Iain Hall's SANDPIT

Home » Australian Politics » Congratulations to Mal Brough the new LNP candidate for Fisher

Congratulations to Mal Brough the new LNP candidate for Fisher

Mr Abbott is the odds-on-favourite to win the next election and is already under pressure to promote a bevy of rising stars to the frontbench. But none of his existing frontbenchers has indicated a willingness to step aside and the jostling for the spoils of victory has already begun.
Apart from the recently minted NSW senator and former right-hand man to John Howard, Arthur Sinodinos, who is certain to be promoted, others in line include Scott Ryan, Jamie Briggs, Simon Birmingham, Paul Fletcher and Kelly O’Dwyer.
The former West Australian Liberal treasurer, Christian Porter, is also set to join federal Parliament and will be expecting rapid promotion.
Mr Brough was elected in 1996. He entered the ministry in 2001 and the cabinet in 2006.
(click for source)

While the minions of the left struggle to find reasons to describe the coalition as evil incarnate they are in fact being offered some very hard working and dedicated talent in the candidates that have been chosen to stand for the party at the next election. There is an interesting contrast between the ALP and the coalition here. At the last state election our oldest political party struggled to get enough people to pull on the ALP jersey as candidates and they struggled even more to get anyone to man to polling stations (only one very depressed chap on the verge of tears at the one I voted at) Yet on the conservative side we have just seen a very spirited competition result in Mal Brough winning the pre-selection for Fisher, The Phil Coorey piece I cite above seems to be missing the point that its better to have lots of talent to draw a ministry from than to have too few in your team that are worthy and able to take a seat at the big table.

Cheers Comrades

Advertisements

21 Comments

  1. deknarf says:

    Ahh Ian, you little jester you! Just keep repeating Brough, Ashby, Slipper, Brough, Ashby Slipper until the whole ugly mess comes out in the courts.
    If this is the best that the LNP can do then they are surely scraping the bottom of the cesspit! And you think that Brough will be working for the electorate — hmm, don’t think so. Himself more likely.

  2. Iain Hall says:

    The suggestion that Mal Brough has done anything improper in the slipper affair is such a desperate conspiracy theory, that only the uber-left believe them. When are lefties like you going to admit that the only one who looks bad about the slipper affair is the man himself and the woman who raised such a flawed individual to such high office

    Photobucket Pictures, Images and Photos

    If this is the best that the LNP can do then they are surely scraping the bottom of the cesspit! And you think that Brough will be working for the electorate — hmm, don’t think so. Himself more likely.

    Really don’t you lefties ever do credit where its due? And why you have to insist that no conservative ever does things in politics for altruistic reasons really when it just makes you look ideologically blinkered and narrow minded.

  3. Ray Dixon says:

    Come of it, Iain. it’s as plain as day that Brough was up to his neck in getting Ashby to bring Slipper down. Dirty, dirty politics by a dirty, dirty man.

  4. deknarf says:

    Hmm? Wouldn’t say that I’m a leftie (and I expected better than name calling). I’d say that I’m not a conservative (ultra or neo) and I believe in social justice and equity.
    As for Brough, the guy is involved with Ashby/Slipper business up to his ears, with self-interest being the primary driver in digging himself into a safe seat.
    Time and the decisions of the courts will tell whether its a conspiracy theory or no. The evidence to date suggests the contrary view that Brough was indeed involved.
    Blinkered and narrow minded? Don’t think so, but pot calling kettle does come to mind.

  5. paulwello says:

    I think goes all the the way to the top of the Liberal party, what was poodle Pyne doing in the speakers office when Slipper was on the floor of the house, not drinking beer.

  6. deknarf says:

    I see that Ashby is now being investigated for alleged sex acts with minors. Yes I know it was referred by Slipper but the 15 y.o. actually emailed the information to him and he acted on it. I think I’ll stick with the Brough, Ashby, Slipper etc, etc!

  7. Richard Ryan says:

    Ashby’s favourite song——–thank heavens for little boys!

  8. Richard Ryan says:

    “I did not have sex with that under-age boy” snigger-snigger——does a cat drink milk? snigger-snigger——I rest my case. Shalom, Richard Ryan.

  9. Richard Ryan says:

    Now what did the Mad Monk Abbott know about this sorid sex affair?.

  10. Richard Ryan says:

    Hate to say this Iain——-but this little saga is going to blow up in the Liberal ‘s faces——like a ” wet dream” (snigger-snigger-your favourite retort.)

  11. Iain Hall says:

    Firstly let me offer you a most warm welcome to the Sandpit Paul! and you will notice that I fixed your typos for you as well.

    deknarf & Ray

    I find it amazing that you are both so willing to believe in a liberal conspiracy yet you think that the latest allegation from Slipper should be taken as gospel. So it becomes a contest between Ashby’s allegations of sexual harassment which has corroborating evidence (which you disbelieve) and a desperate claim generated by Slipper (with no corroborating evidence) you are seemingly certain that its true. If you want to believe in conspiracy then why can’t accept that this latest claim smacks of that as well?

  12. deknarf says:

    Corroborating evidence: So the email (not sought) and the Facebook information is not corroborative? How about Ashby passing Slipper’s diary information to Brough and then Brough asking for it to be emailed as it couldn’t be read properly. As I said before the decision of the courts will determine the veracity of the claims, as will the investigations by the police of the 15 year old’s claims. I understand that there were two involved at different stages. Now I could throw in a conspiracy theory that under a Qld LNP government the under age claims might just go nowhere — but that would be stretching it a bit wouldn’t it?
    There are blinkers about certainly, but I’d suggest that I’m not wearing them.
    The question one should ask is will this whole business eventually turn into Abbot’s Grech?

  13. Ray Dixon says:

    Iain, I said nothing whatsoever about Slipper’s “allegations” (*) re Ashby being a pedophile, only that it’s patently obvious that Brough was involved with Ashby in the court case Ashby is bringing against Slipper. It’s undeniable. Even Brough doesn’t deny meeting the guy (for 3 hours) and “advising him to get a lawyer and take action”. Come on, Brough’s got a big stake in it. Who’s being blinkered?

    (* And Slipper has not made any “allegations” per se. He has merely done the right thing and referred the information given to him (by Ashby) about Ashby claiming to have rooted a 15 y.o. boy to the police. That’s not an “allegation”, it’s passing on information of a possible crime to the authorities. As an MHR he would be remiss not to do that)

  14. Richard Ryan says:

    AS the old saying goes” Love is Blind—snigger-snigger—-wink-wink. It must be the “carbon tax”

  15. Richard Ryan says:

    OR– to cut a long story short, one boy’s meat, is another man’s poison. snigger snigger, ________Political poison

  16. Iain Hall says:

    deknarf

    Corroborating evidence: So the email (not sought) and the Facebook information is not corroborative?

    Not in law it isn’t It is at best hear say or an uncorroborated allegation

    How about Ashby passing Slipper’s diary information to Brough and then Brough asking for it to be emailed as it couldn’t be read properly.

    In what Context?

    As I said before the decision of the courts will determine the veracity of the claims, as will the investigations by the police of the 15 year old’s claims.

    Well the former is before the court now and the latter is not likely to result in charges for a couple of reasons firstly is there any forensic evidence? No? well then it becomes a he said he said conflict dependant upon unreliable memories unless Ashby were to admit the offence chances of a conviction too low to trigger a prosecution. In any event it sounds more like a set up than anything else because its not unheard of for people to lie for political reasons.

    I understand that there were two involved at different stages. Now I could throw in a conspiracy theory that under a Qld LNP government the under age claims might just go nowhere — but that would be stretching it a bit wouldn’t it?

    Well I think that It won’t go anywhere

    There are blinkers about certainly, but I’d suggest that I’m not wearing them.
    The question one should ask is will this whole business eventually turn into Abbott’s Grech?

    From an LNP perspective I don’t think that there is any comparison.

  17. Ray Dixon says:

    Sorry, the information about Ashby’s alleged pedophilia was given to Slipper (unsolicited) by the 15 y.o. victim (now aged 24), not by Ashby. Nonetheless, Iain, what else do you think Slipper should have done about that except pass it to police? Maybe he should have called Brough and got his advice? Or Pyne? Or Bishop? Maybe Hockey or Abbott? …..

  18. GD says:

    Ray reckoned:

    it’s as plain as day that Brough was up to his neck in getting Ashby to bring Slipper down. Dirty, dirty politics by a dirty, dirty man.

    And aren’t the rest of us glad that he did. Whatever you think of Brough, he certainly will be a more worthwhile member of parliament than the turncoat Slipper. As for Slipper’s lackey Ashby, by all means get rid of him.

    You really are scraping the barrel here Ray, trying to find something on the Libs when it is glaring obvious, given that we have to put up with another year of Labor, that the beam in your Labor eye is much greater than any speck in our soon to be incumbent Liberal government.

  19. Iain Hall says:

    Ray
    Clearly Slipper saw this allegation as a perfect way to smear Ashby and hopefully swing the court case that Ashby has brought against him in his favour. When the reality is that even if the allegations are true they should have absolutely no bearing on the sexual harassment case at all.

  20. Richard Ryan says:

    Iain you have been speaking to Brandis—-I see, both your comments are word for word-nearly! Pedophiles in the Catholic Church are also above the law—–why not have a Royal Commission on the law of Australia. Now that would ruffle a few “big wig” feathers, (Judges)! snigger-snigger.

  21. Ray Dixon says:

    If he’d wanted to “smear” Ashby he’d have gone to the media with it, not the police, Iain. I repeat, what do you think he should have done when the victim contacted him out of the blue with the information (including Facebook links) that Ashby was a pedophile other than pass it on to police like any responsible citizen would do (especially a MHR)? Pity Pyne or Bishop et al didn’t act so responsibly when Ashby ‘mysteriously’ contacted them about Slipper by raising the matter with Slipper himself (remember, sexual harassment is not a crime but a civil matter).

    As for it having “no bearing” on the civil action by Ashby re the so-called sexual harassment by Slipper, it kind of goes to Ashby’s credibility I would think. The guy is clearly not of good character (he has a conviction already) and not a reliable witness or complainant. It amazes me that you want to blindly back the allegations of a douche like Ashby just because it suits the conservative side of politics. A dud is a dud regardless of which side you barrack for, Iain. And Ashby’s clearly a dud.

Comments are closed.

Welcome to the Sandpit

I love a good argument so please leave a comment

Please support the Sandpit

Please support the Sandpit

Do you feel lucky?

Do you feel lucky?

%d bloggers like this: