Prime Minister Tony Abbott today absolves his “political mother” Bronwyn Bishop from all wrong doing:
What has become apparent, particularly over the last few days, is that the problem is not any particular individual; the problem is the entitlement system more generally,” he said.
“We have a situation where spending is arguably inside the rules, but plainly outside of community expectations, and that’s what needs to be dealt with once and for all.
Surely it is not too much to expect that politicians will exercise ethical and moral judgement sufficient to contain their expenses within “community expectations,” aka the “sniff test?”
Obviously it is, as has been so spectacularly brought to our attention by the revelation of decades of indulgence and extravagance practiced by Bishop, who seems to be enchanted by the fantasy that she is a reincarnation of Marie Antoinette.
I don’t know about anyone else, but I’m over Tony Abbott’s sophistry, his constant use of specious and fallacious argument to deceive and obfuscate. If Bishop hasn’t done anything wrong, why has she resigned, and why has Abbott accepted her resignation? If Bishop is a victim of the system, as Abbott apparently alleges, why did she have to go?
And how can Abbott and his henchmen and women expect to escape charges of hypocrisy when the comparison is noted between the excuses made for Bishop, and the ruthless hounding of “particular individual” former Speaker Peter Slipper, over less than $1000 abuse of travel expenses? Slipper made a number of attempts to resolve his matter administratively, that is, to pay the money back, as does everybody else, but these attempts were thwarted and he found himself in court.
Will we see Bronwyn Bishop in court over her outrageous excesses? If not why not?
Abbott’s attempts to spin Bishop as a victim of a system that allows politicians far too much leeway is adding insult to injury as far as the electorate is concerned. Bishop’s sense of entitlement and privilege allowed her to abuse the system to such an extraordinary degree: she is not the system’s victim, she is a practised exploiter who would have continued her exploitative practices until the day she expired, if she hadn’t been caught.
Bronwyn Bishop loves the Australian people, she claims in her resignation statement. So why did she squander so much of the people’s money, and why has it taken her this long to express remorse, and sod off?
No Place For Sheep 
I’d grant that more than just the sniff test has probably been violated here. I’d even grant that Bishop was probably so guilty that she literally failed to even imagine what innocence might look like. Yet I do feel that the main and most important thing has been achieved here. It was above all her failure of honesty that undermined confidence in her speakership and meant she simply had to vacate the chair.
Short of blame shifting, had she simply, and honestly, admitted the helicopter trip was ill advised and undertaken have her expense account audited with a view to paying back any similarly unseemly overspending then that at least would have been an attempt to restore trust. Imagine that! A politician saying that despite guidelines that allow grey areas for exploitation the right thing to do is to, well do the right thing? It might’ve even saved her……
What’s actually happened instead is that sometimes the public get a whiff of something unseemly and shifting opinion polls deliver more of a blow to a government’s political position than even the force of the law seems to impute. Why not? It’s a democracy, and today has been a good day for democracy in Australia.
LikeLiked by 1 person
A victory for democracy. May there be many many more.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I’m taking this to be a further demonstration (as if we needed it) that Tony Abbott is actually just a complete misanthropist, who has no concept of personal integrity and believes that people will only ever behave themselves if they’re corralled by rules.
LikeLiked by 1 person
He did once say he doesn’t ask permission he just apologises afterwards.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Which makes him a predator
LikeLiked by 1 person
good point
LikeLike
Very well said Jennifer. I loved the second last paragraph.
Good riddance to Bishop, though I’d have preferred to see her in the same tumbril as Abbott, en route to Madam Guillotine.
Just a matter of time.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I was torn between wanting her to stay and increase the damage and wanting rid of her. Actually, either works for me.
LikeLike
As Andrew Wilkie pointed out on Radio National this morning, if a Federal member or Senator calls on him for a cup of tea; has a pleasant weekend fishing; then claims all the weekend’s expenses because his/her entitlement is “within the guidelines”; a fraud has been committed. They KNOW they’re ripping off the system.
A fundamental principle of criminal law, and that includes fraud, is that a crime consists of both a mental and a physical element. Mens rea, a person’s awareness of the fact that his or her conduct is criminal, is the mental element, and actus reus, the act itself, is the physical element.
I don’t want to hear another politician nursing a damaged hand that’s been caught in the till, whining about fuzzy guidelines and offering to give the takings back. I want the customary penalty of double the fraud and a first warning issued. Three warnings and they’re out. Then let’s see if the guidelines get a little more distinct and their sense of smell improves.
LikeLiked by 1 person
What an excellent idea – treating pollies who commit crimes the same as everyone else is treated.
LikeLike
I love your writing 🙂
LikeLiked by 2 people
poor ole’ Bron a victim of an $811,000 expense account in only o0ne year, yes, poor old Bron, doesn’t it make you sick! Not only that but Abbott is said to have knocked up $1.4 mil but he’s the PM so we must learn that the age of entitlement is over and we must further tighten our belts giggle like a 14 y.o. school girl.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thank you
LikeLike