Dictator Dan Quits And Victoria Is Free...

With the resignation of Dan Andrews, Victorians can once again go to…

Tech Council of Australia Supports Indigenous Voice to…

Media Alert Canberra: Following the announcement of the referendum date, the Tech Council…

The Legacy of Daniel Andrews: Recognising the Good…

Today the impending retirement of Daniel Andrews – Labor Premier of Victoria…

Study reveals most common forms of coercive control…

Media Release A new study by the NSW Bureau of Crime Statistics and…

Great Expectations from the Summit of the G-77…

By Denis Bright The prospects for commitment to UN General Assembly’s sustainment development…

Imperial Footprints in Africa: The Dismal Role of…

No power in history has exercised such global reach. With brutal immediacy,…

Fascism is unlikely: idiocy is the real threat

The fight against domestic fascism is as American as apple pie. Even…

Murdoch: King Lear or Citizen Kane?

By guest columnist Tess Lawrence It may be premature to write Emeritus Chairman…


Why didn’t Tony tell Bronwyn to pay the money back?

There’s something odd about Bronwyn Bishop and Sophie Mirabella’s wedding.

You most probably think that the odd thing is “why would anybody want to invite Bronwyn Bishop to their wedding?”

No, that’s not it.

Or you might think that it’s odd that anyone would want to attend Sophie Mirabella’s wedding anyway.

No, that’s not it either.

This is what I think is odd:

Tony Abbott (another person I wouldn’t invite) attended the 2006 wedding and charged the taxpayers for his attendance. In 2013 he paid that money back.

Other attendees from the Coalition who had charged the taxpayers for traveling to the wedding – George Brandis, Scott Morrison, Barnaby Joyce – have also paid the money back.

We are to believe that Bronwyn Bishop hasn’t.

So where is this odd?

Well, if in 2013 Tony Abbott paid the money back, as did the other three luminaries as noted above, why wasn’t Bronwyn told to as well?

Wasn’t she made aware that this could go pear-shaped?

Or maybe she was, but thought she was above all that.


Like what we do at The AIMN?

You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.

Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!

Your contribution to help with the running costs of this site will be gratefully accepted.

You can donate through PayPal or credit card via the button below, or donate via bank transfer: BSB: 062500; A/c no: 10495969

Donate Button


Login here Register here
  1. brickbob

    ‘This whole episode is just bizarre,it is like a pantomime,a punch and judy show,an episode from Cabaret Berlin circa 1930,please make it stop.””””””

  2. Rosemary (@RosemaryJ36)

    I am pretty confident she thought she was above all that!

  3. mars08

    My thoughts exactly, brickbob. However “grotesque” is the word I had in mind! The photo is what I imagine the Rocky Horror Show would look like… if you were on a bad acid trip…

  4. Maureen Walton

    Very interesting question, as I have been pondering that since it was announced. I think the answer is that she more than likely made sure she had a visit that was suppose to be connected to her Parliamentary work. Which makes you wonder, what in Heavens name would a person who has been getting Great wages from Taxpayers for many, many years now think and even feel that they are entitled to more money from taxpayers, as one can not take it with them when they die…Obviously Brownyn Bishop has a addiction of Rorting the system Because she thought she is well above all others. You can tell that by the way she acts as speaker of the house and that she would love to be able to give someone a order about the opposition “off with their heads” because B. Bishop thinks she is above all of us mere mortals.

  5. Loz

    Greed begets greed.

  6. rossleighbrisbane

    She didn’t because she was only at the wedding to make the speech about how Parliament works!
    Oh wait, she wasn’t Speaker then…
    Mm, perhaps she was meeting one of her constituents in the car park?

  7. Möbius Ecko

    Barnaby Joyce paying back the money is a surprise, he has refused to pay pack his rorts in the past.

    Barnaby Joyce won’t pay back NRL expenses
    Barnaby Joyce won’t repay more than $5,000 billed to taxpayers for attending State of Origin, NRL finals

    What makes Joyce’s malfeasances on rorting travel claims galling is that when in opposition he railed against the misuse of these claims stating they should be more transparent.

    Yet another case of a right wing politician saying one thing in opposition but doing the opposite in government.

  8. dwejevans

    Bottom line “thought she was above all that.”…….I personally think she is a rorting old hag.

  9. Felicitas

    Perhaps it’s time we gave our pollies a choice: either have ALL expenses paid for but NO SALARY, or else leave the salary but no expenses. It would ensure that those whose motivation is greed get the least benefit. Just a left-hand think-bubble….

  10. Kaye Lee

    Nick Xenophon’s suggestions are a good start.

    Politicians would have to pay back double the value of expenses claimed incorrectly and be relegated to economy class on short domestic flights under a new plan to curb expenses scandals.

    In a bill to be introduced next month, independent senator Nick Xenophon will also seek an independent expenses umpire and to make politicians comply with a 30-day deadline for reporting travel details and pay at least half the cost of travel if there is any political party business involved.

    Unfortunately his bill is unlikely to get up as both major parties see no need for change.

    A spokesman for Special Minister of State Michael Ronaldson said the government had not seen the details but did not have plans to make further changes.

    Labor won’t come to a position on the legislation until it is released but manager of opposition business Tony Burke said the problem with Mrs Bishop’s claim was that it did not comply with the current rules.

    “I don’t accept for one minute that we can say this was within the rules. I think Nick Xenophon there is accepting Bronwyn Bishop at her word, while I want to see what documents she signed.

    “I don’t think we should just say this means the rules are wrong; no, let’s check whether or not the rules have been broken, because on the evidence we have so far, it looks like they have.”

  11. Harquebus

    Is it my imagination or are despicable women always worse than despicable men?

  12. Jennifer Meyer-Smith


    I was just starting to think you were one of the good guys and then you come out and make a gender discriminatory comment.

    Despicable people are despicable people. Simple.

  13. Jennifer Meyer-Smith

    I tend to think Xenophone is onto something.

    My suggestion is why can’t pollie’s expenses be treated as work-related tax deductions?

    Then, they would think twice before they undertook some of their mickey mouse activities and travels in first class style, if they think they will only receive a percentage of their cost back.

    Also, they would need to supply all receipts to the ATO like the rest of us mere mortals, and it will be the ATO’s decision as to whether they are entitled to such deductions or not.

    There would be an added bonus to the Australian people because, not only will we save from non-wastage of pollie’s misspent expenses, but they might even start to recognise that some blunt government processes that lack flexibility for special circumstances, should be revised and opened up to more accountable appeal processes that are user-friendly for every Australian citizen.

  14. Fred Martin

    I must say that I am confused by all this. Why are our politicians held to a different standard to the rest of us ?
    If you work as a senior manager of a company then you get to fly, on company business, business class. If the flight is for personal reasons you pay yourself, if it is for reasons of a third party (ie: for a customer etc.) then the third party pays.
    So if our pollys are on Government official business the Government should pay, if they are on business for their party (eg. fund raisers) the the party should pay. If they are guilty of fraud then they should be sacked and prosecuted. This idea that all is OK so long as you don’t get caught and even if you do then all you need do is pay it back is utter bullshit.
    While I am on the subject, if I had lied on my resume for a job the way Tony Abbott did to be elected to his job, then I would be instantly dismissed.

  15. Harquebus

    Jennifer Meyer-Smith
    Once again you have pulled me up.
    Where would I be without you?

  16. Jennifer Meyer-Smith

    Hear, hear, Fred Martin. Spot on.

    Harquebus, now let that be a lesson to you. 🙂

  17. kerri

    Mars08 that photo haunts me! I try not to be sexist and judgemental but that slash of red, the wanton toss back of her head the bare neck and shoulders just looks like the classic movie harlot who has served the elderly wealthy husband his Oleander Tea. It screams I’ve joined the winners circle and the rest of you losers can go to hell. The others seem to be welcoming and Abbott’s face reminds me of his “Australians for Honest Politics farce. But maybe that’s because I know their stories and are unable to forget what they stand for?
    Felicitas I would prefer the system most employed people in the real world work with? Pay for it yourself and then claim it back after suitable scrutiny (by an independant official in the govt case) that might slow them down a bit? In my working life if a trip involved anything personal it was immediately disqualified. But then I was a low level Government employee!
    Kaye Lee Nick Xenophon has many good honest clear ideas. Unfortunately he is rarely listened to in the Parliament. I wonder why? (Sarcasm intended)
    Jennifer Meyer-Smith and Fred Martin yeah! Why do we have to do back flips to prove travel expenses for taxation purposes and they don’t??
    And yes Fred, why do they get to pay back money and go back to the trough?
    Abbott repaid the trip to Mirabella’s wedding 7 years after stealing it!! Can anyone name an employer whi would forgive them for that??? And we need to stop calling this stuff “Travel Rorting” and give it it’s correct legal moniker “Theft, Fraud or Embezzlement”
    FEDERAL ICAC!!!! Before we end up like Korea or Greece!

  18. Jennifer Meyer-Smith

    Yes, I want a Federal ICAC now – with strong financial and criminal consequences for any current or past politician (if still alive!), who has been found to have acted in a manner that goes against the best interests of the Australian people.

  19. Alisru

    What I want to know is how a speaker so clearly biased towards a specific political party (Liberals) can still hold a supposedly unbiased position

  20. kerri

    Take a look at all of the people who would be in a position to sack her?
    The Prime Minister? The Attorney General? The Governor General?
    Is there any independant authority who could legally call her out?
    There is a petition on Change.org.
    Or you could email Peter Cosgrove?
    At this point I have done both and am pretty much willing to try anything for this nightmare to be over!

  21. @6##GS)$%

    The whole argument about politicians allowances and benefits misses the point – they are the ones who decide what is fair.
    Get your super early, no worries. Judges (and their wives after they decease), no worries.
    As Jennifer says above, “why can’t pollie’s expenses be treated as work-related tax deductions?” and judged by the rules that apply to the rest of us.
    Everyone does a job according to their lights (talent or effectiveness clearly plays no part), so we need to make politicians follow the same rules as the rest of us, not make beneficial laws that apply only to themselves.
    As my mother used to say, “what is fair is fair for everyone”.

  22. win jeavons

    Jennifer Meyer-Smith ; I like your style!

  23. Bronte ALLAN

    It is simple, change these stupid “rules” for ALL parliament “travel”! It seems to matter not one bit whether it is the party in power or the opposition, they ALL rort this travel “system” (sic). Although it does seem like the Libs are the ones who both rort the system more than Labor, & also seem to not want to pay back any “false” etc claims unless they are forced to, whether by weight of opposition numbers, public outcries etc. It is past time for ALL parliamentary perks to be examined (by an independent auditor), then after their decision, STOP any or all of these perks they all get when in parliament. They already command obscenely excessive wages for sitting in the Parliament for what, about 2 months of the year or so, & they do not “need” (or require) that many different perks, especially when compared to “civvy street”. Bishop should be sacked for her misuse of “our” monies etc for all of her trips she has (it seems) falsely claimed, also she should be sacked as she is by far the worst Speaker of the Parliament I have ever seen! Not just because she is so biased in her “decisions” regarding the opposition, but because she is so “in favor” of all & any Liberal decisions!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

The maximum upload file size: 2 MB. You can upload: image, audio, video, document, spreadsheet, interactive, text, archive, code, other. Links to YouTube, Facebook, Twitter and other services inserted in the comment text will be automatically embedded. Drop file here

Return to home page
%d bloggers like this: