Thieving from the tax payer

[donnashuggy]

Who would do such a thing?

[lakeland27]

---

@crikey*mate wrote:

your neural pathways?

---

 i have to pay that.

a fuller explaination would be that just because the murdochs are helping impose the media blackout on his activities the PM seems to want, the fact is there are plenty of journalists employed elsewhere with some integrity who are more than wiling to take up the slack.

[monman12]

"Oh I suppose it doesn't matter. I mean if your leader can use taxpayers money to pay for his personal ironman and training events, then of course it must be OK to use taxpayers money for whatever you want."

I agree, at least have a degree of separation from the executive,  and then make it worthwhile,  like Thomson and his union funded unions.

[*ibis]

the fact is there are plenty of journalists employed elsewhere with some integrity who are more than wiling to take up the slack.

who are these journalists of interity you speak of and where are they employed?

[lakeland27]

---

@*ibis wrote:

the fact is there are plenty of journalists employed elsewhere with some integrity who are more than wiling to take up the slack.

who are these journalists of interity you speak of and where are they employed?

---

 its not my place to give that type of advice. i'd steer clear of crikey though,  bernard is good and has long looked to be angling for what rupert calls a 'ralph sarich' job. like the early sarich engines, you buy them up and put them on a shelf .

[*ibis]

its not my place to give that type of advice

you never do but i thought i would give it a shot

[lakeland27]

---

@monman12 wrote:

"Oh I suppose it doesn't matter. I mean if your leader can use taxpayers money to pay for his personal ironman and training events, then of course it must be OK to use taxpayers money for whatever you want."

I agree, at least have a degree of separation from the executive,  and then make it worthwhile,  like Thomson and his union funded unions.

---

 and that's in front of the court now, where it ought to have been. it seems to hinge around the restrictions on use of HSU cards atm (the case) if memory serves me correctly there were no restrictions on their use. from the look of brandis joyce and abbotts attitude to parliamentary cards i'd say that's a little bit of a furphy now.

[donnashuggy]

Brandis is paying it back, is that an admission of guilt? No, it couldn't be because he said he did nothing wrong. But that is confusing isn't it, why would you pay it back if you did nothing wrong, I don't get it 

[cherry*135]

michaelsmith news website?.. so.. those 2 are his mates.

He claims Barnaby didn't make any claims for travel to his wedding on his site. He has copies of  Baranby's travel claims posted on there for the relevant time period.

Brandis has paid back $1683.06. I would prefer to resolve any uncertainty in the favour of the taxpayer.

Attending a wedding for work-related purposes.. what is the bride/ or guests supposed to be doing while this work related business is carried out at a wedding.?

[donnashuggy]

Glad that a few have been caught out this week, I'm sure there is more to come

[red_wolfey]

I'm sure it will not make the news because people only care when it's the 'other team' rorting our taxes.

 Rupert murdoch put out a tweet during the election where he was 'complaining about the public sector workers and welfaree scroungers  sucking the life out the economy and it seems his favourite party is rorting tax dollars

Ahh hypocrisy!