Palmer calls Hockey corrupt


This morning the SMH reported that:

Treasurer Joe Hockey is offering privileged access to a select group including business people and industry lobbyists in return for tens of thousands of dollars in donations to the Liberal Party via a secretive fund-raising body whose activities are not fully disclosed to election funding authorities.

The Independent Commission Against Corruption is probing Liberal fund-raising bodies such as the Millennium Forum and questioning their influence on political favours in NSW.

Mr Hockey offers access to one of the country’s highest political offices in return for annual payments.

Then our Tony sort of defended the Treasurer:

On Monday, Mr Abbott was asked if he was comfortable with Mr Hockey’s fund-raising activities during an interview with Channel Nine.

Mr Abbott responded by saying that he had not read the Fairfax Media report but that “all political parties have to raise money”.

“Typically, you raise money by having events where senior members of the party go and obviously they meet people at these events,” he said.

“The alternative to fund-raising in this time-honoured way, is taxpayer funding.”

Mr Abbott said that in the context of a “very tough” budget, the idea that taxpayers should fund political parties was “very, very odd”.

When asked if there should be a federal ICAC, Mr Abbott said that he thought that Canberra had a “pretty clean polity”.

But Joe has called in the lawyers. From Business Spectator:

Treasurer Joe Hockey has sought legal advice over a story in Fairfax newspapers.

…”Accusations made in Fairfax Media today are both offensive and repugnant,” Mr Hockey said in a statement.

…”As the matter is now in the hands of lawyers no further comment can be made.”

Now, Clive Palmer, of all  people, is putting the boot in over conflicts of interest:

Clive Palmer has described allegations that Joe Hockey is offering privileged personal access to wealthy business people as “corruption” and called on the Treasurer to explain himself.

…“The right of access to someone to meet a politician of any party cannot involve a pre-payment or a payment of any kind, if it does, if that’s knowingly received by the politician that’s just corruption, there’s nothing else for it,” Mr Palmer said.

“People can pay money for a dinner if they want to but specifically paying to meet that person goes too far.”

Let’s get them set up to sort this out on Joe’s front garden and take appropriate snaps.

Houses and Holes
Latest posts by Houses and Holes (see all)


    • migtronixMEMBER

      Corruption done the old boys way — “we’ll criticise you and you’ll criticise us, but never too loudly, and definitely never as to actually stop anything!!”

  1. Looks like Palmer is one black pot calling another pot black. Both shaped like black pots too.

    • But he appears to be the first talking pot in all of history – which sets him aside.

    • Hey, at least doesn’t want to increase the debt burden on tertiary students (the destroying the last pillar of our developed economy).

      • University graduates get the highest salaries and the lowest unemployment.

        I’d make first year free then full fee paying.

        The people who really get slugged are those who start and drop out before graduation, most of them drop out before second year starts.

        Free university was regressive as it mainly subsidised the children of the upper middle class and wealthy. The very talented less well off got scholarships with living allowances. It was a good system and took into account cost of living while studying.

  2. Lets get the crowds chanting ‘rumble, rumble rumble’

    I reckon Clive might still throw a better punch than Bariatric Joe – who likes to use shrill hectoring to conceal a fundamental pudginess…

    • I live in Victoria, and want to put together a consortium to host the event at Festival Hall to kick off a revival of Friday night fights. Any takers?

      • I’m in StatSailor, though I’d also be willing to fly to Bondi if Jake’s proposal beats yours.

      • 2 versions. The ‘softcore’ version on Bondi; then the pay per view ‘adult’ version jelly wrestling at Festival Hall. Some people will watch big men in tights jelly wrestle over ethical principles in public life. The windfall can be used to pay down the deficit.

  3. Surely not, Australians have seen both sides of parliament, feeding at the trough of rent seekers.

    ”Accusations made in Fairfax Media today are both offensive and repugnant,” Mr Hockey said in a statement.

    I find Joe Hockey’s family trust to be offensive and repugnant, when majority of Australian taxpayers are not able to minimise their tax in such a way.

    • Mining BoganMEMBER

      Offensive and repugnant eh? Now I get it. You can misrepresent and tell lies about darkies and thats okay because that’s free speech.

      Question the ethics of fat politicians and it’s straight to the courts.

      Seems simple. Oh, has our Tony apologised to that young journo lass yet?

  4. This is great. Palmer is hardly a clean skin in this but damn its fun seeing him shake the establishment can. Now if only he would tie Tony and Brandis to this or if icac would it would be a trifecta leaving Turnbull the lead dog in this group.

  5. I’m sure even 3D would be able to get behind the Greens’ proposal for a national ICAC.

    The Australian Greens have called on both Liberal and Labor to urgently consider legislation for a national Integrity Commissioner in light of recent events in NSW politics.

    An Australian Greens bill for a national Integrity Commission is already before federal Parliament. Among other integrity measures, the bill would establish a new Office of the Independent Parliamentary Adviser to advise MPs and Ministers on entitlements claims and the ethical running of their office that the public rightly expects. The adviser will also be tasked with developing a legally binding code of conduct for MPs for the Parliament to adopt.

    • I nominate Geoffrey Watson for chairman of such a commission, he’s had a cracker of an innings with the NSW ICAC. I’d love to see him rip into the Federal LibLabs.

      • Mining BoganMEMBER

        Don’t bother. I’m guessing there will be a hit put out on him soon.

        Smart and honest. No room for people like that around pollies.

    • Bloody great idea…

      one of few from the Greens, but they’re definitely getting better at it

  6. interested party

    “When asked if there should be a federal ICAC, Mr Abbott said that he thought that Canberra had a “pretty clean polity”.”

    Can someone shine a light on any deals made with the banks for gaining election funding? There has to be skeletons in that closet!

    “Pretty clean polity”…….my arse!

    • Check today’s Fairfax papers front page.

      What little public information is available reveals members of the forum include National Australia Bank as well as the influential Financial Services Council, whose chief executive is former NSW Liberal leader John Brogden.

      The FSC’s members, including financial advice and funds management firms, stand to benefit from the changes to the Future of Financial Advice (FOFA) laws being considered by the federal government, which would involve a winding back of consumer protections introduced by Labor. The National Australia Bank would also benefit from the changes.

      David Murray, ex-CEO of CBA, is a Liberal party fund raiser.. while also wearing the hat of an “independent” head of commission of inquiry on banks.

      • On that note Mav, this is well worth posting again —

        “To understand the pivotal role of Australian banks in the funding of political parties requires a deep knowledge of how the system works.

        For the most part, in the vicinity of three quarters of a major party’s funding in most elections comes from the public purse. The ‘public purse’ amounts are allocated to parties after the election in accordance with the proportion of the votes that are achieved.

        But there is no forward allocation of money. The distribution of ‘public purse’ money is strictly governed by the proportion of the votes actually achieved.

        ALP organisers are not looking forward to meeting with their bankers as the election nears. They are deeply apprehensive that as a result of current opinion polls, their bankers will slash the amount of election funding available to the ALP and lock it into a low vote.

        Conversely, Liberal and National Party organisers believe that as a result of their opinion polling they will receive a huge increase in support from their bankers to fund unprecedented amounts of advertising and promotion.”–pd20110721-JXTSN?OpenDocument&emcontent_Gottliebsen

        The usurers OWN our political system.

      • interested party

        Thanks Mav,

        This beggars belief! I was hesitant to ask knowing full well there would be evidence out there. If you cannot beat them, and refuse to join them…….Op8…your mountain top is really gonna get crowded.

  7. Gotta love the NSW ICAC, the gift that keeps on giving.

    The SMH cover today was quite lovely, funny that it was all quiet in the Oz though.

  8. Fancy Mr Palmer comments, having a crack at the purhcasing of govt influence…..

    the bloke basically bought the balance of power – far worse for Australia than anything a $10k lunch would ever do

    • C.M.BurnsMEMBER

      In his defence, Palmer at least owns who and what he is and how he got there. He doesn’t deny or obfuscate anything. He is rich, he used his money to get elected. And if you voted for him then you know what he stands for – his own interests – since he isn’t beholden to any funding from special interests that only becomes obvious after the election.

      • He is the most transparent and least hypocritical of all of them.

        I don’t agree with all of his policies but the state if politics right now with major and minor parties fooling sheep to vote for them through misrepresentation and obfuscation, as you say, a force like Palmer is long overdue.

        Good on him for shaking things up.