OTB,

Triggs should not be compared to Bishop, rather to Michaela Banerji who was a public servant fired for bias against the labor government.

BB should rather be compared to Tony Burke who spent $12000 flying his family to ULURU, going to a rock concert, or spending $1.2m on his office in 2 years.

Peter Slipper was changed for falsifying documents (not expense abuse) much like Craig Thompson.

Anyone seen this week's Newspoll?

It has mysteriously failed to appear.

I wonder why?......

As the one who initiated this thread and who freely admits is pleased with the final outcome of the whole affair, Bronwyn Bishop being one of my least favorite politicians, living or dead. Ironically the only worthwhile contribution made by Bishop to parliament may well be through her demise, a well overdue reform of MP entitlements.

Comparing Prof. Gillian Triggs to Bronwyn Bishop
is ridiculous to say the least.

Let's run through the facts concerning Prof. Triggs
as given in the website cited earlier:

1) The Human Rights Commission is an Independent Statutory
body. Part of its job description is saying things a
government may not want to hear.

2) The President of the Human Rights Commission is appointed
for a five year term specifically to avoid political
interference. In fact, under the law, Commissioner's can only
be removed on grounds of misbehaviour or physical or mental
incapacity.

When Attorney-General George Brandis was asked if there had
been any errors of law, or breaches of the Act - he could not
point to any.

3) "The Forgotten Children Report," revealed institutionalised
child abuse. It exposed sexual, physical, and psychological
abuse as a result of the Australian Government's indefinite
detention policies.

4) Revealing the shocking human rights abuses that are part of
Australia's Immigration Policy is not a biased or partisan
thing to do. The Labor and Liberal Parties have an almost
identical position when it comes to the treatment and
detention of asylum seekers and the Commissioner's Report
covered both the current government and the one before it.

Prof. Gillian Triggs is a fine woman and an exceptional
lawyer. She maintained her composure and dignity as she was
grilled for more than 8 hours in the Senate Estimates -
in one of the most sexist and aggressive displays ever seen.

It was bully-boy behaviour at its worst and anyone who saw
Prof. Triggs stand her ground could not fail to be inspired.

Fox,

None of that is at all relevant and certainly does not dispel the charge that Gillian Triggs has become 'the' political subject herself, she is controversial and should tender her resignation for the good of the publicly-funded agency she leads.

Shadow Minister has proposed a reason behind her fall in public confidence and in doing so he has also provided another fatal flaw, perceived lack of impartiality. However, lack of credibility is quite enough to warrant her resignation for the good of the Commission and the Australian public it is supposed to be serving.

As already discussed, Triggs' role is to lead and represent the publicly-funded agency she heads. She cannot hope to effectively fulfill that role where her credibility is questioned by a large sector of the federal Parliament and the public.

To be blunt, she would be more an embarrassment than an asset to the Commission.

There is already a gathering number of the public and the politicians who represent them who believe that the Human Rights Commission itself should be abolished.

There will be interesting times ahead.

The extra-ordinary outpouring of support for Prof.
Gillian Triggs proves that huge numbers of Australians
understand the role of the Human Rights Commission
as an independent statutory body and the fact that
the President of the Human Rights Commission must
do their job free from political interference.

If Professor Triggs was to resign in the face of
"Highly Personalised" government pressure it would
undermine the organisation's independence.
Professor Triggs has the support of her fellow commissioners
to continue. Part of her job
description is saying things a government may not want
to hear.

Her appointment is for a five year term, specifically
designed to avoid political interference.

She cannot be removed from office under the law.
Commissioners can only be removed on grounds of misbehaviour,
or physical or mental incapacity. There are no grounds for
her removal.