DISQUS

Kate Foy · 11 months ago

It's a blanket response to any perception by anyone of any offence. Sheesh! Makes me wonder about the increasingly ill-conceived and in this case draconian federal government response to stifling comment on the web. What next? And I'm a Labor supporter!

Dan · 11 months ago

i'm guessing rudds 'heavy counselling' touched not only on the donation 'afterthought' but also took a general 'rise above the fray'/ 'conduct unbecoming' line.
But ever the micromanager, Rudds main bugbear would simply have been that a labor parliamentarian took part in a media event that he did not himself authorise/orchestrate.

cathy johnson · 11 months ago

I don't believe people can clear this MP of selling distressing images of a person who was well known to him as a protester of the Australian Immigration system. This man and his family were familiar to the MP and his party and identified themselves publicly in the days preceding the MP's decision to photograph them. He sold the images to a news outlet that challenged the price of the sale. MP Bidgood then nominated a charity of his choosing to benefit from the distressing photos. My understanding is the MP did intend to sell the photos for personal profit and on second thoughts nominated a charity that at this stage remains unknown. The politically expedient solution remains in the hands of the news oultet and the MPs party - neither of whom will divulge the beneficiary of income derived from the deemed misery. The MP remains under investigation for other bizarre activities associated with his party.

christan singles · 8 months ago

I don't believe common people can clear this MP of selling distressing forms of a person who was well known to him as a protester of the Australian Immigration entity. that man and his family were familiar to the MP and his party and identified themselves publicly in the days preceding the MP's decision to photograph them. He sold the images to a news outlet that challenged the sticker of the sale. MP Bidgood then nominated a charity of his choosing to benefit from the distressing photos. My understanding is the MP did import to stock the photos for personal profit and on second thoughts nominated a charity that at this stage remains unknown. The politically expedient solution remains in the hands of the news oultet and the MPs party - neither of whom will divulge the beneficiary of income derived from the deemed misery. The MP pauses under case for other bizarre activities associated with his party.