Parrot,

How pathetic. Only Labor pollies would be stupid enough to organise only one item when on a trip. Can you not conceive of the study trip being moved to coincide?

Last week I went and visited my cousins in Melbourne, the trip being entirely paid by the company. Am I in danger of being fired? absolutely not. I simply had a meeting until 2pm, and arranged to meet my cousins after that. The same goes for politician's visits, and the onus is on the accuser to show that no legitimate parliamentary business occurred on the trip. While nudge nudge, wink wink, might be enough to cast innuendo, it does not in any way constitute evidence.

Considering that YOU personally claimed that Craig Thomson was innocent until proven guilty even with the pile of hard evidence, yet pronounce guilt based on innuendo, you personally are a huge hypocrite.

SM,

Explain Don Randall's largesse to himself?

SM,

Just noticed your last paragraph.

"Considering that YOU personally claimed that Craig Thomson was innocent until proven guilty even with the pile of hard evidence, yet pronounce guilt based on innuendo, you personally are a huge hypocrite."

You were the one arguing against the presumption of innocence in Thomson's case.

I'm not presuming anything particular regarding Mr Randall - but he has offered no explanation of his fishy expense claims.

I'm saying they should be "investigated."

I'm saying that many politician's expense claims should be investigated...that most of them appear to emanating from the Coalition is merely the way it is.

I'll also point out that the former FWA's civil case against Thomson has collapsed.

(We're all hypocrites to some degree...I'd be battling to surmount your particular skills in that area...you're a stunner in that regard)

P,

I actually took the 10 minutes to look into Barnaby Joyce going to the wedding in India, that you could easily have done.

His study tour was approved by Finance (as study tours are) long before he was invited to the wedding, he simply moved the tour to coincide with the wedding. The tax payer never paid for him to go to the wedding or for accommodation there, in fact, the cost to the tax payer was reduced.

As far as Craig Thomson was concerned I was claiming that he was guilty based on the hard evidence against him, and in his trial he has disputed none of it. The FWA civil claim has not been dropped, but has gone to mediation. The option of court is always available, but as he is likely to be bankrupt, The FWA is likely to be trying to save the taxpayer money.

At least you have dropped the stupid comparison of Slipper's case with the rest.

alex/downer/aka..shades/quote..<<His study tour..was approved by Finance (as study tours are) long before he was invited to the wedding, he simply moved the tour to coincide with the wedding.>>

guess he is lucky..
his low wage/teachers.were able to..accommodate his whim

these SPUR of the moment
ego ergo/weddings..[weeding]..can be so wearying..so much to learn
so many bosses/master exploiters..to appease..

oh..please alexandra
you bring on a downer

its all lies..study tours my butt
in what universe is selling out..study?
its such a nice peer lobby support wurk perk..[puke]

[hang-on..we could get a govt run..by students
they could squeeze in..representing their pals..between weed-dings

its funny how when..he was your slipper
you didnt stick..the boot..into your own slipper..
only after..he gave you the boot..did you slip in..the boot into the slippery slipper..double dipper

anyhow that reminds me alex-sandra..
you..looked great in..them fish-nets/high heels..but mate the lippie?

SM,

That' Study period" was one day long.

Can you direct me to literature that defines Finance's role in "approving" study tours? (serious enquiry)...I was under the impression that pollies merely defined what the expenses were for when putting in their claim.

In any case, a 1 day "study period" so conveniently timed in order to claim travel expenses - should be investigated. It is so obviously questionable, I can see why you are trying to dismiss it.

I didn't say FWA's civil case against Thomson had been dropped.

I said it had collapsed.

It has.

Going from 500 charges to FWA requesting mediation is a collapse.

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/margaret-rivers-traffic-jams-draw-sydney-mp-john-alexander-20131021-2vx7f.html