Comments on: Joel Fitzgibbon, time to step aside?

By: meski

meski — Thu, 04 Jun 2009 04:01:10 +0000

Well, you got your way, he’s resigned.

By: meski

meski — Thu, 04 Jun 2009 03:26:49 +0000

No, Graeme, not a fan club, just people who can admit that the standards of ministerial ethics are not inflexible things to be strictly applied. They aren’t even laws, like speeding fines and DUIs are. Admit that he *didn’t* get $450 worth of hotel room, that was for *2* people. The charge rate is per head, not room.

By: Chris Johnson

Chris Johnson — Wed, 03 Jun 2009 23:38:13 +0000

So far he’s flunked on parliamentary standards of real and perceived honest conduct.

By: Graeme Lewis

Graeme Lewis — Wed, 03 Jun 2009 11:30:48 +0000

Oh my God - the McGibbon Fan Club. Hey you lot - a rule is a rule. It’s either broken or it’s not. He admitted breaking it when he apologised.

I’d like to escape a speeding fine or a DUI just by apologising, but it wouldn’t work. Why is dear Joel given multiple chances by a PM who obviously owes him for something. Wonder what??

By: Gratton Wilson

Gratton Wilson — Wed, 03 Jun 2009 06:19:57 +0000

The benefit should never have been declared because the booking was made by NIB’S for their representative for shared accommodation, so if all had gone to plan NIB would have paid $450.00, the full amount, and therefore Joel would have received a gift to the value of $225.00. In the absence of his brother, Joel paid $450, that being $225.00 of his own debt and $225.00 toward his brother’s (or NIB’S) obligation. When Joel’s payment was canceled he only received benefit of $225.00. Joel has no obligation to declare his brother’s benefit as his own. If parliamentarians do not have to declare benefit under $300. then he had no obligation to declare it at all.
Look at it this way:
If NIB had booked 2 single rooms each for $225.00 and Joel used one room and paid the account of $450.00 for both rooms and the payment was subsequently canceled, he has received benefit of the value of only one room ie $225. 00

By: Robert Gregg

Robert Gregg — Wed, 03 Jun 2009 05:39:59 +0000

The only questions we should ask here is whats a health fund CEO doing sponsoring football games , getting private boxes etc etc and then farming out tickets and fringe benefits to family and friends. In one breath NIB are claiming a need to increase premiums by 3 times the inflation rate - in the next they are spending money like its going out of fashion - on there own benefits!
As for Joel Fitzgibbon - give the guy a break he’s got to be one of the hardest working ministers - it’s his PA who needs to work harder.

Bob Gregg

By: Harry Goldsmith

Harry Goldsmith — Wed, 03 Jun 2009 04:35:05 +0000

I think the real question to be answered is why does NIB spend its funds buying tickets for the Minister? It is made even worse by the fact that the CEO (or whatever) is the brother of the Minister. Members of the NIB should be up in arms. Nicola Roxon must take this style of illegal expense into account when approving health care premium rises.

By: zac spitzer

zac spitzer — Wed, 03 Jun 2009 04:10:20 +0000

If the binary opposition really want to chase this one, we need to address the double standards.

since when is $450 a hanging offence but a few hundred million in bribes to with the AWB, or how about all the pay outs with regards to Immigration stuff under Howard, all the extra dollar means jack shit?

Makes sense really tho, blue collar crime is punished and (rich) white collar crime is ignored…

By: stephen martin

stephen martin — Wed, 03 Jun 2009 03:55:02 +0000

What a storm in a teacup. This is pure bullshit, Fitzgibbon’s explanation of what happened is plausible and that’s as far as it should go. The Liberals are desperate is this the best that they can do.
More to the point would be the minister’s brother using company funds to entertain the minister at the Football and put him up in an hotel. After all the minister is the Defence Minister not the Health Minister; which could have been some sort of justification. The one who should be investigated by his board is the brother!

By: meski

meski — Wed, 03 Jun 2009 03:54:31 +0000

It wasn’t for a single, that was for 2 people, Joel and his brother. Which makes the 450 look a little less outrageous.

By: zac spitzer

zac spitzer — Wed, 03 Jun 2009 03:54:03 +0000

RTFA, $450 for a double room for a cabinet minister and a company CEO, that’s really outrageous

keep moving along, nothing here

By: j-boy57

j-boy57 — Wed, 03 Jun 2009 03:46:32 +0000

Its not the oversight its the $450 room thats the problem.
Joel your allegedly a Labour politician $450 for a nights kip is a trifle extravagant
even if you did think that some poor bastards health fund was doing the footing.

By: Graeme Lewis

Graeme Lewis — Wed, 03 Jun 2009 03:41:54 +0000

Bad accounting by a senior minister, temper tantrums by his leader, an ETS in total disarray, water schemes in a real mess, a flu epidemic being badly mismanaged, cheques flying out to non-residents and deceased folk, and a borrowing and debt programme leading us into chaos - who cares if it is a technical recession or not. We are in deep s — t with a government anything but in control.

By: zac spitzer

zac spitzer — Wed, 03 Jun 2009 03:39:41 +0000

You gotta be kidding right? It’s a technical breach with a reasonable explanation

next up you’ll be complaining he jaywalked