Any politician, or person in any public office like a mayor etc etc, who charges money for anyone or any group to speak to him in his official capacity --- DESERVES A PRISON SENTENCE.

It is utter corruption, and nothing else. And the pollies have been engaging in this open corruption for a very long time indeed. In fact, they often encourage it, and are proud of it.

Hmmmm....

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/missing-liberal-donations-declared-four-years-later-20140505-zr515.html#ixzz30qmRRRcS

"The Liberal Party of NSW last month declared a four-year-old donation of $25,000 from the Warringah Club, a fundraising entity associated with Prime Minister Tony Abbott, as well as amending its most recent returns to declare more than $100,000 in political donations including in-kind support to Joe Hockey’s Federal Electoral Committee.

The amended returns were received by the Australian Electoral Commission on April 5, 2014, as the Independent Commission Against Corruption was preparing to begin public hearings into political donations channelled to a company associated with a staff member in the office of Terrigal MP Chris Hartcher, uncovered during Operation Spicer."

"In 2010-11 the NSW Liberal Party declared it had received $50,000 from the Warringah Club, but has now declared another $25,000.
Advertisement

The Warringah Club is operated by accountant Peter Polgar and serves as a fundraising body for Mr Abbott in his electorate of the same name. In 2010-11, an election year, it received $127,142 in funds of which $96,534 came from the Liberal Party’s NSW office. The source of the remainder of the funds was not disclosed but is likely from membership fees and fundraisers. It also channels money back to the Liberal Party by way of donations."

Poirot, The old adage of "Do the crime, do the time." Doesn't apply to these Liberal scoundrels, it more a case of "Do the crime, all will be fine."

I find THE GREENS policy on donations rather refreshing compared to the Liberal/labor shenanigans. Maybe it goes a long way to explain why no GREENS are caught up in this toxic affair.

http://nsw.greens.org.au/policies/democracy-participation-elections

John,

It's a pity that your definition of corruption bears no resemblance to reality.

Paying a politician to achieve a desired outcome is corruption. "donations" for access is not unless you want to jail every politician in the last century.

Political parties are not funded by taxpayers, but by donations, and frothing at the mouth because the world does not comply with your expectations is pathetic.

One can equally claim that because the unions fund the Labor party and fund the party through union members fees that this is corrupt.

<<Paying a politician to achieve a desired outcome is corruption>>

So said Shadow Minister, very noble thought there Shadow. Lets look at the following one, Nathen Tinkler, property developer and tens of thousands of dollars in illegal donations to the National Party before the 2011 NSW State election, and the Newcastle coal loader projrct. Tinkler exploded shortly after the election that he had "donated to the nats" and they were doing "f---all" to approve a proposed $1 billion coal loader in Newcastle to be constructed by his company 'Buildev'. This was contained in a Tinkler email dated 20th April 2011, one month after the election of the O'Farrell Government. Tinkler was scathing of the Nationals not moving fast enough for him, after all he had paid the Nationals good money in the form of a donation for that approval! The slush fund that 'Builddev' and other property developers made illegal donations to was set up by an adviser to Chris Hartcher.

The ICAC inquiry into Liberal Party Slush Funds is expected to adjourn to give investigators time to examine startling new evidence.

Shadow, I totally agree with you, like to comment on the above.

Paul,

You seem to be struggling with the concept of a donation.

People donate money to organisations in the belief that the organisation will strive towards goals that they share. I donate to the Salvos because I want to help the homeless, and they are better equipped to achieve this than I am. Similarly I donate to the libs, as I am appalled by the incompetence of Labor. In both cases most of the objectives of the money I give are achieved, and some are not.

Corruption is where the money is paid with the express understanding between both parties that the payment is contingent only on achieving a predetermined outcome.

Labor has a record of being unbelievably slow in approving projects, with many in Queensland still waiting years after receiving the tick of approval from the EPA etc. The coalition has a record of not wasting $billions with undue delays, and the coalition being in power is the best way to get rid of this bureaucratic incompetence.

What is clear from NT's email is that his expectations of more rapid approval have not been met. What is lacking is any indication that the donation was solely contingent on the approval, or that this was understood by the people receiving the donation. All there is is innuendo. There is no signed document, no photo ID etc.

The final logical block in this argument is that the approval did not occur, and it can be conclusively shown that government outcomes were not influenced by the donation. Ipso facto there was no corruption.