Michael Smith has rushed to the defence of Coalition frontbencher George Brandis, who has been accused of hypocrisy for claiming taxpayer funds to attend the ex-shock jock’s wedding.
Smith — who has hounded union officials, including Craig Thomson, for allegedly misappropriating members’ funds — says Brandis’ expenses claim was an innocent mistake and there is a grey area when it comes to what politicians can and cannot claim as work-related travel.
“Does it display incompetence? Does it display dishonesty? Does it display a slap-dash approach? I don’t see any of that on the evidence,” Smith told Crikey.
“A literal reading of the guidelines doesn’t include meetings with journalists. But the vast majority of what Brandis did at the wedding falls within the work-related expense arena. He had a sincere belief he was going in a professional capacity and to network with journalists. I know the bloke and I know when he said it was a legitimate claim he believed it.”
The former 2UE host, who departed the station after trying to pursue Julia Gillard’s role in a 1990s union scandal, compared being a guest at his 2011 wedding to appearing on the ABC’s Q&A program. Around a dozen journalists attended the wedding between Smith and Australian Financial Review life and leisure editor Katarina Kroslakova. Coalition frontbencher Barnaby Joyce also attended.
While Smith and Brandis have been described as friends, Smith says their relationship has been a professional one. The pair worked closely together pursuing the Thomson affair, but had not been to each others’ houses, according to Smith. Brandis gave a wedding speech covering freedom of speech issues (including Smith’s departure from 2UE) rather than personal matters. Smith claimed at the time that Brandis had torn up the dance floor after the wedding.
Smith says Brandis’ decision to pay back the $1683 he claimed for attending the wedding should not be read as a concession he did anything wrong. “I think it’s a reaction to community response,” he said. “It’s in no way an admission of anything.”
Smith added that he believes Joyce has been “smeared terribly and unfairly” by being named prominently in Fairfax’s initial reports breaking the story. Joyce has said he did not drive to the wedding, did not use a Comcar to drive from his hotel to the wedding and didn’t charge taxpayers for the cost of his hotel room.
Acting Opposition Leader Chris Bowen this morning slammed Brandis as “pathetic” and one of Parliament’s “biggest hypocrites” for claiming taxpayer funds to attend the wedding while acting as a watchdog on parliamentary standards.
As covered in a Crikey profile last year, Smith has become an prolific blogger and played an active role in reviving the Australian Workers Union slush fund scandal since his acrimonious departure from 2UE.
Some of those chickens look suspiciously like vultures.
“The Michael Smith Wedding Expo”? Did anyone else miss that?
Yes we all invite heaps of business colleagues and vague acquaintances to our weddings. *** Guffaw *** What rot!
The rules of Australian politics are clear. If the offenders are from your side of politics then they simply made an innocent mistake, if they are from the other side of politics they are rorters and fraudsters who must be hunted down at all costs and made to pay. Even moreso if it is someone who must be paid back for any perceived slight (Slipper).
Poltiics is indeed a dirty game and those in the media and in government who think they are above the law forget who they represent.
What is even worse, is those shock jock types playing the holier than thou card when it comes to Labor and then put blinkers on when it is the LNP who rort.
Fact is every citizen should be keeping the politicians honest. It is not a sport, these people are entrusted with administering policy and should be of the highest calibre no matter for which party they stand.
Work related events for parliamentarians are tied in with electorate or parliamentary business. It is not relevant to party networking and marketing.
Neither, as has been suggested, is it comparable to work expenses that a company employee might claim in the same circumstances with their employer’s permission, and where hob-nobbing with the like-minded, making contacts may be seen as beneficial to your product. This is clearly Liberal Party business and not something that the taxpayer should be funding. To pretend this is anything other than a manifestation of the culture of self-entitlement is a furphy. This is the result of a real lack of accountability in the entitlements regime. And for a perpetrator to pretend paying back monies will quell concerns while claiming it is still legitimate is beyond an insult.
The ALP should pick its next leader based on who can bounce Geo. Brandis out of the Abbott ministry.