2GB just said Lib leadership challenge is on

[Patriot]

Now the smears start about Dutto.

And the ILLEGALLY CLAIMING TO BE INDEPENDENT slimy foreign controlled GetUp! propaganda mouth for the unions is furiously rabble raising about Dutto's seat. No doubt BlackDay is cheering from the sidelines.

Did Turnbull leak the info about Dutto ? Probably Dutto will wriggle out of this smear.



Explainer: is Peter Dutton ineligible to sit in parliament?
Author Anne Twomey Professor of Constitutional Law, University of Sydney August 20, 2018 8.00pm AEST


There is enough in the Dutton case to raise questions about whether disqualification has occurred. AAP/Lukas Coch

Section 44 of the Constitution has struck down many a politician in the past year – but is it powerful enough to take down the Minister for Home Affairs, Peter Dutton? This time it is not dual citizenship under s44(i) that is at issue. Instead, it is the more obscure s44(v) in the spotlight.


What is section 44(v) about?
Section 44(v) says that any person who “has any direct or indirect pecuniary interest in any agreement with the Public Service of the Commonwealth” is disqualified from sitting as a member of parliament.

Dutton, as recorded in the parliamentary register of interests, is the beneficiary of a discretionary family trust. This trust, through its trustee, apparently owns two childcare centres in Queensland. The allegation is that since July 2, 2018, the trust, through its childcare centres, has agreements with the public service to provide childcare services in exchange for childcare subsidies.

Dutton may argue the childcare centres merely receive the subsidy on behalf of the parents and do not have an agreement with the public service. But if it is found there is such an agreement, it would appear Dutton has a beneficial interest in a trust that has an agreement with the public service, potentially triggering the application of s 44(v).

Last year, in a case concerning Family First senator Bob Day, a majority of the High Court held that the beneficiary of a trust which, via its trustee, is party to an agreement to which section 44(v) refers, has an indirect pecuniary interest in the agreement, and is therefore disqualified from sitting in parliament. If the facts set out above are correct, this would place Dutton into the realm of potential disqualification.


Read the rest here

https://theconversation.com/explainer-i ... ent-101840

[brian ross]

Dutton tried and failed to depose Trumble. Dutton has now resigned as Home Affairs Minister. Tsk, tsk. Time to try from the backbenches?

[Black Orchid]

“I believe strongly that we can win the election if we get the policies and the message right - about lowering electricity prices, about making sure that we can do more on infrastructure and in particular around the migration program, until the infrastructure can catch up in our capital cities.

"We need to invest more in water to get farmers out of drought so they do not go through what they go through at the moment. We need to invest record amounts into health and education, aged care and other areas as well.”

>snip<

In trying to regroup, Turnbull will have to deal with some of the issues worrying his MPs that Dutton is exploiting. One is the gripes of the Catholic education section. Another is population and immigration.

https://theconversation.com/view-from-t ... der-101901

Agree 100% with Dutton. Let's hope he gathers more numbers and comes back to topple Turnbull.

[Bobby]

Turnbull is a dead man walking.
He can't survive more than 3 weeks as PM.

[sprintcyclist]

Scott Morrison ?

[brian ross]

I believe it was John Howard who once observed, "If we cannot govern ourselves, what hope have we of governing Australia?" Turnball is trying desperately to cling onto the Prime Ministership. He has Tone Rabbit and now il Duce Dutton clamouring at his heels. Which ever one faces the polls next year, they are dead. Shorten might not be the most popular Leader of Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition but he is the leader of the Party that has won, what 39 consecutive Opinion Polls since Turnball became PM.

[brian ross]

Fairfax and Sky News are reporting that the constitutional question hovering over Peter Dutton will be referred to the solicitor general. So, that means the solicitor general, who gives legal advice to government, will provide an opinion on whether Dutton is eligible for parliament, given his ownership of a childcare centre that received millions in government subsidies.

You’ll remember the constitution bars Dutton from holding a financial interest in government. Dutton says he has his own legal advice. It has not been released publicly and Malcolm Turnbull said he hadn’t seen it.[/quote]

Hmm - if you cannot stop the challenge, stop the challenger!

(Others in the Section 44 cases have had their own legal opinion - and the High Court disagreed)

Shades of the Bob Day case....

And then an attack from another front...

Meanwhile

Crossbenchers won't confirm they will guarantee supply under Dutton

Plus some Nats threatening to go to cross-bench (but no mention of supply and confidence)

This one could well force a Federal ICAC...