker, than there is
nothing more to be said.

Foxy,

JF Aus thinks govt members sit quietly on their side, filling in their lunch forms and reciting Advance Australia Fair - while the rabble on the left shout non-stop over the dispatch box.

Has he ever watched Question Time?

If he did, he'd see members on both sides doing what they've always done - and that is to interject vociferously.

Both sides.

It's nothing to see the govt "front bench" mouthing off in exactly the same manner as those opposite - louder and more vehement at times.

Bishop is deaf to those on her right on the majority of occasions.

Fox,

What law has the Speaker, Bronwyn Bishop broken? You claim to be an expert on the law relevant to politicians entitlements.

You have previously insisted on due legal process and a formal court finding of guilty for those you happen to side with.

otb,

"Labor believes the case hinges on whether Mrs Bishop signed a Presiding Officer's Charter Certification form. The form requires the Speaker to confirm that a charter is for her "office holder duties" and states that knowingly giving false or misleading information is a serious criminal offence."

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/bronwyn-bishop-expense-scandal-investigation-in-the-hands-of-finance-department-20150718-gif75a.html#ixzz3grbYzb29

Of course, due process should be allowed to take place - but the above outlines the potential offence.

Foxy,

Considering that labor appointed Slipper, who had been removed from pre selection for abusing entitlements, as speaker and kept him even after he spent taxpayers money like water. The left has no wiggle room.

Let's see how Shorten fares after throwing Labor's asylum seeker policy overboard and admitting that Rudd and Juliar were mass killers.

Poirot,

I wouldn't be placing to much stock on what any of the federal members who didn't implement the recommendations of the ANAO Report have to say on politicians entitlements.

Cynicism rules. There would be precious few politicians on both sides of the Parliament, Reps and Senate, who wouldn't prefer that Bronwyn Bishop should fall on her sword form being undermined and bullied to do so.

Of course Bishop erred and was casual at least (talking principles where public money is concerned) so as far as we the public might see politicians' allowances.

I would very much like to say that politicians have the flexibility they need where their travel and other entitlements are concerned. However, we all being obliged to accept that the politicians we elected to represent us have demonstrated in the past and present, that they have a vested interest in conditions that are easily abused and they are quite determined to protect that situation.

The auditors and the administering department have walked over eggshells for years, diplomatically trying to get interest in some accountability and proposing solutions, but to no avail. True, the Abbott government recently made some very slight amendment, but avoided the ANAO Report that their political opponents (but not opponents where politicians' entitlements are concerned!) deliberately ignored when in Office.

'Bronnie' must fall to protect all of the other noses in the trough of public money. I must say (reluctantly) to her credit, that she is proving that women can be tough and resilient, because she is not volunteering to be the whipping boy so they all can continue on, business as usual.

As usual, there are so many self-serving, cynical, greedy, career politicians in both Houses that it is unlikely a champion, a statesman, will emerge to represent the public interest.

Dear Poirot,

It should not be that difficult to work out whether an
MP chartering a helicopter to get to a party fund-raiser
is breaking the rules. Yet its amazing how many rusted-on
Liberal supporters still don't get it.

Dear Shadow Minister,

Mr Slipper has been cleared of all charges by the Supreme
Court.

It is not a question of how Mr Shorten will fare in the
future. It is a question of - Will Mr Abbott have a future?

Fox.
The numbers Foxy, on topic numbers, cost of the helicopter compared to cost of the schoolyard-type noisy interruption of genuine national debate and business.

And an individual Observer for a day would not see the need to constantly try t get the House in order.

Dear JF Aus,

Yes. The numbers ejected from the House certainly
are a clear indication of our Speaker's bias.

Having a truly independent Speaker would allow for the
Parliament as an institution separate from the
government to keep ALL ministers accountable - and
not just singling out the Opposition as is currently done.

We should follow the example of the UK's Speaker.
Who is independent from the government.

Foxy,

Labor's Speaker got off on a technicality. The finding that he submitted forged documents still stands.

Liberals get that left whingers have double standards and ignores entitlement abuses by their own MPs but kicks up a great fuss when liberal MPs do the same.

SM,

"Labor's Speaker got off on a technicality. The finding that he submitted forged documents still stands."

Not what this says:

""A Canberra court has thrown out Peter Slipper's conviction for defrauding the Commonwealth.

Justice John Burns on Thursday found the prosecution had not proven Mr Slipper did not conduct parliamentary business on his visits to Canberra region wineries.

"It follows that it was not open to the magistrate, viewing the evidence as a whole, to convict," the judge found.

Justice Burns ordered the appeal be upheld and the convictions and penalties imposed by the magistrate be set aside."

"Verdicts of not guilty will be substituted with respect to each charge."

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/peter-slipper-conviction-overturned-by-canberra-court-20150226-13p7b1.html#ixzz3gmOnzYFW

You still haven't submitted your evidence that Slipper was up on a charge of "submitting forged documents".

Details please.....

As far as I can see he was initially convicted (before that judgement was overturned) of defrauding the Commonwealth.

Which documents submitted by Slipper were forged?

Direct us to finding where it states that he was convicted of submitting forged documents?"

Dear Shadow Minister,

The Supreme Court rulings were not based on a
"technicality."

And as for double standards?

You have to look no further than our current Prime
Minister for his thuggery and his "Take No Prisoners"
track record.

I'd keep quiet on that subject if I were you.

Funny, I thought this thread was about whether Ms Bishop should be tossed out of the Speaker's chair for her conduct. Yet to the usual suspects it's about almost everything else - mainly switching the topic to unsubstantiated allegations of what Tweedledee had done. The only behaviour of Tweedledee relevant to the topic of the thread is whether they behaved like yobbos in Parliament, forcing the Speaker's hand. I haven't watched much of Parliament but what I have watched (especially Question Time) contained no hooliganism - just Opposition pollies being thrown out the moment they started to raise a question or a point of order.

The other points made by the usual suspects have been about issues totally irrelevant to the conduct of Ms Bishop - and what should be done about it.

Footage of Parliament will be on file and together with Hansard can assist a Royal Commission into Ms Bishop's behaviour and the complicity of her colleagues. Remember many payback Royal Commissions are owed when the Libs and the Squatters’ Party have been dragged kicking and screaming to an election and lose government. There are plenty of issues more serious than the antics of a silly old harridan to warrant Royal Commissions to repay those tame witch-hunts that have been used against especially Rudd, Gillard and Shorten.

Foxy

Actually they were, What was accepted was that the documents submitted to Finance were fraudulent. However PS was charged with defrauding Finance not just committing fraud.

P.S. there is more evidence that Shorten is a rapist, and Juliar is a crook, than of any thuggery by Abbott.

Come, come, Poirot and Foxy, you obviously don't know the law in the manner that our most learned friend does. It took hours and hours of painstakingly watching TV crime and courtroom drama before SM was qualified to pass legal judgments. Heck, I know for a fact he watched every episode of 'Rumpole of the Bailey' twice, even watching it backwards. I too was once cynical about Shadows legal qualifications, believing he had got them out of a 'Cornflakes' pack, Shadow has corrected me on that, in fact it was a 'Ricebubbles' packet, so there.

Regardless of the findings of some menial judge, in some inferior lower court in Canberra, our very own (Labor) hanging judge, the lord protector of all things Liberal, his excellency, the forums Chief Justice, our very own Judge Jeffreys, aka Shadow Minister, has delivered his verdict from upon high!

Rudd, guilty as charged, Gillard guilty as charged, Shorten guilty as charged, Slipper guilty as charged! guilty, guilty, guilty. And, as you know there can be but one sentence passed upon such villainous blaggards! etc etc of of course etc. Shadow will carry out the sentence of the court, he is also chief prosecutor and the courts executioner.

p/s To show SM is not biased, and does have a heart, Bronnie, the court fines you not guilty, you may go free with the blessing of the court.

Paul1405,

The Greens new leadership might be better served by trying to show clean air between the Greens and others on the use of politicians' entitlements, rather than by joining in the Jackasses in their chorus for a ritual burning at the stake, so that the remainder of the Parliament are Scott-free to go about their business as usual, getting their share of those entitlements and stretching the envelope as they do so.

Most are cynically protecting self-interest by having the older woman as the whipping boy and sacrifice required to shove the whole smelly issue of entitlements under the carpet.

The tabloid hacks of 2015, the forever-angry ABC ones too, would embarrass any of the worst fools reporting current affairs back years ago. They would make the late Richard Carlton seem Award material, even while dead.

They're still at it. Relevance long out the window. The floor's awash.

Foxy,

Talking of thuggery, just look at the brutality of those accusing Abbott.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/life/weekend-australian-magazine/tony-abbott-greg-sheridan-and-the-1977-aus-conference-a-political-baptism-of-fire/story-e6frg8h6-1227455780155

"One of the most serious incidents concerned one of our Newcastle supporters, a woman named Anne. One night, after a series of unpleasant scuffles, I had gone across the road to bed in the Catholic college where Tony and I were staying. One of the delegates went over to Anne and said quietly to her: “We’ll do you in tonight. You’ll get yours.”

Tony and another Democratic Club member from Sydney escorted Anne, who was quite frightened by the threat, back to her room in one of the halls of residence. Two men approached and told her she was lucky they hadn’t got her that night, but there would be another time. Then four or five more men came up and Tony and Anne and the other Democrat started running. Anne made it back to her room; Tony was attacked in the corridor, with several of the Maoists kicking him and one threatening him with a beer bottle.

In an act of extraordinary bravery, Anne came out of her room and tried to stop the assault. She was spat on and abused in the foulest language. She was pushed about and bruised. As they left, the attackers told Anne what would happen to her later. Anne and Tony went back to the ­conference and lodged a formal complaint. At first they were laughed at, although Anne had broken down and was crying. Finally, AUS set up an examination, decided that nothing much had happened and of course no one on the left was censured, much less expelled. ­Taking a high profile against the left exposed people to danger."

Emperor Julian,

As we know, one of the complaints against the Speaker is that "relevance" means nothing to her when the govt is holding the floor.

It's quite obvious from Shadow Minister's last post that it means nothing to him as well....

Stay tuned for another exciting episode of 'The Student Days of Tone' where our hero Tony Baloney is pitted once more against the evil forces of L.A.B.O.R. Listen as our intrepid hero is forced to protect the beautiful but virtuous Anne, Hold up in the "Catholic Cottage" and surrounded on all sides by the criminal agents of L.A.B.O.R led by the sinister Doctor Gough, our hero Tone is able to hatch a clever but ingenious plan to save the beautiful Anne from the ravages of the evil agents of L.A.B.O.R.
'The Student Days of Tone' is brought to you by our sponsor Bronnie's Luxury Copters and Limo's of South Yarra. "Only For The Discerning Execitive!"

Lol! - Paul

But wait - here's a lengthy article and comprehensive run-down of Bronnie's machinations.

http://www.thesaturdaypaper.com.au/news/politics/2015/07/25/bronwyn-bishops-lifelong-gambits/14377464002167

"Although she has always denied it, she relied heavily on the support of the ultra-right wing of the party, the so-called “Uglies”. This, together with her personal style, saw Fahey government police minister Ted Pickering describe her as “the unacceptable face of the Liberal Party”."

"Bishop was loathed by the party’s moderates, not just because of her alleged preparedness to do business with people accused of branch stacking, character assassination, racism and anti-Semitism, but because of how her personal ambitions were seen to trump party unity."

"The state president was meant to provide a sense of harmony, and yet her ability to stir up the pocket branches on issues such as the monarchy, flag and family values ensured a level of hostility and division that the organisational wing had never experienced."

"And this was the third remarkable aspect of her maiden speech in 1994 – that, unbeknown to anyone at the time, she had decided to borrow heavily for her speech from the pages of one of the most bizarre political tracts ever written in Australia.

The book was called Egoessentialism and its author, Bedrich (Rick) Kabriel, was a Czech-born migrant..."

"Bishop shared – without attribution – Kabriel’s thoughts in her maiden speech.."

Etc...

More...

http://www.thesaturdaypaper.com.au/opinion/topic/2015/07/25/abbotts-military-pretensions-amid-echoes-howards-prattlers/14377464002158

"The guilt implied by Abbott’s probation puts Department of Finance secretary Jane Halton in an interesting position. Halton caught the Australian Federal Police hospital pass when they referred the problem to her late on Friday last week, after the ALP had referred it to them. Forty-eight hours before that, at a “Women in Focus” cocktail party held by Commonwealth Bank for selected customers at the National Press Club on July 15, Halton spoke about her experience as a female leader in the male-dominated bureaucracy. The Choppergate story had broken that day. Halton used it as an example of sexist double standards: she dismissed its significance, suggesting that had Bishop been a man, the helicopter claims would probably not have been a story."

"Even that early in the Choppergate saga, Halton’s dismissal of Bishop’s pricey, party-driven helicopter ride struck some of Commonwealth Bank’s cocktail party guests as surprising. Against the backdrop of Halton’s history in relation to the “children overboard” affair, however, her point about Choppergate’s potentially sexist dimension is interesting to consider. Halton’s silence about the Howard government’s children overboard lie helped it win the 2001 election, arguably one of the great political disasters of postwar Australian politics."

Reassuring to know the AFP tossed this one back to Halton's Finance - the polar opposite of their treatment of the Slipper allegations.

("Living the theme, Abbott lays his head down at night on a pillow in the Australian Federal Police College in Canberra. He increasingly appears in the media in military or quasi-military settings, often wearing military-style gear. But Abbott took this to a new extreme this week, holding the retreat with premiers at an actual military base, Sydney’s Victoria Barracks.")

Hi Poirot,

Yes Bishop is very sus when comes to her connection to The Liberal Party Uglies, so is Abbott and his mentor Howard. One sinister operative within the Liberal Party was Lyenko Urbanchich an Eastern European who escaped to Australia after WWII. As head of The Liberal Party Ethnic Council, Urbanchich was heavily into ethnic branch stacking. A former Nazi collaborator in WWII Urbanchich was part of the war criminals that influenced the Liberal Party from the 1950's, giving rise to the faction known as "The Uglies" today. Urbanchich combined with the hard rights David Clarke in 1996 to establish the far-right’s ironically named “central committee”; controlling the NSW state executive, the Young Liberals (in NSW and federally) and the NSW Women's Council.
Using their control the Uglies were able to purge the NSW Liberal Party of moderates and take full control. Urbenchich died in 2006 and Clarke was dumped in 2014 following the ICAC corruption findings.

http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/liberal-hard-right-faction-dumps-leader-and-regroups-after-icac-20141013-1155ht.html

Maybe OTB who is forever banging on about The NSW 'Watermelon' Greens, factions and Lee Rhiannon might care to comment about the ultra rights influence in The Liberal Party, or is that not part of his agenda here. Shadow might also like to throw his 2 cents worth in as well.

Foxy,
In plain English, you have shown experience in accounting costs incurred by Speaker BB, but in comparison what is the total cost per minute of time wasted by interruption and other political distraction in Parliament?

Many Australians are tired of productive national business not being done.

Dear JF Aus,

I am not an accounting expert and my earlier figures
were taken from the Sydney Morning Herald as I stated
earlier. All I can do for you is
suggest that you either contact the government Finance Department
in Canberra or your local MP to help you find the answers
you're after . Either that or go to your local library for some
help.

Question Time has always been a very robust time in Parliament.
It was formerly a democratic safeguard, but its now a
rancorous farce.

Questions on notice are defensively answered by public
servants. Questions without notice receive irrelevant,
rambling and propagandist replies.

Governments also use up the time with Dorothy Dixers where
sycophantic and ambitious backbenchers ask questions for
which the Minister has a well prepared answer boasting
about his own and his government's brilliance.

An Independent Speaker would be able to hold the
MPs to account - as they do in the UK. Mrs Bishop is not an
impartial or independent (from government) Speaker.

It should be noted that the majority of Liberal candidates and those elected in NSW during the past 15 years have been nominees of the "Uglies" with a few notable exceptions, Barry O'Farrell being one, a factual moderate who played the game very well. Unfortunately Barry become his own man, particularly on the billion dollar poles and wires privatization issue. This perceived failure led to the set up of O'Farrell with the 'Winegate' affair before the ICAC, this set up was orchestrated by party members and their right wing controllers from outside, Barry had to go!. Mike Baird one of the North Shore Mafia Liberal members was elected in 2007 and, took over from O'Farrell as Primer in 2014, Baird moved quickly to okay the NSW electricity privatization.

The 'Uglies' would definitely be the Trotskyist Watermelon Greens faction.

This criticism of the Greens in the UK could easily apply to the Greens in Australia with the restriction that the Greens in Australia have always been far too elitist to ever be concerned about doing anything practical for the 'Struggle Streets'.

http://www.spectator.co.uk/the-week/leading-article/9426951/calling-the-green-party-socialist-is-an-insult-to-socialists/

Paul,

I see that you and parrot have descended into fairy tales. There is no more hard right faction in the libs than there is a Stalinist faction in Labor (that is in the greens) Lee Rhiannon, the greens member for ignoring atrocities who goes to bed with a Stalin mannequin, goes with SHY who is the member for drowning refugees who sinks refugee boats in her bath every night, and Solom the member for molesting children.

Notably all the information refuting the fabricated claims against TA have credible witnesses, yet those against TA have none.

Fox to 'Dear'(sic) JF Aus, "Questions without notice receive irrelevant, rambling and propagandist replies"

That is a description that could equally be applied to your manipulative refusal to give JF Aus a direct answer. That is the way of propagandists's spin: never answer, play with a flat bat and ramble away.

As JF Aus has said, "Many Australians are tired of productive national business not being done" and yes, the cost to the taxpayer of that incessant and childish interruption and other political distraction in Parliament would far exceed the claim by the Speaker for that helicopter (that is being recouped anyhow along with the 25% loading).

So the short answer you should have given JF Aus was a simple yes.

Yes Minister no minister one flew over the cuckoos nest, comes to mind for a good film series, synopsis for which is this thread.
Have lots of helicopter scenes, vineyard tours and the like.

Foxy,

There has never been an impartial or unbiased speaker from Labor either. Even Harry Jenkins who the left whingers hold up as the ideal threw out roughly 10 opposition members for every labor one.

SM,

"There has never been an impartial or unbiased speaker from Labor either. Even Harry Jenkins who the left whingers hold up as the ideal threw out roughly 10 opposition members for every labor one."

While it's a fairly basic premise that around 90% of throw-outs would be of Opposition members no matter who's in govt (Jenkins threw out 265 members between 2008 and Nov 2011)....Bronnie has taken things to an extreme. Less than 2 years in the position and she's sin-binned 407 members.....with her record of removals around 57 Opposition members for every Coalition one.

HJ: 10 - 1

BB: 57 - 1

Parrot,

Thanks for acknowledging that Labor speakers are also extremely biased.

The difference in ratios can be attributed to Labor MPs acting like rabid chimpanzees.

What's the break-up where an Opposition without policies sets out to deliberately disrupt, particularly where they focus on the Speaker?

Calliong them schoolboys is an insult to students, few of whom would ever act up like the fools seen in the federal Parliament. Shame!

The public are not the easily-led 'punters'(sic) with deficient memories that Shorten and others imagine them to be.

The public are very conscious of the handsome remuneration politicians get, irrespective of how they perform in the House.

Let me help you there, SM...

The "extraordinary" difference can be attributed to the shameless bias, lack of scruples and command of the present Speaker.

Here's how she conducts herself when her idea of entitlement is challenged:

"Clayton Long was preparing the business class cabin for take-off when rumour began to spread. Something was wrong; a passenger was causing a stir at the gate.

It was the year 2000, or thereabouts. Long was a Qantas flight attendant for 27 years, so it's not surprising he can't remember the precise date of this particular Perth to Sydney flight. But he's adamant he remembers how it unfolded.

"We were told that the plane was going to be delayed," Long says. "We weren't told the exact reason at the time. It stretched out a little bit. Then we were told it was Bronwyn Bishop causing the problem."

The way Long tells it, the delay stretched on for 10 minutes and then 20. Everyone else was on the plane and wanted to know: what the hell was going on?

"It was because she didn't get the seat that she prefers. She likes the front row of business class," Long says. "But business class was full with the exception of two seats. She was given the seat with no one next to her but she still wasn't happy."

After half an hour or so Bishop was finally coaxed on board, Long says. If she didn't take her assigned seat the plane would leave without her.

"She made her displeasure very clear when she got on to the aircraft," Long says.

Long was the senior attendant and his underlings were visibly scared of this formidable woman. He decided he'd give Bishop, then a Howard government minister, the best personal service he could in an effort to smooth things over.

It didn't go well.

"She wouldn't take anything. She was like a spoilt child," he says. "I just thought it was incredible. She's paid by the Australian taxpayer. To even get into her mind that she's entitled to a particular seat just floors me."

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/bishop-controversy-subsides-and-nothing-has-changed-20150725-gijfcv.html#ixzz3gyhNvjMt

Yes Poirot, the old crow is well known for her dummy spits whenever she does not get her own way. She sees herself as top of the heap in the born to rule class.

Shadow, Lee might go to bed with a blow up Stalin doll, but Bronnie, Johnny and Tony got into bed with a real live Nazi, Lyenko Urbanchich.

http://www.smh.com.au/news/obituaries/ardent-nazi-took-liberal-to-extremes/2006/03/03/1141191845008.html

In 1986, NSW Labor minister Frank Walker informed parliament that (Liberal Party member) Urbanchich was a senior propagandist for the quisling government of Slovenia, during Nazi occupation in World War II. Walker added that Urbanchich was listed by the Yugoslav government as a war criminal.
Lyenko Urbanchich was a member of the Slovenian militia, the Domobrans during WWII, which worked hand-in-glove with the German occupiers. Urbanchich organised its first public procession on October 10. The Domobrans were directly under the command of an SS general and on Hitler's birthday, April 20, 1944, pledged allegiance to the "Führer". The NSW Liberal Party power broker Urbanchich as part of the Domobrans' secret intelligence, The Black Hand, committed cruel atrocities for the occupying Nazi's in the dead of night, leaving a black palm print at the scene of such atrocities.
Shadow you say Lee Rhiannon condoned atrocities, here is a powerful Liberal who actually committed them! What do you say about that?

Beach off into cloud cuckoo land, Did not Tony Abbott describe himself as the political love child of John Howard and Bronlyn Bishop, obviously he failed to mention the Nazi Lyenko Urbanchich was there at the time of conception giving the union his political blessing.
You continually show your ignorance of the Greens and politics in general, I must have hit the hail on the head, you are situated up a tree, somewhere in the back blocks of Queensland, correct! Shadow is simply in denial about the hard right Liberal faction the "Uglies", you sir simply did not know they existed, too concerned with The Greens and Fabians. You would make a great member of the "Uglies" their policies are right up your ally

Parrot,

Thanks for acknowledging the shameless bias of Harry Jenkins.

Paul,

Thanks for acknowledging the atrocities condoned by Lee Rhiannon and the pedogreen Karel Salomon. It is nice to realise that every green has a personal deviance.

SM,

Lol!...we know you're struggling when you resort to your special armoury of kiddie names.

Keep up the good work!

Shadow,
What I do acknowledge is Lyenko Urbanchich was a Nazi who committed atrocities against innocent civilians during WWII. Unbanchich was able to escaped to Australia, and join The Liberal Party becoming head of its Ethnic Council in NSW. By your silence I take it you support the actions of Unbanchich. Are you a factional member of The Liberal Party Uglies?
p/s Could you please send Beach a membership application, he is desperate to join, his kind of folks. Address c/o The Black Stump, Back Blocks of Queensland.

Dear Shadow Minister,

You stated that "every Green has a personal deviance."

So, members of the Liberal Party don't?

I take it this is a clash of competing moralities in which
the winners will declare themselves to be normal and moral
and the losers to be deviant and immoral.
I can see where this is heading. In general, from your
posts, the decision to stigmatize or even criminalize
particular acts will depend on which of the contending
groups has the most wealth, power, prestige, and other
resources. For example, begging in the streets will be
considered deviant, but living in idleness off inherited
wealth will not be. Neither will catching helicopters to
Party fund-raisers at taxpayers expense, and so on.

We get it.

Foxy,

Don't you know it's always the conservative types who bang on abut the deviance of this one and that one...but the reality is more like this, I'm afraid...

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-07-27/british-lord-john-buttifant-sewel-quits-post-after-drugs-video/6649298

"A senior British lord has quit his post and will face a police investigation after a tabloid newspaper released a video showing him semi-naked and snorting white powder through a banknote off a woman's breasts.

John Buttifant Sewel stood down from his post as deputy speaker of Britain's unelected House of Lords after The Sun on Sunday released the footage and accused him of using cocaine and of hiring prostitutes."

Especially the types that get themselves on official panels to oversee the behaviour of others...(like Bronnie making a name for herself policing govt waste:)

Here is this guy's special responsibility:

"Ironically, Mr Sewel's senior position in the House of Lords tasked him with ensuring fellow lords behaved properly.

Packed with political appointees from all parties, its role is to scrutinise government legislation, but some politicians on the left believe it is an elitist anachronism and should be abolished.

Mr Sewel's behaviour was "shocking and unacceptable", Ms D'Souza said in a statement."

"The Sun on Sunday said Mr Sewel had disgraced himself and parliament and said that Westminster, the seat of parliament, sometimes seemed as if it was "a giant cesspit of moral, financial and sexual corruption".

"His behaviour reeks of the sense of entitlement so widespread in our political class," it wrote.

"The Deputy Speaker of the House of Lords should be a figure of respect and unimpeachable character. Not a low-life."

Funny that?

"The scandal follows a press campaign aimed at John Bercow, the speaker of the House of Commons, over what his critics say are his excessive expenses."

(I'd like to see a comparison of the British Speaker's expenses and Bronnie's)

Otto Abetz "Uncle Otto a relative of senior Liberal politician Eric Abetz was Adolf Hitler's ambassador in occupied France and was later convicted as a Nazi war criminal.

Shadow, Bronnie, Johnny and Tony may not have had their very own uncle Otto like Abetz, but they did have their honorary uncle, "Uncle Lyenko" for political advice.

Although she (Bishop) has always denied it, she relied heavily on the support of the ultra-right wing of the party, the so-called “Uglies”. This, together with her personal style, saw Fahey government police minister Ted Pickering describe her as “the unacceptable face of the Liberal Party”.
Unbeknown to anyone at the time, Bishop had decided to borrow heavily for her maiden parliamentary speech from the pages of one of the most bizarre political tracts ever written in Australia.
The book was called 'Egoessentialism' and its author, Bedrich (Rick) Kabriel, was a Czech-born migrant who had arrived in Australia in the 1950s to set up Fontana Films, a film studio and production company in Sydney’s inner south-west.
It was there in the grounds of Fontana Films in the mid-1980s that Kabriel’s friend, Lyenko Urbanchich Liberal party member and wanted Nazi, established his Liberty Research office – a consultancy firm for right-wing organisations. Fortunately Urbanchich went to meet his Fuhrer in 2006.

They are everywhere in the Liberal Party!

A political campaigner working for the Liberal party in Victoria has resigned after his history of links to white supremacist neo-Nazi groups was revealed.Scott Harrison was largely working on the campaign of Liberal candidate Tony McManus in the electorate of Lara.

Wait there's more;

THE OCCASION WAS A SPEECH given by Craig Kelly MHR, a representative of Prime Minister Tony Abbott celebrating Croatian National Day . 10th April 1941 is also the day that the Axis powers set up the state of Croatia it brief but bloody existence as an annex of the Axis powers, it was overseen by Poglavnik Ante Paveli&#263;, in its brief existence it saw the deaths of some 800,000 Yugoslavian subjects at the hands of the Nazi's and underlings from the Croatian State.

Paul,

The greens and Labor are chock full of communists of the kind that turn a blind eye to the murders of 10s of millions of people under the banner of socialism, and pedophiles and kiddy diddlers such Karel Solom of the Pedogreens and many from Labor.

Poirot,

I know that you are desperate when you quote completely unsubstantiated single person recollections of events from more than a decade ago, who can recall minute details of the event, but due to fading memory, cannot recall the date or even the year. This sounds like another pathetic fabrication and the failure to recall the date or flight was to prevent anyone else contradicting the lie.

Shadow, where do you get your nonsense from, have you been "channeling the spirit world" again, are you in contact with "UNCLE LYENKO", the Liberal Nazi from hell, or was it "UNCLE OTTO"? LOL

I note you do not dispute any of the facts I have posted

The return of Konrad Kalejs, an Australian citizen deported from Canada as a World War II Nazi collaborator and leading member of a death squad responsible for the slaughter of 20,000 people, starkly highlights the hypocrisy of the Coalition parties. Yet, as Kalejs' arrival dramatically exposed, Coalition governments have for decades sheltered Nazi collaborators, some accused of horrific crimes. Many of them joined the Liberal Party and became influential within it. The respected Simon Wiesenthal Centre, which tracks down Nazi fugitives, estimates that there could be as many as 400 Nazis in Australia who committed serious crimes during World War II.
Shadow of the estimated 400 how many joined The Liberal Party? Possibly all 400! We can add Konrad Kalejs to this list. Who's uncle is he? Now there is Uncle Otto, Uncle Lyenko and Uncle Konrad, how many Nazi relatives joined The Liberal Party after WWII?

Paul,

I also note that you don't dispute that the greens are riddled with communists and pedophiles.

Dear Shadow Minister,

All political parties are made up of all sorts of
people with all kinds of "inclinations."

Aren't the Liberals all for unbridled
commitment to individualism.

Beach, as a want-a-be member of the "Uglies". Just for you.

This criticism of the Deputy Speaker in the UK could easily apply to the Speaker in Australia with the restriction that the Speaker in Australia have always been far too elitist to ever be concerned about doing anything practical for the sex workers and the drug trade.

A BRITISH deputy speaker in charge of upholding standards in the House of Lords has resigned after allegedly being filmed snorting cocaine with two sex workers.
Video obtained by the Sun on Sunday allegedly shows Baron John Sewel, 69, naked and snorting white powder from a woman’s breasts at his rent-protected London apartment.
The married father of four, who is involved in legislating on sexual offences acts, prostitution and brothel-keeping laws, now faces a police investigation.

[Deleted for abuse.]

Paul,

Thanks for giving up your time from the pedogreen play date, now you can go back to "channelling" brother Karel Salomon, and hit the spot with uncle Brown eye Bob, or get Bent with Adam.

Shodow, thanks for sending the minutes of last nights "Uglies" faction meeting. I'm sorry you were unsuccessful at channeling "UNCLE LYENKO" and "UNCLE OTTO", but I'm sure all was not lost watching that most enjoyable short film 'Fun in the Sun on the Russian Front'. Next month you are putting on a real treat for the lads, a special guest star no less, inviting Bronnie to helicopter in at taxpayers expense and talk to the fellas on her favourite subjects 'Why Tone's a Great Guy' and "Egoessentialism", can't wait for your report.

Paul,

Thanks for pointing out the Labour MP sniffing coke and cuddling prostitutes. Quite a trend for the left whingers.

At least he wasn't cuddling children like his green counterpart.

How many children have the Aus Pedogreens "channelled"?

When caught ripping the taxpayer off Tony Baloney was forced to make good, not so Tony's fellow wroughter, Bronwyn Bishop. The pair of free loaders had flown to Albury to attend fellow Liberal Sophie Mirabella's wedding, nothing what so ever to do with parliamentary business, simply the pair were ripping off the taxpayer. That was back in 2006, Bishop is yet to make good as she was instructed to do so by Abbott, by refunding the money she ripped from the taxpayer! This woman has no shame!

Paul,

I have to defend Bronnie here - it's clear she was on top secret rorting business on this occasion...

See here:

http://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2015/jul/28/bronwyn-bishop-under-pressure-over-expense-claim-for-mirabella-wedding

"Bronwyn Bishop’s office claims she has to keep secret her meetings in Albury on the weekend she claimed travel expenses to attend Sophie Mirabella’s wedding."

And here - well, this one speaks for itself.

http://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/2015/07/28/speaker-spends-14000-functions

"Speaker Bronwyn Bishop has spent over $14,000 on mobile bars and cocktail tables for functions in her Parliament House suite since taking on the role in 2013."

Hi Poirot The old gal must have been off doing "Secret Bronnie Business", simply laughable! What a pathetic load of rubbish, the woman is not even a good liar. She will say anything that comes to mind to protect her own ass!
Maybe Bronnie had a date with Shadow, and together they were "channeling" "UNCLE LYENKO" and "UNCLE OTTO", doing a bit of "research".

Bishop can clear the whole 'Weddinggate' scandal up by simply producing the committee minutes which show she was in Albury doing "research" for the committee, as she claims.

Paul,

Its absolute BS that every trip and car hire needs to minuted.

Perhaps she investigating the Local branch of the PEDOGREENS to check whether they were doing their customary review of Kiddie porn and where channeling Children again.

[Deleted for abuse.]

Oh dear...another wedding....another claim for travel expenses "written off as “committee chair business”."

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/victoria/speaker-bronwyn-bishop-charged-taxpayers-to-attend-a-wedding-as-questions-asked-over-albury-trip/story-fni0fit3-1227460141952?utm_content=SocialFlow&utm_campaign=EditorialSF&utm_source=HeraldSun&utm_medium=Twitter

"EMBATTLED Speaker Bronwyn Bishop has again been caught out — charging taxpayers to attend a wedding.

As pressure mounts for her removal, the Herald Sun can reveal Ms Bishop hit the public purse for $288 in travel allowance to stay in Brisbane on the night of MP Teresa Gambaro’s wedding in April 2007.

The latest revelation comes as parliamentary colleagues cast doubt over the legitimacy of her charging taxpayers for $600 flights to Albury in 2006."

"Ms Bishop was one of 180 guests, including then prime minister John Howard, to attend Ms Gambaro’s wedding to Robert Duffy at St Lucia Golf Links in Brisbane in 2007.

Travel expenses records show she claimed $288 for a one-night stay in Brisbane on the same day, for committee chair business.

It is unclear whether Ms Bishop also charged for her flights. as those details are not readily available to the public."

Here we go...

"Julie Bishop says Bronwyn Bishop is considering her position amid speculation the Labor party will use the resumption of Parliament to disrupt question time as part of the fallout from the Speaker's use of taxpayers entitlements.

This came as News Corp reported on Wednesday that Bronwyn Bishop claimed travel allowance to attend federal Liberal MP Teresa Gambaro's wedding in 2007.

The Foreign Minister's comments declining to support the Speaker are significant given her position as Deputy Liberal Leader and that she is considered an ally of Ms Bishop's."

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/speaker-bronwyn-bishop-is-considering-her-position-amid-expenses-scandal-julie-bishop-20150728-giml2e.html#ixzz3hEAABsEl

Hi Poirot, I am surprised, I thought these days Bronnie is the Liberal Parties "Nigel No Friends", even Tone wants to divorce his political mummy.
I think we were wrong about Bronnie and all those weddings she attends, she actually wasn't invited, just turned up for the taxpayer funded free nosh up!

I'm still waiting for one of the 'Usual Suspects' to post at least one achievement of Bishop's in all the years she has been in the parliament. Bishop was the incompetent minister in charge during the notorious 'Kerosene Bath Scandal' at Riverside nursing home.

BRONWYN BISHOP, MINISTER FOR AGED CARE: "When I heard of this incident of frail Australians, elderly Australians, being bathed in a bath of kerosene to get rid of an alleged attack of scabies, I couldn't believe my ears."
Bishop was made aware of a "problem" at the home but failed to act, for 12 months before hand the incompetent minister had been made aware of "problems" in aged care facilities, but she had failed to act . Should have jumped a helicopter and shot over to Riverside and other places herself and checked it out, however she was not to busy to feed of the taxpayer.

Paul,

yes...here's a good tag line:

"The dog ate Bronwyn Bishop's travel expenses homework – twice"

http://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2015/jul/29/the-dog-ate-bronwyn-bishops-travel-expenses-homework-twice?CMP=soc_568

"It sounds like the dog ate Bronwyn Bishop’s homework – twice. Even senior Liberals are having terrible trouble defending her.

First she claimed $600 in flights to Albury on the same weekend in 2006 as colleague Sophie Mirabella’s nearby wedding, because, she says, she had a secret meeting with an unnamed person late on a Friday afternoon regarding a parliamentary committee inquiry into balancing work and family life.

Fellow committee members were not told about the meeting, did not approve the travel and do not remember hearing anything that Bishop, the committee chair, gleaned from her conveniently-timed discussion.

It’s hard to imagine what aspect of work/life balance could be so sensitive as to require such secrecy and discretion, harder still to imagine why it would have to remain secret nine years later."

I hear Turnbull's been trolling the situation and tweeting his rides on public transport...Lol!

She's a goner - I reckon it'll all be over for Bronnie as Speaker before the resumption of parliament.

Paul,

Poll in the Sydney Morning Herald:

"Poll: Do you accept Bronwyn Bishop's explanation for her claim of $600 in return flights the weekend of Sophie Mirabella's wedding?"

Yes - 1%

No - 99%

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/speaker-bronwyn-bishop-is-considering-her-position-amid-expenses-scandal-julie-bishop-20150728-giml2e.html#ixzz3hEvsGELD

Again, is anyone suggesting that Bronwyn Bishop did anything illegal? Or that the administering department did not accept the claim?

The tabloids, the political spin masters (both sides) and the hysterical Twitterati are all peeing on a shrub, while denying the existence of the very large swamp behind, which are the wide-open, hazy and complex provisions and arrangements for political entitlements that are apparently designed to allow politicians to stretch the envelope and abuse the system.

It is precisely that, that should be the target of the critics, assuming of course that they might some day consider some accountability where politicians' entitlements are concerned, some much-needed productivity in both houses of the Parliament, and the forever forgotten public good (particularly getting some value for money for those dollars taken compulsorily form taxpayers).

It is very sorry indeed that there is no discussion nor interest in implementing the recommendations of the ANAO Report that was presented to both houses of Parliament (see my previous posts and link).

Who is representing the public interest in this? NO champion for change, no much-needed statesman or stateswoman has emerged. However there are plenty past and present politicians who would much prefer to have a fall guy and then sweep it all under the carpet, so they can carry on with those valued wide open conditions and an excuse that the toothless employees they boss, the public servants, have allowed them their claims.

otb,

"Again, is anyone suggesting that Bronwyn Bishop did anything illegal?..."

Yes....

"Labor believes the case hinges on whether Mrs Bishop signed a Presiding Officer's Charter Certification form. The form requires the Speaker to confirm that a charter is for her "office holder duties" and states that knowingly giving false or misleading information is a serious criminal offence."

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/bronwyn-bishop-expense-scandal-investigation-in-the-hands-of-finance-department-20150718-gif75a.html#ixzz3grbYzb29

"The ABC has spoken to senior members of the Government and there is little support for her. One described her position as "untenable", another called her actions "unconscionable".

All raised a large procedural hurdle: the Prime Minister cannot sack the Speaker, she can only be removed if a vote of no confidence is carried by the Lower House.

None believed that the Speaker would fall on her sword but there is broad agreement among those the ABC spoke to that the continuing scandal surrounding Mrs Bishop is damaging the Government.

One said few in the Party still backed the Speaker.

"Ropeable doesn't even come close," he said.

"This is week three and there is no sign of it ending. She has no support [in the party] because what she did was so unconscionable."

The Minister said the story was dogging MPs and senators wherever they went.

"It's a disaster," he said.

Another frontbencher said: "No-one can sack her. She's got to resign and she's got nothing to lose. If she resigns that's the end of her career."

Another did not believe the Prime Minister would try to force the Speaker out: "She won't resign and he won't ask her to go.

Leader of the House backs Bishop to remain Speaker

"Leader of the House, Christopher Pyne, has called on Government colleagues to stand firm and support Mrs Bishop to remain in the Speaker's chair.

"Stand firm against the demands by the Labor party to remove the Speaker," he told Sky News.

"These issues do come and go, they're always extremely unhelpful, but you also don't jump at the first whiff of grapeshot."

Mr Pyne also praised Mrs Bishop's conduct."

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-07-29/senior-ministers-ropeable-over-bronwyn-bishop-scandal/6656936

The govt seems to be on the horns of a dilemma....

Paul,

A little tantrum Yes. Happy to dish it out, but when you get the same back you stamp your little feet?

Behave like an adult and I will treat you like one.

Good to see Malcolm Turnbull making a point by taking public transport, trams and train, for official government business in Geelong, not a helicopter in sight. Why this bloke is not PM I don't know. How many train fares to Geelong can you get for a $5000 helicopter ride? More than 300 return trips, a train full of trips. Turnbull is rich enough to have hired the space shuttle to take him to Geelong, if he had wanted to, but no he chose public transport. Turnbull and Bishop, chalk and cheese.
A Liberal friend of mine who works for Turnbull tells me he is actually a really nice bloke and knowledgeable, I can believe that. Some might think I am opposed to The Liberal Party and its members per se, not so, there are still a few true blue Liberals who deserve respect for what they believe in and I certainly do not have a problem with them. Some might find this hard to believe, but at the last federal and state elections I gave my 2nd preference to the Liberal candidate over Labor, they were simply a better choice.

Radio broadcaster Alan Jones today asked Speaker Bronwyn Bishop if she asked for the helicopter and the answer was no.

I think it amazing in this day and age how a woman can be pulled down and kicked on the ground.

Dear JF Aus,

Bronwyn Bishop is in the public arena and
she dishes it out to others. Therefore
she has to also be able to take it especially
when she stuffs up. To excuse her simply because
she's female? Now that would be demeaning!

The Grrls are harsh where it concerns a woman who has made her own way in the world, eschewing the cronyism, favouritism and legs-up that the left's Emily's Listers expect and demand.

They can go on for pages Left-splaining away Gillard's mistakes though. Gillard is still casting herself as the victim.

The treatment of Speaker, Bronwyn Bishop by the Labor Opposition will be remembered in history as black days of Parliament.

From the public's perspective, those large executive salaries are wasted on fools who continually get thrown out of the chamber for being playing childish games.

What have Li'l Willie Shorten and the Opposition come up with as alternative policies? Zilch, as ex-Labor leader Mark Latham said, Labor is obsessed with gay marriage.

http://www.3aw.com.au/news/mark-latham-slams-labors-obsession-with-samesex-marriage-20150527-ghb1rv.html

Foxy one, how did BB stuff up as you put it?
Maybe she has been set up, since she did not ask for the helicopter.

Surely Bill Shorten with the rape accusation is a much more serious matter. Yet you say nothing about that.

Dear JF Aus,

Politicians are consistently told that entitlements are
supposed to be used on business related to their
work as parliamentarians but not for anything to do
with party political business or social events.

It's not just the helicopter ride with Mrs Bishop it's
also spending in the hundreds of thousands for local
and overseas travel that had nothing to do with her job.
She was unable to produce evidence for the reason for her
trips - which is extraordinary.

The Speaker's role is critical. She runs the lower house from
which government is drawn and to which it is answerable. Without
the Speaker's impartiality - actual and perceived - both
Members of Parliament and those watching lose respect for the
entire institution.

Mrs Bishop is a solicitor, she maintains her NSW practising
certificate 47 years since her admission and has spent the
past 27 years in parliament. She is not a political novice
and she should understand the law's strict views of those
occupying impartial offices. Yet her behaviour has been
biased in the extreme and in addition she has charged the public
purse for so many travel allowances that had nothing to do with
her job.

The Abbott-led Coalition chased Mr Slipper at the cost of
millions to the taxpayer to get back a measley sum - yet chooses
to ignore the atrocious behaviour of the Speaker.
This is not good enough.

As for Mr Shorten's alleged "rape" accusation?
That was investigated by the police and the
matter was dropped.

cont'd ...

I forgot to add that it is well past time to have
another detailed examination of how travel and
other entitlements are used in practice.
Limits should be set.

Foxy,
Speaker Bishop also does electorate work for constituents such as myself. Why should she have to blab my situation for example, in response to unjustified media accusations?
Slipper was clearly out on the booze for himself.
In contrast, fundraising is a key component of getting into office and remaining there.
i am not objecting to Shorten's legitimate fund raising or that of any politician.

What did the complainant say about the dropping of the rape accusation investigation?