Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
zaph

How long will Barnaby remain?

27 posts in this topic

Hired. Fired. Rehired. Resigned - potentially all in the space of a few months. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Breaking news...

Tamworth fast food franchise Red Rooster has removed the 'S' on their store front sign to show solidarity with Barnaby Joyce.

:D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've always thought this guy is shifty.

I couldn't care how many women (or men) this guy bangs. But the hypocrisy he espoused during the same sex marriage debate while his secretary was carrying his bun is unbelievable. I suspect the gay mafia will come down on him like a tonne of bricks.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Quote

 

Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull has announced Barnaby Joyce will take leave next week, so will not take up the role of acting prime minister.

Finance Minister Mathias Cormann will instead be acting PM when Mr Turnbull leaves the country
.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-02-15/barnaby-joyce-will-take-leave-next-week-mathias-cormann-act-pm/9450796

 

Is this sick leave?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Quote

 

It comes as Mr Joyce faces questions over his living situation and expenses during his relationship with Miss Campion amid concerns taxpayer funds may have been misused.

On Wednesday, Labor demanded to see details of taxpayer-funded flights taken by Mr Joyce and Miss Campion. His use of a rent-free apartment in Armidale, where he lived with his former staffer following the end of his marriage, was also raised in parliament.

Mr Joyce has declared the house on his interests register, but said it was given to him as a gift from a personal friend when he was not an MP.

“It’s on the record and it’s there for you to see,” Mr Joyce said on Wednesday.

http://www.news.com.au/national/politics/fresh-questions-over-salary-travel-for-barnaby-joyce/news-story/2b37f2085122babe1b19195b4f7642d4

 

Obviously some 'administrative errors' are going to be coming out soon. Pay it back, no worries. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Quote

 

Barnaby has only ever been for Barnaby – in life and in politics.

He has allowed his Nationals team basically to run amok over the past couple of years, ignoring government policy and responsibilities to cabinet solidarity, and to government unity, speaking freely on many issues, and on many occasions, notionally “in the interests of the bush”.

Barnaby simply cannot remain as Deputy Prime Minister, irrespective of the Coalition agreement. He doesn’t deserve it on either merit or performance. If this requires the renegotiation of that Coalition agreement, so be it.

https://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/politics/federal/joyce-doesn-t-deserve-to-be-deputy-pm-20180217-p4z0p8.html


 

Note the author is John Hewson.

I think the Libs are trying to lessen the power of Nats in this whole thing. Rightly so too. The nats have less than ten % of the vote and members of parliament. Yet they automatically get the DPM gig and nearly half their members are ministers. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Quote

 

he did not believe he was in breach of the ministerial code of conduct prohibiting the employment of spouses or relatives because Ms Campion was not his partner when she worked for Senator Canavan.

https://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/mathias-cormann-looking-forward-to-answering-for-barnaby-joyce-at-senate-estimates/news-story/2a8d25f81c0db2a577eb2a5433d958b0

 

She was not my partner at the time. She was just a staff member I was banging. It wasn't until 12.01 that she became my partner.

Where's my pension?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, zaph said:

 

She was not my partner at the time. She was just a staff member I was banging. It wasn't until 12.01 that she became my partner.

Where's my pension?

+1. John Clarke's witty humour would have taken the absolute p!ss out of this on the Clarke&Dawe segment in Thursday's 7:30 Report

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Quote

 

Barnaby Joyce charged taxpayers nearly $100,000 on printing and communications costs in the 10 weeks between being exposed as a New Zealand dual citizen and forced to a byelection after he was thrown out of Parliament.

The $98,000 in spending between August 14 and October 27 last year represented a dramatic jump in Mr Joyce's usual spending on the entitlement, which MPs use to pay for pamphlets, mailouts, websites and local advertising.

He spent more on the entitlement in those 74 days - when a byelection in his northern NSW seat of New England loomed as a real possibility - than in the first six months of the year.

https://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/politics/federal/barnaby-joyce-charged-taxpayers-100-000-for-communications-in-lead-up-to-byelection-20180228-p4z24z.html

 

Might be ok under the rules but smells like a bucket of prawns left in the sun for a few days.

Quote

Maverick Nationals MP George Christensen spent more than any other politician on office consumables, publications and printing in the last three months of last year - costing taxpayers more than $111,000 in three months. More than $100,000 alone was spent on printing pamphlets.

Fatty knows how to work the system.

Quote

Conservative senator Cory Bernardi charged taxpayers $1900 to travel to Sydney from Adelaide on September 16, the night before the launch of the "No" campaign for same-sex marriage he attended. 

Why are we paying for a SA senator to go to a Fred Nile rally in Sydney? Why isn't the IPEA investigating this?

Quote

Our most expensive former prime minister remains John Howard, who spent twice as much as any other living prime minister in the three months, racking up $80,000 in taxpayer-funded expenses on flights, cars and offices. He was the only one of the six living former leaders to claim a family travel allowance, worth $1800.

This guy's nearly 80 and he's still sucking on mummy's tit!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, zaph said:

This guy's nearly 80 and he's still sucking on mummy's tit!

Whitlam did it into his 90's

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, cobran20 said:

Whitlam did it into his 90's

They've removed the former PMs costs from the article. Howard racked up $90k in three months. I don't want our former pms to be poor but $360k in a year on cars and planes is just making fun of us. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, zaph said:

They've removed the former PMs costs from the article. Howard racked up $90k in three months. I don't want our former pms to be poor but $360k in a year on cars and planes is just making fun of us. 

Nice how they stopped defined benefit pensions for everybody else, but kept it for themselves, which I believe has been finally stopped in recent years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 01/03/2018 at 6:28 PM, cobran20 said:

Nice how they stopped defined benefit pensions for everybody else, but kept it for themselves, which I believe has been finally stopped in recent years.

Hawke, Howard, Keating and Abbott (when he quits) all get defined benefits. Tony will get over $300k pa.  

Many of our former PMs continue to make a contribution to public life and I think we should fund that. Howards bill seems excessive. IMO we fund their travel to 'greater good' events, not a chauffeured car to coles. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

 

Former deputy prime minister Barnaby Joyce has slammed the initial reporting of his relationship with Vikki Campion, saying he was never asked if he was the father of his former staffer's unborn child and that the issue of paternity is not certain.

https://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/politics/federal/a-grey-area-barnaby-joyce-raises-doubts-over-whether-he-s-the-biological-father-of-vikki-campion-s-baby-20180303-p4z2ob.html

 

The snipping has begun!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/4/2018 at 9:25 AM, zaph said:

IMO we fund their travel to 'greater good' events...

Please don't tell me you seriously believe that. It is and has always been a junket.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Quote

 

Barnaby Joyce and his partner, Vikki Campion, have reportedly sold the story of their relationship to the Seven Network for $150,000, months after appealing for privacy and telling the media to “move on”.

An industry insider has told News Corp the money will be held in trust for their six-week-old son, Sebastian.

“The baby’s parents have no say in it and cannot access it,” the insider reportedly said. “Lawyers ultimately get to decide if it should be accessed for the child’s education or if it will go to the child as a lump sum when he gets to 18 or possibly older.”

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2018/may/27/barnaby-joyce-and-vikki-campion-reportedly-sell-story-to-channel-seven-for-150000

 

Hypocrite. He wanted privacy not long ago. 

Quote

Even if he does not profit from the interview, Joyce will still have to declare the money on the parliamentary register of members’ interests.

Of course he profits from it. Are they going to interview the child? Is the child contracting for the interview? No. Joyce is giving the interview - what he decides to do with the proceeds is up to him.

Will he be paying tax on the proceeds? Should he be?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 05/03/2018 at 6:18 PM, cobran20 said:

Please don't tell me you seriously believe that. It is and has always been a junket.

Sometimes a junket, sometimes not, sometimes a mix. There should be greater scrutiny of (ex)polly's travel expenses though. 

IMO people who never travel for work see any travel as a junket. Travel is so glamorous. 

In my case (not govt employee or polly), it's never a junket, but sometimes a mix. Many other employees see my travel as a junket.

I'll give some examples:

  1. I leave the house at 5am for a meeting in Sydney. Get home at 9pm same day. Nothing but travel and work. For me, it's just a day on the job with a much longer commute. Other employees think I've had a days holiday in Sydney. Oh what fun it was to spend an extra 6 hours commuting!
  2. I attend a semi-compulsory few day conference in Sydney, which I despise. One night I attend Vivid in the evening. Attending Vivid was incidental to travel. Other employees think I've had a week cruise around the pacific. 
  3. Other conferences: I'm expected to present at one, or two conferences a year. There might be 15 conferences I can present at. I do choose these to coincide with my personal life - semi junket. Is it a city I'd like to see? Do I have friends there? So I've chosen Canberra for floriad and Perth for friends. Both conferences were valid but gave be some fringe benefits. Other employees think I've had a week vacation in Europe. Other employees think I've taken a year long cruise.
  4. Add on days at my expense: I've got a meeting, conference, whatever finishing Friday. I stay another couple of days and stay with friends/hotel at my expense.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, zaph said:

Sometimes a junket, sometimes not, sometimes a mix. There should be greater scrutiny of (ex)polly's travel expenses though. 

IMO people who never travel for work see any travel as a junket. Travel is so glamorous. 

In my case (not govt employee or polly), it's never a junket, but sometimes a mix. Many other employees see my travel as a junket.

I'll give some examples:

  1. I leave the house at 5am for a meeting in Sydney. Get home at 9pm same day. Nothing but travel and work. For me, it's just a day on the job with a much longer commute. Other employees think I've had a days holiday in Sydney. Oh what fun it was to spend an extra 6 hours commuting!
  2. I attend a semi-compulsory few day conference in Sydney, which I despise. One night I attend Vivid in the evening. Attending Vivid was incidental to travel. Other employees think I've had a week cruise around the pacific. 
  3. Other conferences: I'm expected to present at one, or two conferences a year. There might be 15 conferences I can present at. I do choose these to coincide with my personal life - semi junket. Is it a city I'd like to see? Do I have friends there? So I've chosen Canberra for floriad and Perth for friends. Both conferences were valid but gave be some fringe benefits. Other employees think I've had a week vacation in Europe. Other employees think I've taken a year long cruise.
  4. Add on days at my expense: I've got a meeting, conference, whatever finishing Friday. I stay another couple of days and stay with friends/hotel at my expense.

 

 

 

I've had to travel interstate and overseas for work. never a junket, just long hours. But directors is a separate matter, with plenty of breaks in between official duties whilst travelling.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Travel for work is mostly a major pain in the backside. It's only useful if I can time it with other activities like conferences or leisure.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 27/05/2018 at 11:51 AM, zaph said:

Sometimes a junket, sometimes not, sometimes a mix. There should be greater scrutiny of (ex)polly's travel expenses though. 

IMO people who never travel for work see any travel as a junket. Travel is so glamorous. 

In my case (not govt employee or polly), it's never a junket, but sometimes a mix. Many other employees see my travel as a junket.

I'll give some examples:

  1. I leave the house at 5am for a meeting in Sydney. Get home at 9pm same day. Nothing but travel and work. For me, it's just a day on the job with a much longer commute. Other employees think I've had a days holiday in Sydney. Oh what fun it was to spend an extra 6 hours commuting!
  2. I attend a semi-compulsory few day conference in Sydney, which I despise. One night I attend Vivid in the evening. Attending Vivid was incidental to travel. Other employees think I've had a week cruise around the pacific. 
  3. Other conferences: I'm expected to present at one, or two conferences a year. There might be 15 conferences I can present at. I do choose these to coincide with my personal life - semi junket. Is it a city I'd like to see? Do I have friends there? So I've chosen Canberra for floriad and Perth for friends. Both conferences were valid but gave be some fringe benefits. Other employees think I've had a week vacation in Europe. Other employees think I've taken a year long cruise.
  4. Add on days at my expense: I've got a meeting, conference, whatever finishing Friday. I stay another couple of days and stay with friends/hotel at my expense.

Who gives a sh*t if employers do/don't pay for travel for my points. If the taxpayer is footing the bill then it matters. If I was a polly then...

1. Is clearly 110% work related.

2. The media could make out I only went to Sydney to see some pretty lights. In reality I had a few hours off and decided to have some recreation.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I haven't worked out the best wording, but there's a great meme in waiting - Barnaby gets a staffer pregnant, Trump bangs porn stars. Just a different league... the difference between a second-rate accountant and a billionaire.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know Barnaby Joyce personally. I am not intimately involved with the situation. I am therefore a little loath to comment, but........

It is worth remembering that this was the man, who was once second in charge of our country.

Every human being has sexual urges, and in certain cases they are difficult to control given circumstance and environment. Many late nights isolated away from wife and family, etc. Most of us control this to the best of our ability. In this respect though we are all very similar. But I doubt this is what was really under judgement. After all, thousands of people have affairs and destroy their marriages every day around this country. No. It was his position of power, that drew the focus.

And from my position of relative safety behind the computer screen, I can observe that he made some seriously stupid decisions regarding the matter. I thought the turmoil had died down. He should have let the sleeping dogs lie. Kept a low profile, and maintained his seat in parliament, even if it was on the back benches. He could have slipped off into obscurity after a few years and received his lucrative parliamentary pension. But his pride (or is it arrogance) wouldn't let him do this. He had to have the last word!!

To then think that he could financially benefit from the scandal, and not receive outcry by the public is to completely misunderstand public life, or public sentiment. I have to wonder then, if he every really understood his constituency?

Society is often prepared to accept/forgive a mistake, but they don't like people to personally benefit from their benevolence.  

But it also highlights for me how quickly a person can fall from grace with the public. (Yes, I know he is public fare for the media, and a lot of these politicians flirt with the media to get the spotlight on them.) But to go from darling to disgrace in a matter of months is a fascinating and debilitating fall. While we may ogle and glare from the sidelines, and secretly thank God that it isn't us undergoing this scrutiny, I'm not sure we have the right to throw too many stones either. I guess its a matter of perspective.

I don't know now whether he can continue in politics. He may have jeopardised it all. I therefore can only wish him well for the future, as I would any other human being who gets themselves into a predicament of their own making. And most of us do!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0