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.