Fisher, taken for granted!
As someone who has lived in the electorate of fisher for some 15 years, I have been very frustrated by the lack of representation, and as I have said repeatedly, the voters of Fisher would elect “Vlad The Impaler” if he was endorsed by the LNP! 😯
The reason for this is that there is a high concentration of self funded retirees, and aspirational voters, who believe that the LNP “should” be their party?
Now there is no doubt that this electorate is a fantastic part of this great country and south east QLD, but unfortunately we have been let down by the blind loyalty to the LNP over recent years.
There have been many rumours, over many years, surrounding the current sitting member Peter Slipper, and I have to say that I’m not personally a fan 😯 , but having said that, I do feel for him and his family, as a result of the despicable treatment that he received at the hands of his “friend” Tony Abbott and his own party, the LNP.
That appalling treatment was compounded, and came to a head with the Ashygate saga, which was extensively covered by the MSM until Justice Rares handed down his damming determination with regards to Ashby, Brough (The newly endorsed LNP candidate for Fisher), Doane, and the abuse of process that they engaged in along with others from the LNP, both state and federal, at which point the MSM went silent!
The Ashbygate saga has been well and truly covered by some fantastic investigative journalism, not by the MSM, but rather by the web site “Independent Australia”, and rather than try to go through it all here I would suggest that everybody who is interested in the truth, go to IA, and read these great articles!
The latest of these articles is called “Ahsbygate Emerging”, and there you will find links to the entire Ashbygate saga.
But the question for voters of this electorate is; “How does Ashbygate affect us?”.
After reading the IA articles, they will leave little doubt about the ramifications for this country, but some of the direct consequences for the electorate of Fisher are:
- The current sitting member, Peter Slipper, (Whether you like him or not) was treated appallingly by, not only his “friend” Tony Abbott, his own party, but by the now LNP candidate Mal Brough.
- The Ashbygate saga leaves a huge cloud over the integrity of the LNP, and especially the local branch.
- Mal Brough was voted out of his electorate of Longman under a cloud of suspicion, over certain dealings that he was involved in, and is now under a cloud of doubt over his honesty and integrity relating to his involvement and complicity in the Ashbygate saga.
- If Brough is elected, there is a distinct possibility that sometime in the not too distant future, he along with the other conspirators will be brought before the courts for his actions, and if found guilty, could end up in gaol, leaving Fisher without representation, meaning a by-election.
Now as I have previously stated, I would not presume to tell anyone who they should or shouldn’t vote for, but In this case, I would strongly suggest that anyone thinking of voting for Brough, should, at the very least, read the IA articles, and look carefully at all the other candidates who are standing.
Peter Slipper is standing as an independent, and there are a number of others, but Labors Bill Gissane is my personal pick, as I have it on good authority that he is a very decent man, and a good candidate.
You can see his profile at;
The truth is that The Ashbygate saga won’t go away, just because Murdoch and the LNP want it too, and when I mentioned “Vlad the Impaler”, I wasn’t joking. 😯 Mal Brough tried along with his co conspirators to politically assassinate Peter Slipper for his own personal gain and that of the LNP by trying to bring down a duly elected government.
So this is not only about the electorate of Fisher, although we are central to this whole disgusting affair, but about the strength and integrity of our democracy.
According to Justice Rares:
- Having read all of the text messages on Mr Ashby’s mobile phone, as Mr Ashby’s senior counsel invited me to do, as well as the other evidence, I have reached the firm conclusion that Mr Ashby’s predominant purpose for bringing these proceedings was to pursue a political attack against Mr Slipper and not to vindicate any legal claim he may have for which the right to bring proceedings exists. Mr Ashby began planning that attack at least by the beginning of February 2012. As Mr Ashby and Ms Doane agreed in their texts of 30 March 2012 what they were doing “will tip the govt to Mal’s [Brough] and the LNP’s advantage”: . It may be a coincidence that Mr Ashby suggested to Mr Slipper the idea of becoming Speaker just as Mr Brough began to move towards challenging Mr Slipper for LNP pre-selection for his seat and Mr Ashby ended up in an alliance in late March 2012 with Mr Brough to bring down Mr Slipper after he became Speaker. It is not necessary to make any finding about this or about whether Mr Slipper did sexually harass Mr Ashby in any of the ways alleged. It is also not necessary to consider whether these proceedings are “vexatious proceedings” within the meaning of r 6.02 or if that expression has a different meaning in r 26.01(1)(b) under which the Court can give summary judgment if “the proceeding is frivolous or vexatious”.
- For the reasons above, I am satisfied that these proceedings are an abuse of the process of the Court. The originating application was used by Mr Ashby for the predominant purpose of causing significant public, reputational and political damage to Mr Slipper. It contained the scandalous and irrelevant 2003 allegations and assertion that Mr Ashby intended to report to the police Cabcharge allegations. To allow these proceedings to remain in the Court would bring the administration of justice into disrepute among right-thinking people and would be manifestly unfair to Mr Slipper: Jeffery & Katauskas 239 CLR at 93 . Even though Mr Ashby has now abandoned the 2003 and all the Cabcharge allegations, the features that I have criticised did the harm to Mr Slipper that Mr Ashby and Mr Harmer intended when those allegations were included in the originating application. A party cannot be allowed to misuse the Court’s process by including scandalous, irrelevant or damaging allegations knowing that they would receive very significant media coverage and then seek to regularise his, her or its pleading by subsequently abandoning those claims.
- Sexual harassment of anyone, including an employee such as Mr Ashby, is a violation of the person’s human dignity and rights. The Court must always be available for the hearing and determination of bona fide proceedings to vindicate and protect those rights. But for the reasons I have given, Mr Ashby’s pre-dominant purpose in bringing the proceedings was not a proper one.
- Even though I have not found that the combination was as wide as Mr Slipper alleged in his points of claim, the evidence established that there was a combination involving Mr Ashby, Ms Doane and Mr Brough of that kind. Mr Ashby acted in combination with Ms Doane and Mr Brough when commencing the proceedings in order to advance the interests of the LNP and Mr Brough. Mr Ashby and Ms Doane set out to use the proceedings as part of their means to enhance or promote their prospects of advancement or preferment by the LNP, including by using Mr Brough to assist them in doing so. And the evidence also established that the proceedings were an abuse of the process of the Court for the reasons I have given. Accordingly, I am satisfied that the exceptional situation that enlivens the Court’s power to dismiss (or stay) proceedings as an abuse has been proved to the heavy standard required: Williams 174 CLR at 529. The duty and power of the Court to protect its own processes require that I give effect to the findings I have made by dismissing the proceedings under r 26.01.00.
So think carefully people, our electorate, our country and our democracy deserves much better.
Palmer has aded weight (Pardon the pun) to the accusations against Brough, and now Abbott should exercise the same standards that he called the ALP to when accusations were made against Slipper and Thomson.
Or are there two sets of standards?
One for the LNP, and another set of standards for their opponents?
Sadly the election has once again proven that Fisher is still an LNP stronghold, although Palmer gave it a bit of a shake, and we now have our very own “Vlad The Impaler” in the form of Mal Brough,. 😦
Our only option now is to rely on a justice system in the hands of George Brandis, which is like putting the inmates in charge of the nut house. 😯 But we live in hope!