topic Re: Why was Slipper charged? in Community Spirit

Why was Slipper charged?

***super_nova*** — Sun, 13 Oct 2013 21:10:16 GMT

Under the Minchin protocol, when questions are raised about the propriety of an expenses claim, Finance does not refer the matter to police if the MP concerned pays the money back. Slipper offered to pay. So why the double standard? Charge them all or let Slipper go.

http://nofibs.com.au/2013/10/08/will-media-finance-afp-handle-evidence-pm-cheat/

if questions are raised about the propriety of an expenses claim, as they were for the book promotion expenses, Finance does not refer the matter to police if the MP concerned pays the money back. So when questions were raised about Slipper’s winery tour, he offered to repay. - See more at: http://nofibs.com.au/2013/10/08/will-media-finance-afp-handle-evidence-pm-cheat/#sthash.Pn9Jh7hP.29vz6apF.dpuf

When the AFP charged Peter Slipper, I broke the story that he had been treated differently than other MPs. Under the Minchin Protocol, if questions are raised about the propriety of an expenses claim, as they were for the book promotion expenses, Finance does not refer the matter to police if the MP concerned pays the money back. So when questions were raised about Slipper’s winery tour, he offered to repay. - See more at: http://nofibs.com.au/2013/10/08/will-media-finance-afp-handle-evidence-pm-cheat/#sthash.Pn9Jh7hP.29vz6apF.dpuf

Re: Why was Slipper charged?

***super_nova*** — Sun, 13 Oct 2013 21:34:53 GMT

Interview with Slipper yesterday:

http://www.abc.net.au/insiders/content/2012/s3867906.htm

Re: Why was Slipper charged?

grandmoon — Sun, 13 Oct 2013 23:53:44 GMT

This was/is Peter's punishment for stopping Tony from forcing an early election.

Re: Why was Slipper charged?

catsnknots — Mon, 14 Oct 2013 00:26:19 GMT

why???

This is all Allegedly.

Because slipper asked a person to wilfully help him commit a fraud. It was not because he felt his claim was justified... it was a way to help cover up his fraud.

He asked a man to charge one trip around wineries as four different trips around suburbs (no location) of Canberra.

As for those events that Tony Abbott claimed for. The question I ask is would this event be done even though he was not in the political position he was in? Chances are no... if he were just Joe Bloggs he would probably not travel to these locations and do what he did.

If you have even experienced an event like one that a pollie attends in the capacity of a visiting MP then you would understand. To have a politician attend one of your events is a huge deal for any organiser. These are big names that draw other entrants. It usually means more turnover for your charity event. It also means more people come out and see the person participating.

Along with the adulation politicians get they also get a lot of abuse along the way... they do not just do things because they enjoy them.. they do them as part of their jobs.

Labor MP's claim to visit Union meetings and Union get togethers and people seem to think that that is all ok. The difference is that they seem to have an obvious tie yet in reality they are just back slapping to get the particular union on side to help keep them in power. In comparison the Coalition MP's visit everone else that is not in a union at the functions that they go to.

If Tony cant visit a charity event and claim then Shorten can't visit union delegations and claim.

Re: Why was Slipper charged?

monman12 — Mon, 14 Oct 2013 01:47:52 GMT

SN I think CM has the situtation explained perfectly.

Re: Why was Slipper charged?

izabsmiling — Mon, 14 Oct 2013 01:59:35 GMT

@monman12 wrote:
SN I think CM has the situtation explained perfectly.

This is all Allegedly.

Re: Why was Slipper charged?

izabsmiling — Mon, 14 Oct 2013 02:00:57 GMT

Catmad wrote :

It usually means more turnover for your charity event. It also means more people come out and see the person participating.

it's not our charity event

Re: Why was Slipper charged?

izabsmiling — Mon, 14 Oct 2013 02:29:26 GMT

The problem arises ... when there is a belief that one person has a right to a good or service that someone else will pay for. It is this sense of entitlement that afflicts not only individuals but also entire societies. And governments are to blame for portraying taxpayer's money as something removed from the labour of another person.

Joe Hockey, London 2012

Re: Why was Slipper charged?

lakeland27 — Mon, 14 Oct 2013 02:50:27 GMT

@monman12 wrote:
SN I think CM has the situtation explained perfectly.

to your satisfaction maybe. to others the difference is less clear. taxpayers money is taxpayers money. Abbott made 'deceptive' claims excessive claims. he's been treated differently for political advantage and gain, and of course there is the question of Why the Federal police were only willing to act in this case, which brings the spectre of who influenced and encouraged this ? from opposition ?

i suggest you clear that nose, because if you cannot smell a rat it isn't functioning as it should.

Re: Why was Slipper charged?

just_me_karen — Mon, 14 Oct 2013 03:04:26 GMT

The whole Slipper saga reeks of the same liberal corruptions evidenced in the Pauline Hanson affair. It's a disgrace.

Re: Why was Slipper charged?

catsnknots — Mon, 14 Oct 2013 03:18:11 GMT

LL... we all have a different opinion on the situation.... hence the discussion.

Re: Why was Slipper charged?

izabsmiling — Mon, 14 Oct 2013 03:18:12 GMT

and add in Joe's words (said in 2012..under different Government) about the

Government being to blame for misuse of tax payers money.

Re: Why was Slipper charged?

izabsmiling — Mon, 14 Oct 2013 03:21:28 GMT

Catmad, LL was the person who actually acknowledged the different opinions

LL wrote:to your satisfaction maybe. to others the difference is less clear.

Re: Why was Slipper charged?

catsnknots — Mon, 14 Oct 2013 03:25:48 GMT

oh.. and for the record... I think the whole situation needs to be looked at....

I like the idea that they all get a set amount to spend no questions asked... each person is going to think that one claim in more justified than the other... me for example think that all monies claimed for Union related visits is wrong... I have my reasons for that belief but others will think completely differently.

Slipper may in fact think that taking a person around a winery was part of his job.. it may have been... if he did not have to justify it he may not have asked the taxi driver to make fake claims to cover his tracks. He could have just used the money allocated and be done with it.

A politician is away from his or her family for very long periods of time.... it requires you to be "friendly" with people you may not like, it means you need to socialise with people you don't like because they are part of your party... It may mean you need to make choices you don't like because you need to play the party lines... For all the good there is a lot of bad that comes with it.

I do not begrudge them one cent of their pay or their entitlements so long as they are honest about what they do and do not participate in things like what happened with the NSW Labor party and the mining leases...

Re: Why was Slipper charged?

izabsmiling — Mon, 14 Oct 2013 03:32:56 GMT

Catmad wrote:I like the idea that they all get a set amount to spend no questions asked

kind of like the Schoolkids payment ?

Re: Why was Slipper charged?

i-once-was-bump — Mon, 14 Oct 2013 10:21:00 GMT

Slipper has been accused of deception with the dockets in that he asked a driver to book out a trip to the wineries as 4 different trips to different suburbs in order to hide the fact that he went on a wineries tour with a friend using government money.

Whereas all other pollies have stated what they used the money for but the question with them is should they have made the claim, all a very grey area and I don't think either side can gloat about the poor behaviour of the "otherside", both sides of the house are as guilty as each other.

Re: Why was Slipper charged?

kennedia_nigricans — Mon, 14 Oct 2013 10:24:28 GMT

that is not a just a rat that one requires the pied piper.

Re: Why was Slipper charged?

i-once-was-bump — Mon, 14 Oct 2013 10:28:12 GMT

@kennedia_nigricans wrote:
that is not a just a rat that one requires the pied piper.

Huh?

Re: Why was Slipper charged?

kennedia_nigricans — Mon, 14 Oct 2013 10:31:47 GMT

@lakeland27 wrote:
@monman12 wrote:
SN I think CM has the situtation explained perfectly.

to your satisfaction maybe. to others the difference is less clear. taxpayers money is taxpayers money. Abbott made 'deceptive' claims excessive claims. he's been treated differently for political advantage and gain, and of course there is the question of Why the Federal police were only willing to act in this case, which brings the spectre of who influenced and encouraged this ? from opposition ?
i suggest you clear that nose, because if you cannot smell a rat it isn't functioning as it should.

i replied to that post

Re: Why was Slipper charged?

lakeland27 — Mon, 14 Oct 2013 12:04:35 GMT

@kennedia_nigricans wrote:
@lakeland27 wrote:
@monman12 wrote:
SN I think CM has the situtation explained perfectly.

to your satisfaction maybe. to others the difference is less clear. taxpayers money is taxpayers money. Abbott made 'deceptive' claims excessive claims. he's been treated differently for political advantage and gain, and of course there is the question of Why the Federal police were only willing to act in this case, which brings the spectre of who influenced and encouraged this ? from opposition ?
i suggest you clear that nose, because if you cannot smell a rat it isn't functioning as it should.
i replied to that post

i'm thrilled, but i missed it.