What would a Dutton Liberal leadership mean for the Liberals and the country?

[The Punter]

Yes, but one is far more problematic, has much longer-term effects, and far more obvious than the other.

You admit that, yes?

So are we talking about grift, or are we talking about climate change? Easy to dislike Gina because of how she makes her money. Those airplanes don't run on good wishes either, but jet fuel.

Gina runs a legal business. She needs help from government, which is why you either don't take her money, or better yet (and the sign of a real one), take her money then ignore her pleas.

 

[Festerz]

I don't see why the government doesn't rent a room at each airport for politicians to work and hide from the plebs. Or just make it law that x amount of space is to be provided for government travellers.

Easy to fix.

C'mon Chief, you know this isn't about the functionality of the room, but the exclusivity of it.

 

[Chief]

C'mon Chief, you know this isn't about the functionality of the room, but the exclusivity of it.

My solution is workable, but you're saying it wouldn't be acceptable?

 

[Festerz]

My solution is workable, but you're saying it wouldn't be acceptable?

I'm saying the attraction to MPs at both state and Federal level of being a member of an exclusive club that is invitation only for business leaders and MPs is its exclusivity.

Setting up a club that is for government MPs and their guests only would detract from that.

I mean we have SA MPs who are members of the Chairmans Lounge and Qantas doesn't even fly internationally from Adelaide.

 

[Chief]

So are we talking about grift, or are we talking about climate change? Easy to dislike Gina because of how she makes her money. Those airplanes don't run on good wishes either, but jet fuel.

I'm saying that the two are not equivalent, and the resulting decisions are far apart in terms of affect and ease of reversing.

That's what I am saying.

Gina runs a legal business. She needs help from government, which is why you either don't take her money, or better yet (and the sign of a real one), take her money then ignore her pleas.

Or consult in formal settings that are recorded, notes taken, file these records as public documents so they can be examined in future if need be.

Easy solution.

Now: the whole lobbying issue and cash for access is not going to be solved by us on here. We all know that. So cutting discussion off with "yeah but they won't do it" is not really useful.

 

[Chief]

I'm saying the attraction to MPs at both state and Federal level of being a member of an exclusive club that is invitation only for business leaders and MPs is its exclusivity.

Setting up a club that is for government MPs and their guests only would detract from that.

I mean we have SA MPs who are members of the Chairmans Lounge and Qantas doesn't even fly internationally from Adelaide.

So: we know WHY they want it.

They are of course denying this at every turn.

Why should that stop us discussing alternatives?

 

[The Punter]

I'm saying that the two are not equivalent, and the resulting decisions are far apart in terms of affect and ease of reversing.

That's what I am saying.



Or consult in formal settings that are recorded, notes taken, file these records as public documents so they can be examined in future if need be.

Easy solution.

Now: the whole lobbying issue and cash for access is not going to be solved by us on here. We all know that. So cutting discussion off with "yeah but they won't do it" is not really useful.

So grift is more OK if the person handing out the grift is not as consequential. I do not agree. One makes the other more likely.

I'd have no problem with a government lounge at airports.

 

[Festerz]

So: we know WHY they want it.

They are of course denying this at every turn.

Why should that stop us discussing alternatives?

I'm not stopping you.

Just suggesting that including in that discussion the reality of why the Chairmans Lounge is a universal hit for MPs (i.e. its not just or even mostly about work and business meetings) benefits that discussion.

Oh and a little known fact about the Chairman's Lounge and the Virgin equivalent (Altitude) - membership of it is not automatically revoked on retirement or resignation from the position that gets you the invite and free membership in the first place.

 

[Chief]

So grift is more OK if the person handing out the grift is not as consequential. I do not agree. One makes the other more likely.

Oh dear.

They are not equivalent in scale and effect.

Can we at least agree on that?

 

[Festerz]

Anyways now that several LNP politicians and former Ministers have been found to have been knee deep in free flight and upgrades this issue will no longer be in the headlines.

Today’s High Court decision throwing out the compromise decision on curfew and security bracelets for visa offenders will shift Dutton’s focus back to his favourite topic of border security

 

[Not Important]

enjoying this. the hypocrisy of 'thug' and his mob writ large.

 

[Not Important]

So he paid for them using taxpayers money. Didnt get them as freebies from a private company highlighting conflicts of interest as albanese has with qantas. The problem with albanese and qantas is not the money. Its the conflict of interest which arguably led to qatar being blocked and australians facing massive prices.

Ps. 220 thousand isnt that much for someome in his position. I spend about 150 thousand in a year just on commercial flights for work. Not private flights.

you do realise the opposition has being doing the same thing, don't you?

this sort of thing (perks of all sorts) has been going on for yonks on all sides of politics. that doesn't make it right but the hypocrisy of the liberals on this matter is astounding for even them

 

[The Punter]

Oh dear.

They are not equivalent in scale and effect.

Can we at least agree on that?

Oh dear all you want, if it is a matter of principle, then the scale should not matter.

And to be honest, I think if Gina made her money building wind turbines, you wouldn't be so chirpy.

So no - you do not receive my agreement.

 

[peetoo]

Usually in a political prism, the grift is the evidence. I'll keep the quoted post in mind with reference to Dutton and Gina (he shouldn't be so cosy IMO but a standard is a standard and should be applied identically).

So let’s look at the money Qantas got in lockdowns for doing nothing while foreign airlines did the heavy lifting. Join the dots

 

[The Punter]

So let’s look at the money Qantas got in lockdowns for doing nothing while foreign airlines did the heavy lifting. Join the dots

I need the dot where you list how many Australians each of those airlines employ before joining all of them.

QANTAS operate in a highly-regulated industry, so their incentive to offer grift is obvious. As it is with mining operators. But we needed people to keep their jobs during the pandemic (this was one of the reasons hotel quarantine was initially proposed at COAG by Daniel Andrews).

 

[peetoo]

I need the dot where you list how many Australians each of those airlines employ before joining all of them.

QANTAS operate in a highly-regulated industry, so their incentive to offer grift is obvious. As it is with mining operators. But we needed people to keep their jobs during the pandemic (this was one of the reasons hotel quarantine was initially proposed at COAG by Daniel Andrews).

They could have run a few flights wouldn’t that have been better security wise than letting foreign carriers do the work?

 

[The Punter]

They could have run a few flights wouldn’t that have been better security wise than letting foreign carriers do the work?

I think Qantas could do a lot better, but the money given to them (and others) during the pandemic was to ensure their employees were able to eat.

 

[Chief]

I think Qantas could do a lot better, but the money given to them (and others) during the pandemic was to ensure their employees were able to eat.

Did QANTAS post any profits during that time? Afterwards?

 

[The Punter]

Did QANTAS post any profits during that time? Afterwards?

I assume so, they operate a for profit business. I think a stimulus spending system that saw the government able to recover money given, based on profits, would have been an improvement on what took place, but people kept their jobs and that was the first priority.

 

[Chief]

I assume so, they operate a for profit business. I think a stimulus spending system that saw the government able to recover money given, based on profits, would have been an improvement on what took place, but people kept their jobs and that was the first priority.

From my point of view, that was never the objective. It was a quick way to achieve the actual objective - keeping the government of the day in power and rewarding their donors.

 

[The Punter]

From my point of view, that was never the objective. It was a quick way to achieve the actual objective - keeping the government of the day in power and rewarding their donors.

The government lost the very next election. But you are, of course, entitled to your point of view.

 

[Chief]

The government lost the very next election. But you are, of course, entitled to your point of view.

I didn't say they were successful at both of these things. Not my argument.

 

[QuietB]

I need the dot where you list how many Australians each of those airlines employ before joining all of them.

I believe they sacked a lot of them. Illegally. Just after they received $2.7 billion in public money.

 

[Chief]

Oh dear all you want, if it is a matter of principle, then the scale should not matter.

And to be honest, I think if Gina made her money building wind turbines, you wouldn't be so chirpy.

So no - you do not receive my agreement.

You think that a nuclear energy policy to spend billions on reactors that will never be fully built is as easily reversible as allowing an airline to fly into the country or not?

No, of course you don't. We all know you don't.