Moralistic morons
So, Howard’s scared that Draper will lose her seat, and has ordered her to pay back the money she rorted to take her boyfriend on a round-the-world trip.
And the Libs are going to tighten the rules. Apart from the fact that — ministerial stonewalling notwithstanding — Draper is in clear breach of the current rules, the new ones won’t address a major flaw in the system:
Last week, the office of the Special Minister of State, Eric Abetz, admitted there was no system for checking who politicians took with them on taxpayer-funded jaunts overseas, so long as they were heterosexual couples.
[...]
Asked if gay parliamentarians would gain the same rights as others, he said: “I’m not sure I understand. First [our critics] say eligibility should be tightened, then that it should be expanded. I thought one of the criticisms made was that lovers shouldn’t go.”
So Brian Greig’s live-in partner of eighteen years is a “lover”, while Trish Draper’s fling is a “spouse”? Puh-lease.
Punishing monogamy, rewarding promiscuity: forgive me if I consider your “family values” perverse.
(I should also add that the injunction that sparked my interest in this scandal has been quashed. The initial judge’s decision that comments linking the boyfriend to a murder investigation were unacceptable was overturned.)
Outraged taxpayers who feel ‘mugged’ again by pollies rorts are being whipped into a feeding frenzy, by the media. When they have finished publicly stoning the latest villain, they will have to quietly consider the following:
Should Federal backbenchers get 1 overseas study trip, every three years, as they currently do? If we believe this is fair and desirable, should it be an open cheque trip, or consist of a set allowance for each member?
If we agree they should, should members additionally be entitled to take a) Only a married spouse b) Married and defacto spouses and partners of any sex c)Only political office employees/advisors d) Any one person of their choosing.
Historically this travel entitlement, would have been implemented to facilitate international idea exchange and education. Given the inordinate demands of politics on family life and since most politicians were married, spouses(usually wives) were included. As social mores changed, the rules were relaxed to include defacto partners(no poofters please, we’re missionary positionists!)
Interestingly enough, although administrative arrangements have been relaxed somewhat, public opinion does not appear to have relaxed to include homosexual partners, as Rob points out. Curiouser and curiouser, the outrage over Trish Draper’s boyfriend/defacto going along, seems to include a strong element of his unworthiness in this role. Indeed, the electorate has not been in any uproar over the many politicians who have travelled with their spouses. Q. Are our pollies less conservative than their masters?