Quote:

Two of Prime Minister Tony Abbott's most high-profile ministers claimed thousands of dollars in taxpayer entitlements for attending the wedding of close friend and Sydney shock jock Michael Smith. It was a little less than two years ago and Smith had just left 2UE after a falling out over his attempt to raise allegations about then prime minister Julia Gillard's relationship with a former union official and the misappropriation of funds. The shock jock did not have a best man. But two close friends spoke: George Brandis, then one of the Abbott opposition's lead attack dogs and now Attorney-General, and deputy Nationals leader Barnaby Joyce. Mr Joyce read a poem called Fair Dinkum Love. Senator Brandis made a bridal speech before dominating the dance floor. According to travel expenses lodged with the Department of Finance, the duo collectively billed taxpayers nearly $3000 for flights, hire cars and incidental expenses incurred on the trip. Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/ministers-claimed-costs-for-wedding-trip-20130928-2ul6a.html#ixzz2gDoi1A7N

The disturbing thing is that Brandis thinks this is a legitimate way to spend our money.


Quote:

Senator Brandis claimed $1700, including more than $1000 on return flights, $143 on a hire car and the overnight ''official business'' allowance designed to cover accommodation and incidentals. He told Fairfax Media on Saturday that he regarded the wedding as a chance to ''foster collaboration'' over Mr Smith's work covering the then prime minister and the Craig Thomson scandal and it was therefore ''primarily a professional rather than a social engagement''. ''These were both matters of significant national interest on which I spoke frequently in Parliament and the media,'' he wrote in a statement. The federal Department of Finance's guidelines state MPs are allowed to claim travel and accommodation expenses for official business including ''meetings of a government advisory committee or taskforce'' or ''functions representing a minister or presiding officer''. Meeting with journalists is not a purpose sanctioned by the guidelines.

How is this different to the Slipper or Thompson frauds?

When can we expect charges to be laid?

True Colours wrote on Sep 29^th, 2013 at 7:15am:

How is this different to the Slipper or Thompson frauds? When can we expect charges to be laid?

1/ It's not Labor.

2/ There won't be any.

It's like I keep saying: we have the most disgusting alleged politicians in the world. Al Capone must be wondering why he didn't register his crime empire as a political party. People expecting to insinuate the transcendent values of justice, honesty, decency and probity into our society via politics haven't made allowances for the Lib-NP, ALP or the Greens political gangs.

its a low thing to do...it really is they should be made to pay back double what they have cheated us out of.

They should each be brought before the appropriate Senate committees and grilled very thoroughly over why they think this is an appropriate use of taxpayers' money. Because it's not, they should then be made to pay it back.

It's not just these two doing this either. Abbott claimed $9400 for promoting his book, a sum of money that he has since repaid.

In Victoria the misuse of Parliamentary entitlements for private purposes is an ongoing major scandal that has resulted in criminal charges being laid against a former Liberal party MP, Geoff Shaw. If convicted of any of the 24 charges, he would lose his seat. If the Napthine Government then lose the by-election in this marginal seat, the government would lose its majority in the Assembly and would lose a confidence vote.

The ALP or Greens are probably doing it too although I am unaware of specific examples that are current.

Remember the major expenses scandal in the UK in 2009? This is what happens when expenses get out of control.

I do not care about party affiliation on this matter. I want all of our MPs, regardless of party, to treat taxpayers' money with respect and not rort their entitlements for personal gain.

Bam wrote on Sep 29^th, 2013 at 8:46am:

They should each be brought before the appropriate Senate committees and grilled very thoroughly over why they think this is an appropriate use of taxpayers' money. Because it's not, they should then be made to pay it back. It's not just these two doing this either. Abbott claimed $9400 for promoting his book, a sum of money that he has since repaid. In Victoria the misuse of Parliamentary entitlements for private purposes is an ongoing major scandal that has resulted in criminal charges being laid against a former Liberal party MP, Geoff Shaw. If convicted of any of the 24 charges, he would lose his seat. If the Napthine Government then lose the by-election in this marginal seat, the government would lose its majority in the Assembly and would lose a confidence vote. The ALP or Greens are probably doing it too although I am unaware of specific examples that are current. Remember the major expenses scandal in the UK in 2009? This is what happens when expenses get out of control. I do not care about party affiliation on this matter. I want all of our MPs, regardless of party, to treat taxpayers' money with respect and not rort their entitlements for personal gain.

At least Abbott had enough shame to claim it was an oversight.

It would seem Brandis has no shame.

George Brandis and Barnaby Joyce deny wrongdoing over travel expenses claims

Where is the conga line on this?

If it was about two Labor politicians they would be spluttering with righteous indignation, yet we don't hear a squeak from them.

So collaborating with a rightwing shock jock to blacken the reputation of the union movement is official Liberal policy.

What a surprise.

Peter Freedman wrote on Sep 29^th, 2013 at 4:07pm:

Where is the conga line on this? If it was about two Labor politicians they would be spluttering with righteous indignation, yet we don't hear a squeak from them.

To be fair, salad and cods fessed up....onya's

Bam wrote on Sep 29^th, 2013 at 4:00pm:

George Brandis and Barnaby Joyce deny wrongdoing over travel expenses claims

"Senator Brandis has confirmed he claimed nearly $1,700 on flights, accommodation and a hire car, but says he attended the wedding primarily for work purposes.

He told Fairfax that he used the wedding as an opportunity to collaborate with Smith over his work covering the Health Services Union scandal involving former MP Craig Thomson."
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-09-29/michael-smith-wedding-barnaby-joyce-george-brandis-expenses/4987502
=========================================
Give us a break, THAT'S WHAT A BLOODY PHONE IS FOR!!!
And, this guy IS NOW THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF AUSTRALIA?
That said, this happened in 2011, which was under Labor watch.
So, irrespective of who is in power, it seems WE ARE FAIR GAME, as far as all Pollies are concerned, just look at the string of both Labor & Liberal Pollies who have been caught (out in Public) with their pants down and then think about how many have tried us on & got away with it???

cods wrote on Sep 29^th, 2013 at 8:19am:

its a low thing to do...it really is they should be made to pay back double what they have cheated us out of.

Yet....cods..............when it comes to Slipper and Thomson, you seem to have entirely different standards and expectations.

I wonder why these facts did not get Media mention prior to the Election?

You can bet Tony will do SFA because he had his nose in the trough for $9,000 he stole from us to promote his book.

Where are all the Libs going on about this blatant waste of taxpayer money?

Typical, both of you lot are as hypocritical as the other.

I heard Brandis speak about this today, after he apparently paid back the money. The audacity of this scumbag to still suggest that he thought it was appropriate.

Obviously not appropriate enough to face appropriate scrutiny.

The disreputable hypocrisy demonstrated in this is galling. Of course our illustrious MSM has been notable quite in general, apart from basically reporting it. Where are the media calls of FRAUD and DISHONESTY etc?

The political Gravy train is clearly a magnet for lowlife grubs, regardless of ideology.

Fair is fair, they really should come under exactly the same public, media and legal scrutiny that they (Brandis in particular) caterwauled about over Slipper and Thompson issues. It was fair enough for them to face the music after all. Interestingly enough, I don't think we have ever heard a final outcome about Craig Thompson to date. The last I recall was that he professed his innocence and was willing to stand up in court. Clearly our Attorney General is not made of the same stuff....

Peter Freedman wrote on Sep 29^th, 2013 at 4:07pm:

Where is the conga line on this? If it was about two Labor politicians they would be spluttering with righteous indignation, yet we don't hear a squeak from them.

Spot on.

Just like Labor supporters did with Thomaon.

Both sides are exactly the same, so hypocritical.

My business doesn't,t foot the bill when I attend a friend's wedding, why should Brand is and Joyce be funded for attending Michael Smith's?

Phemanderac wrote on Sep 29^th, 2013 at 5:19pm:

I heard Brandis speak about this today, after he apparently paid back the money. The audacity of this scumbag to still suggest that he thought it was appropriate.

This is so typical of the vile filth that ends up in parliament. The rules regarding T/A are deliberately rococo so that anything goes. We end up with bottom feeding scum in our parliaments.

Brandi's knows its wrong, he has now agreed tO pay it back, Barny is silent, Abbott will no doubt tell him to
pay it back too.
If this were Labor there would be outrage, instead there are excuses.
Kudos to cods ,she is the only member of the conga line showing any integrity.

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Sep 29^th, 2013 at 4:17pm:

Peter Freedman wrote on Sep 29th, 2013 at 4:07pm: Where is the conga line on this? If it was about two Labor politicians they would be spluttering with righteous indignation, yet we don't hear a squeak from them. To be fair, salad and cods fessed up....onya's

cods dances to her own drum, I don't place her in the conga line.....

As for salad in, well......

:D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D ;D :D :D :D ;D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D

Is this the same 'Smith' who was extremely vocal in his criticism of Gillard/ALP before he lost his job?

Abbott proves once again he is no Howard. Under Howard's code of conduct these Ministers would have been forced to resign. Instead, under Abbott's leadership, we have to put up with their stomach churning attempts to rationalise their actions.

Can anyone remember the 11 Ministers that were sacked or forced to resign during the Howard years. What were their indiscretions and how do they compare with Joyce and Brandis?

MOTR wrote on Sep 29^th, 2013 at 7:37pm:

Can anyone remember the 11 Ministers that were sacked or forced to resign during the Howard years.

I remember the Peter Reith phone fraud scandal. He was forced to fall on his sword.

Howard was a lot smarter than Abbott - a lawyer by trade, he knew what he could get away with, and knew when someone crossed the line.

Quote:

George Brandis will repay nearly $1700 after submitting expenses for attending shock jock’s wedding in 2011 ...“I considered that those costs were within parliamentary entitlements, since they were incurred in the course of attendance at a function primarily for work-related purposes. I remain of that view,” he said in a letter written today to the Finance Department...

What a shameless scammer!

How is attending a wedding of some shock jock work-related?

True Colours wrote on Sep 29^th, 2013 at 8:03pm:

Quote: George Brandis will repay nearly $1700 after submitting expenses for attending shock jock’s wedding in 2011 ...“I considered that those costs were within parliamentary entitlements, since they were incurred in the course of attendance at a function primarily for work-related purposes. I remain of that view,” he said in a letter written today to the Finance Department... What a shameless scammer! How is attending a wedding of some shock jock work-related?

'Work related,' huh.  Or does he mean 'LNP Get up Gillard' related?

And of all the people in the Land, why would this anti Gillard bugger-wit invite this LNP pair of grubs to his wedding?  Were there no ALP grubs available?

Aussie wrote on Sep 29^th, 2013 at 7:29pm:

Is this the same 'Smith' who was extremely vocal in his criticism of Gillard/ALP before he lost his job?

Yep, that's him.

skippy. wrote on Sep 29^th, 2013 at 8:21pm:

Aussie wrote on Sep 29th, 2013 at 7:29pm: Is this the same 'Smith' who was extremely vocal in his criticism of Gillard/ALP before he lost his job? Yep, that's him.

And what does that have to do with the price of tea in China?

matty wrote on Sep 29^th, 2013 at 8:25pm:

skippy. wrote on Sep 29th, 2013 at 8:21pm: Aussie wrote on Sep 29th, 2013 at 7:29pm: Is this the same 'Smith' who was extremely vocal in his criticism of Gillard/ALP before he lost his job? Yep, that's him. And what does that have to do with the price of tea in China?

About as much as it's got to do with serving the people of Australia.

I just read matty's little signature lines.

Says he's an "Opponent of ... climate change ... "

Stop Climate Change!

MOTR wrote on Sep 29^th, 2013 at 8:31pm:

matty wrote on Sep 29th, 2013 at 8:25pm: skippy. wrote on Sep 29th, 2013 at 8:21pm: Aussie wrote on Sep 29th, 2013 at 7:29pm: Is this the same 'Smith' who was extremely vocal in his criticism of Gillard/ALP before he lost his job? Yep, that's him. And what does that have to do with the price of tea in China? About as much as it's got to do with serving the people of Australia.

You didn't answer - what relevance do Smith's views towards Gillard hold?

greggerypeccary wrote on Sep 29^th, 2013 at 8:35pm:

I just read matty's little signature lines. Says he's an "Opponent of ... climate change ... " Stop Climate Change!

Opponent of the hoax of climate change.

matty wrote on Sep 29^th, 2013 at 8:42pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Sep 29th, 2013 at 8:35pm: I just read matty's little signature lines. Says he's an "Opponent of ... climate change ... " Stop Climate Change! Opponent of the hoax of climate change.

Ah.  I'm assuming you mean AGW.


We agree on something, young matty.

greggerypeccary wrote on Sep 29^th, 2013 at 8:45pm:

matty wrote on Sep 29th, 2013 at 8:42pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Sep 29th, 2013 at 8:35pm: I just read matty's little signature lines. Says he's an "Opponent of ... climate change ... " Stop Climate Change! Opponent of the hoax of climate change. Ah.  I'm assuming you mean AGW. We agree on something, young matty.

The climate is not changing. Just look at the failed predictions of Tim Flannery. Even the rain that falls won't fill our river systems.

Peter Freedman wrote on Sep 29^th, 2013 at 7:17pm:

As for salad in, well......

Turn it up Pedro, as OP's only New Age Muslim I'm the only one dealing with reality. Just ask Xcyzing upstairs, he/she/it will verify my honesty.

matty wrote on Sep 29^th, 2013 at 8:51pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Sep 29th, 2013 at 8:45pm: matty wrote on Sep 29th, 2013 at 8:42pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Sep 29th, 2013 at 8:35pm: I just read matty's little signature lines. Says he's an "Opponent of ... climate change ... " Stop Climate Change! Opponent of the hoax of climate change. Ah.  I'm assuming you mean AGW. We agree on something, young matty. The climate is not changing. Just look at the failed predictions of Tim Flannert. Even the rain that falls won't fill our river systems.

Well, I believe that the climate always changes.

However, none of us have lived long enough to really experience it (the alarmists are talking about weather).

Moreover, if the climate is changing, there's currently no credible evidence to suggest that humans play any part in it.

greggerypeccary wrote on Sep 29^th, 2013 at 8:54pm:

matty wrote on Sep 29th, 2013 at 8:51pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Sep 29th, 2013 at 8:45pm: matty wrote on Sep 29th, 2013 at 8:42pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Sep 29th, 2013 at 8:35pm: I just read matty's little signature lines. Says he's an "Opponent of ... climate change ... " Stop Climate Change! Opponent of the hoax of climate change. Ah.  I'm assuming you mean AGW. We agree on something, young matty. The climate is not changing. Just look at the failed predictions of Tim Flannert. Even the rain that falls won't fill our river systems. Well, I believe that the climate always changes. However, none of us have lived long enough to really experience it (the alarmists are talking about weather). Moreover, if the climate is changing, there's currently no credible evidence to suggest that humans play any part in it.

I agree.

matty wrote on Sep 29^th, 2013 at 9:01pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Sep 29th, 2013 at 8:54pm: matty wrote on Sep 29th, 2013 at 8:51pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Sep 29th, 2013 at 8:45pm: matty wrote on Sep 29th, 2013 at 8:42pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Sep 29th, 2013 at 8:35pm: I just read matty's little signature lines. Says he's an "Opponent of ... climate change ... " Stop Climate Change! Opponent of the hoax of climate change. Ah.  I'm assuming you mean AGW. We agree on something, young matty. The climate is not changing. Just look at the failed predictions of Tim Flannert. Even the rain that falls won't fill our river systems. Well, I believe that the climate always changes. However, none of us have lived long enough to really experience it (the alarmists are talking about weather). Moreover, if the climate is changing, there's currently no credible evidence to suggest that humans play any part in it. I agree.

Who needs the IPCC, when there's matty and me?

;)

greggerypeccary wrote on Sep 29^th, 2013 at 9:15pm:

matty wrote on Sep 29th, 2013 at 9:01pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Sep 29th, 2013 at 8:54pm: matty wrote on Sep 29th, 2013 at 8:51pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Sep 29th, 2013 at 8:45pm: matty wrote on Sep 29th, 2013 at 8:42pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Sep 29th, 2013 at 8:35pm: I just read matty's little signature lines. Says he's an "Opponent of ... climate change ... " Stop Climate Change! Opponent of the hoax of climate change. Ah.  I'm assuming you mean AGW. We agree on something, young matty. The climate is not changing. Just look at the failed predictions of Tim Flannert. Even the rain that falls won't fill our river systems. Well, I believe that the climate always changes. However, none of us have lived long enough to really experience it (the alarmists are talking about weather). Moreover, if the climate is changing, there's currently no credible evidence to suggest that humans play any part in it. I agree. Who needs the IPCC, when there's matty and me? ;)

Even the IPCC now concedes:

The rate of warming over the past 15 years... is smaller than the rate calculated since 1951.

Climate change or global warming r whatever you want to call it is nothing but a hoax.

matty wrote on Sep 29^th, 2013 at 9:38pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Sep 29th, 2013 at 9:15pm: matty wrote on Sep 29th, 2013 at 9:01pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Sep 29th, 2013 at 8:54pm: matty wrote on Sep 29th, 2013 at 8:51pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Sep 29th, 2013 at 8:45pm: matty wrote on Sep 29th, 2013 at 8:42pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Sep 29th, 2013 at 8:35pm: I just read matty's little signature lines. Says he's an "Opponent of ... climate change ... " Stop Climate Change! Opponent of the hoax of climate change. Ah.  I'm assuming you mean AGW. We agree on something, young matty. The climate is not changing. Just look at the failed predictions of Tim Flannert. Even the rain that falls won't fill our river systems. Well, I believe that the climate always changes. However, none of us have lived long enough to really experience it (the alarmists are talking about weather). Moreover, if the climate is changing, there's currently no credible evidence to suggest that humans play any part in it. I agree. Who needs the IPCC, when there's matty and me? ;) Even the IPCC now concedes: The rate of warming over the past 15 years... is smaller than the rate calculated since 1951. Climate change or global warming r whatever you want to call it is nothing but a hoax.

Next thing you'll be telling me, is that there are no reds under my bed.

greggerypeccary wrote on Sep 29^th, 2013 at 9:39pm:

matty wrote on Sep 29th, 2013 at 9:38pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Sep 29th, 2013 at 9:15pm: matty wrote on Sep 29th, 2013 at 9:01pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Sep 29th, 2013 at 8:54pm: matty wrote on Sep 29th, 2013 at 8:51pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Sep 29th, 2013 at 8:45pm: matty wrote on Sep 29th, 2013 at 8:42pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Sep 29th, 2013 at 8:35pm: I just read matty's little signature lines. Says he's an "Opponent of ... climate change ... " Stop Climate Change! Opponent of the hoax of climate change. Ah.  I'm assuming you mean AGW. We agree on something, young matty. The climate is not changing. Just look at the failed predictions of Tim Flannert. Even the rain that falls won't fill our river systems. Well, I believe that the climate always changes. However, none of us have lived long enough to really experience it (the alarmists are talking about weather). Moreover, if the climate is changing, there's currently no credible evidence to suggest that humans play any part in it. I agree. Who needs the IPCC, when there's matty and me? ;) Even the IPCC now concedes: The rate of warming over the past 15 years... is smaller than the rate calculated since 1951. Climate change or global warming r whatever you want to call it is nothing but a hoax. Next thing you'll be telling me, is that there are no reds under my bed.

No, but there are about 8 in Parliament House.

it's a bit dodgy but we've all done it if we're honest.

Few years ago I claimed my family visit to the UK from Melbourne as a work related trip on a similar basis - it has holes in the argument but everyone does it.

Storm in a teacup.

Did somebody say tempratures had gone down in the last 15 years?

http://www.mongabay.com/images/2006/graphs/ipcc-temp.jpg

http://www.grida.no/images/series/vg-africa/graphics/11-tarmodel.jpg

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Sep 29^th, 2013 at 10:33pm:

it's a bit dodgy but we've all done it if we're honest. Few years ago I claimed my family visit to the UK from Melbourne as a work related trip on a similar basis - it has holes in the argument but everyone does it. Storm in a teacup.

Yet you call for Thompson and Slippers heads over entitlements.....Where should the public draw the line Andre???

:-? :-? :-?

Whoop de dam do... ::)

Pay back the money and move on.

So, who was the bottom? Bet it was barnaby!  Gawd I am thankful I didn't stay in the same motel they had for the wedding night.   Ol barn would have been squealing ;D

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Sep 29^th, 2013 at 10:33pm:

it's a bit dodgy but we've all done it if we're honest. Few years ago I claimed my family visit to the UK from Melbourne as a work related trip on a similar basis - it has holes in the argument but everyone does it. Storm in a teacup.

Actually its called fraud.

ian wrote on Sep 30^th, 2013 at 8:12pm:

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Sep 29th, 2013 at 10:33pm: it's a bit dodgy but we've all done it if we're honest. Few years ago I claimed my family visit to the UK from Melbourne as a work related trip on a similar basis - it has holes in the argument but everyone does it. Storm in a teacup. Actually its called fraud.

http://www.ato.gov.au/About-ATO/About-us/Contact-us/Report-tax-evasion/