WITHOUT PREJUDICE 5 Mr Tony Abbott MP Tony.Abbott.MP@aph.gov.

au 1-4-2014

Ref: 20140401-G. H .Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. to Mr Tony Abbott PM- Re Expenditure - etc

Tony, As a CONSTITUTIONALIST I hold it very important that those elected to represent the 10 general community do so in the best interest of them as their agents!
HANSARD 17-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates (Official Record of the Debates of the National Australasian Convention)

15 QUOTE
Mr. BARTON.- Having provided in that way for a free Constitution, we have provided for an Executive which is charged with the duty of maintaining the provisions of that Constitution; and, therefore, it can only act as the agents of the people. END QUOTE

20 As I understand it treasurer Joe Hickey was making it clear that all Australians would have to so to say chip in to combat the deficit, etc. . Then consider the following: 25 31-3-2014

QUOTE
Ex-MPs clock up $1.3m flight bill | The Australian
Mal Scurrilous, they are no-longer federal politicians but are still ripping off the public purse, on MORE BORROWED FUNDS to fund their ongoing perks! http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/exmp To Me Mar 31 at 11:50 PM

30

Scurrilous, they are no-longer federal politicians but are still ripping off 35 the public purse, on MORE BORROWED FUNDS to fund their ongoing perks!

p1 1-4-2014 INSPECTOR-RIKATI about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD A 1st edition limited special numbered book on Data DVD ISBN 978-0-9803712-6-0 PLEASE NOTE: You may order books in the INSPECTOR-RIKATI series by making a reservation, See also Http://www.schorel-hlavka.com Blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/exmps-clock-up-13m-flight-bill/storyfn59niix-1226869215389#

Ex-MPs clock up $1.3m flight bill

5

BY: PHI LLI P HUDSON FROM : THE AUSTRALI AN

M ARCH 31, 2014 12: 00AM

10

TAXPAYERS paid $1.27 million under the Gold Pass scheme for retired federal politicians and their families to take free business class flights around Australia last financial year. Travel records reveal 117 former politicians made claims in 2012-13 with more than half receiving at least $5000 worth of free travel on top of their superannuation. END QUOTE

15 The Framers of the Constitution made it very clear that the constitution must prevent two people to be paid for one seat, hence the cut-off date for Senators. Because members of the house of Representatives are elected during a general election to take up their seat soon after the election has been held as during the election time all seats are vacant, for the Senate the Senator remains 20 to hold his/her seat during the general election until the 1st of July following, irrespective if he i/she is re-elected or not. Also a Senator elect cannot take up the seat until the following 1 July. As such preventing two persons being paid for the same seat. Therefore neither a Member of the House of Representatives or a Senator having vacated his seat commencing the following 1 July after an election has any entitlement to any further payments. 25 Therefore the free flights are what I hold to be theft of the Consolidated Revenue Funds. Likewise so with other so called perks and freebies at cost of taxpayers.
http://ag.ca.gov/ethics/accessible/misuse.php QUOTE Ethics Orientation for State Officials

30

Misuse of Public Funds Public Funds may not be Used for Personal Purposes The starting point for any analysis concerning the misuse of public funds begins with the principle that public funds must be expended for an authorized public purpose. An expenditure is made for a public purpose when its purpose is to benefit the public interest rather than private individuals or private purposes. Once a public purpose is established, the expenditure must still be authorized. A public official possesses only those powers that are conferred by law, either expressly or impliedly. The California Constitution and a variety of state statutes make it clear that public funds may not be expended for purposes that are primarily personal. Such expenditures are neither for a public purpose nor are they authorized. p2 1-4-2014 INSPECTOR-RIKATI about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD A 1st edition limited special numbered book on Data DVD ISBN 978-0-9803712-6-0 PLEASE NOTE: You may order books in the INSPECTOR-RIKATI series by making a reservation, See also Http://www.schorel-hlavka.com Blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati

35

The prohibition against using public funds for personal purposes does not mean that no personal benefit may result from an expenditure of public funds. For example, the payment of a public employees salary confers a personal benefit on the employee, but it is an appropriate expenditure of public funds because it is procuring the services of the employee for public purposes. The misuse of public funds occurs when the personal benefit conferred by a public expenditure is not merely incidental. The term public funds is not limited to money, but includes anything of value belonging to a public agency such as equipment, supplies, compensated staff time, and use of telephones, computers, and fax machines and other equipment and resources.

10
Examples of Misuse of Public Funds 1. In People v. Dillon, a city commissioner used official government discounts to purchase items for himself and others. This was a misuse of public funds, even though those receiving the discount paid for the items with personal funds. 2. In People v. Sperl, a county marshal furnished a deputy marshal and a county vehicle to transport a political candidate, his staff and family. 3. In People v. Battin, a county supervisor used his county compensated staff to work on his political campaign for Lieutenant Governor. 4. In People v. Harby, a city official used a city car, entrusted to him for use in connection with official business, to take a pleasure trip from Los Angeles to Great Falls, Montana and back. Violations of the laws prohibiting misuse of public funds may subject the violator to criminal and civil sanctions. These penalties may include imprisonment for up to four years and a bar from holding office.

15

20

25 State Agency Participation in Ballot Measure Elections

There is another issue involving the misuse of public funds that does not concern the personal use of public funds. This issue concerns the use of public funds in connection with ballot measure campaigns. Following is a list of what well cover in this section. Stanson v. Mott Endorsements and Informational Materials Improperly Using Public Funds may Trigger Fines Using Public Funds and Ballot Measure Campaigns The California Supreme Court case of Stanson v. Mott is the cornerstone case concerning the expenditure of public funds in election campaigns. In Stanson v. Mott, a private citizen sued the Director of the California Department of Parks and Recreation, challenging the directors expenditure of Department funds to support passage of a bond act appearing on a statewide ballot. The Supreme Court unanimously found that the director had acted unlawfully, concluding that in the absence of clear and explicit legislative authorization, a public agency may not expend public funds to promote a partisan position in an election campaign. Stanson v. Mott The Supreme Court wrote in Stanson: A fundamental precept of this nations democratic electoral process is that the government may not take sides in election contests or bestow an unfair advantage on one of several competing factions. A principal danger feared by our countrys founders lay in the possibility that the holders of governmental authority would use official power improperly to perpetuate themselves, or their allies, in office.... The Supreme Court further wrote in Stanson ...The selective use of public funds in election campaigns, of course, raises the specter of just such an improper distortion of the democratic electoral process. Endorsements and Informational Materials: Subsequently, court cases have said that a government agency may endorse a measure that is related to its expertise so long as it does not expend funds to promote its passage. Similarly, a government agency may draft legislation or a ballot measure related to its expertise, but may not promote the passage of the measure in an election campaign. Here is Jose Lopez discussing the findings in the Stanson case in regard to the agency participation in ballot measure elections.

30

35

40

45

50

p3 1-4-2014 INSPECTOR-RIKATI about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD A 1st edition limited special numbered book on Data DVD ISBN 978-0-9803712-6-0 PLEASE NOTE: You may order books in the INSPECTOR-RIKATI series by making a reservation, See also Http://www.schorel-hlavka.com Blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati

1. The Stanson Court also noted that if a state agency or department has authority to disseminate information relating to its activities, it may spend funds to provide the public with a fair presentation of relevant information. 2. The Court found that it would be contrary to the public interest to bar knowledgeable public agencies from disclosing relevant information to the public, so long as such disclosure is full and impartial and does not amount to improper campaign activity. 3. To be fair, a presentation must consider all important points and provide equal treatment to both sides of the issue. Improperly Using Public Funds may Trigger Fines: Improper use of public funds also may trigger fines from the

10 Fair Political Practices Commission for failing to report campaign contributions. In 1996, Sacramento County paid a
$10,000 fine to the Commission in connection with a utility bill insert explaining the effect on the county of several ballot measures. The Commission ruled that the insert advocated a position on the ballot measures and was not a neutral and fair presentation of the facts. Let's Review TRUE or FALSE: Expenditures made to benefit the public are permissible. Answer: False. The expenditure must also be authorized to be permissible. Evelyn is an agency secretary. She has just completed a long day and she wishes to make a few telephone calls before she leaves her office to invite potential contributors to the incumbent Governors campaign fundraising dinner. Since the people she will be calling frequently have dealings with the state government on a variety of issues, may she charge these calls to the state? Yes or No. Answer: No. Evelyn may not charge the calls to the state as they are for personal political purposes rather than for a public purpose.

15

20

25

Let's Review Ramon is the director of a state department. He wishes to produce informational materials to answer questions about the impact of a ballot measure. Select the situation in which it is permissible to expend funds for this purpose. a. The materials stop short of advocating a vote for or against the measure. b. The materials do not make false statements. c. The materials present a balanced description of the favorable and unfavorable impacts of the measure. Answer: c. The materials must present a balanced description of the favorable and unfavorable impacts of the measure. Remember These Points Expenditures must be for a public purpose Expenditures must be authorized Public funds may not be expended for personal use Information must be fairly presented Violations bring criminal, civil and administrative sanctions

30

35

END QUOTE

Therefore, using flee fights after having left the parliament is not for public purposes and 40 cannot be justified. In fact you using taxpayers funded mobiles, etc, for political issues cannot be justified.. Again Joe Hockey might argue people have to tighten their belts but he is a complete hypocrite if he allows nevertheless ex politicians to defraud the Consolidated Revenue Funds unchecked.
Hansard 1-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates QUOTE Mr. HIGGINS.-Suppose the sentry is asleep, or is in the swim with the other power? p4 1-4-2014 INSPECTOR-RIKATI about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD A 1st edition limited special numbered book on Data DVD ISBN 978-0-9803712-6-0 PLEASE NOTE: You may order books in the INSPECTOR-RIKATI series by making a reservation, See also Http://www.schorel-hlavka.com Blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati

45

Mr. GORDON.-There will be more than one sentry. In the case of a federal law, every member of a state Parliament will be a sentry, and, every constituent of a state Parliament will be a sentry. As regards a law passed by a state, every man in the Federal Parliament will be a sentry, and the whole constituency behind the Federal Parliament will be a sentry. END QUOTE

Well, where are you standing? Are you an accessory to crimes committed against Consolidated Revenue Funds of the taxpayers or are you going to stop this rot? 10 . Dont give BS about wanting to reduce the budget deficit while in the meantime your mates current and former pollies are living up the highlight robbing from Consolidated Revenue Funds! . If you lack the balls to stand up against this abuse and misuse of Consolidated Revenue funds 15 then let someone else do the job who can and will do the job. But as long as you are accepting payments then I view you have no choice but to stop this rot.
Hansard 1-4-1891 Constitution Convention Debates (Official Record of the Debates of the National Australasian Convention) QUOTE Sir SAMUEL GRIFFITH: I have an amendment to propose in the clause. There is no mode of returning the names of the senators as chosen by the governor-general. Certainly a provision of that kind must be inserted. END QUOTE

20

25 While the electors elect the Senator-elect it is the Governor-General whose chose the Senator elect to become Senator when being sworn in.
Hansard 1-4-1891 Constitution Convention Debates (Official Record of the Debates of the National Australasian Convention) QUOTE

30

35

Mr. CLARK: It is easy enough to increase, but we shall have to increase by an amendment of the constitution, and I think it is a very bad thing to tinker with a constitution to meet contingencies as they arise. I think the constitution ought never to be amended, excepting upon the discovery of some radical defect which experience has proved to exist, or to provide for some totally unforeseen contingency. If you can possibly provide for probable contingencies, provide for them at once, and do not devise a constitution with the deliberate intention, or with the certainty in the natural evolution of events, that it will require amendment. END QUOTE Hansard 2-4-1891 Constitution Convention Debates (Official Record of the Debates of the National Australasian Convention) QUOTE Mr. J. FORREST: There is another point. We propose to form a commonwealth of Australia, and are we to prohibit people of our own race, born in other portions of the British dominions, from becoming senators until they have been resident in the commonwealth for a certain period? No such prohibition is placed upon Australians residing in the old country. Any Australian, resident in England, can at once, if the electors desire, become a member of the House of Commons, and I see no reason why a distinguished Englishman coming to these colonies should not at once be eligible for the position of senator if the legislature of one of the colonies desired his appointment. I am entirely opposed to the amendment, and if I had my way I would place no more restriction upon the eligibility of senators than we place upon the eligibility of members of the house of representatives. p5 1-4-2014 INSPECTOR-RIKATI about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD A 1st edition limited special numbered book on Data DVD ISBN 978-0-9803712-6-0 PLEASE NOTE: You may order books in the INSPECTOR-RIKATI series by making a reservation, See also Http://www.schorel-hlavka.com Blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati

40

45

END QUOTE Hansard 2-4-1891 Constitution Convention Debates (Official Record of the Debates of the National Australasian Convention) QUOTE

Sir JOHN BRAY: What the hon. gentleman has said is quite right so far as the purposes of this section are concerned as regards reckoning the time of retirement. But in another part of the bill it is provided that the senators are to be paid for their services, and the question arises, does the term of service of a senator for the purposes of payment begin from the date of his election, from the date when he is sworn in, or from the first day of January? HON. MEMBERS: On the day when he is sworn in! Sir SAMUEL GRIFFITH: Surely when his service begins! Sir: I think we ought to have that fixed. It seems to me very undesirable to provide, as suggested by Colonel Smith, that although a senator is elected in June, his term of service and payment for service shall not begin until the following January. Mr. CLARK: He will not do anything until the following January! Sir JOHN BRAY: For the purposes of retirement, a date should be fixed from which the time should be reckoned; but for all other purposes a senator ought to be a senator from the day he is chosen. Mr. BAKER: How can he be when there is another man in his place?

10

15

20

Sir JOHN BRAY: I can quite see that for the purposes of this section the provision as contained in the clause is right; but, as regards other portions of the bill, it seems to me that it is not right, and the question ought to be clearly understood. Sir SAMUEL GRIFFITH: So far as the objection with regard to payment is concerned, there is a good deal in it, and the matter should be dealt with now. The clause only deals with the first senators. Afterwards the term of service begins on the 1st of January. I suppose a senator can hardly be called a senator until the 1st of January arrives. He will be a senator elect, but he will not be a senator really until that day. If parliament is in session on the 1st of January, he will walk in and take his seat, and the other man will walk out, and his pay, I apprehend, will begin on the same day. But the hon. member has pointed out a blot with respect to the first senators. A man might be elected in December and claim twelve months' pay, dating from the previous January. This, I think, would be remedied by inserting in the second paragraph the words "for the purposes of his retirement." Mr. WRIXON: The matter will want a little thinking over, because I apprehend a man is not a senator until he presents himself and takes the oath. Sir SAMUEL GRIFFITH: Why not?

25

30

35

40

Mr. WRIXON: He might refuse to take the oath, and so would be disqualified from the beginning. It is not until be presents himself and takes the oath that he is really a senator. He is in potentiality a senator; but he is not completely clad in that position until he [start page 602] appears at the table and takes the oath, and I apprehend he is not entitled to payment until that takes place. I would suggest that it is somewhat hazardous to make an amendment at the table in a bill of this kind, which has been carefully considered; and if these matters are home in mind, they can be afterwards dealt with by the draftsman. I would deprecate any hurried amendment on the spot, where it may not be required. Sir HARRY ATKINSON: The clause states that the term of service of a senator shall not begin until the 1st January following the day of his election. If a vacancy occurs, and a senator is elected in June, he then p6 1-4-2014 INSPECTOR-RIKATI about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD A 1st edition limited special numbered book on Data DVD ISBN 978-0-9803712-6-0 PLEASE NOTE: You may order books in the INSPECTOR-RIKATI series by making a reservation, See also Http://www.schorel-hlavka.com Blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati

becomes a senator; but, according to this part of the clause, he cannot become an actual senator until the following January. Though parliament might be in session, he would be unable to take his seat. I would suggest to the hon. member, Sir Samuel Griffith, that he should take a note of this point, and consider it. I do not think we could make any amendment here that would meet the case. For the purposes of this particular clause the provision is right enough; but I think there will be a difficulty in regard to payment, and also as to vacancies occurring. Sir JOHN BRAY: I quite agree with Sir Samuel Griffith, that if we are not to overlook this question entirely it ought to be settled somewhere in this clause, and if the hon. gentleman sees no strong objection to such a course I shall move the insertion at the beginning of the second paragraph of the words "for the purposes of this section." It would be manifestly absurd in regard to the first election of senators to say that if a man is elected in September or October the term of his service shall begin from the preceding January, and that he shall be entitled to all the privileges of a senator from that date. It is quite possible that this may not be the best amendment that can ultimately be made, but it seems to me clear that the second paragraph was drawn with the idea, that it applied to this section only and not to other portions of the bill. I beg, therefore, to move as an amendment: That before the words "The term of service" line 11, the words "For the purposes of this section" be inserted. Sir SAMUEL GRIFFITH: That is quite correct: those are the right words! Amendment agreed to.

10

15

20

Sir SAMUEL GRIFFITH: In reference to the point raised by the hon. member, Sir Harry Atkinson, in regard to vacancies occurring by death, the difficulty would be met by substituting for the words "retiring senators" the words "senators retiring by rotation." Amendment (by Sir SAMUEL GRIFFITH) proposed: That the words retiring senators," line 17, be omitted with a view to insert in lieu thereof the words "senators retiring by rotation." Mr. MARMION: Is this intended to refer to senators retiring by rotation throughout, or only in the first instance? Sir SAMUEL GRIFFITH: Always! Mr. MARMION: It seems to me that there are two portions of the bill which may be affected by the proposed amendment. In the first place, unless it is distinctly laid down in the bill that a senator, though elected, does not become a senator until the 1st of January, there will be during that interval twelve senators instead of eight; because there will be four who will not retire for some considerable period after the election. There is another view of the case. A senator may be prevented for a period from holding his seat in the local house of representatives. When he is elected to the senate, he cannot sit any longer in the state house of representatives, and if his election to the senate takes place some time prior to the end of the year, unless it is distinctly laid down that the mere fact of his election [start page 603] does not make him a senator, he will be obliged to retire from the local house of representatives. Sir SAMUEL GRIFFITH: There is no doubt a little difficulty. In the cases of which we have experience, members of parliament are elected by a constituency that may be said to be in permanent session. Here we have to deal with the case of a constituency which is in session only sometimes. We must, therefore, deal specially with it. There cannot be more than eight senators at a time. There will be eight senators and four senators elect; for a senator elect is not a senator until his term begins. There is no reason why a member of the house of representatives should not be elected to be a senator in June; next January he becomes a senator and ceases to be a member of the house of representatives. Amendment agreed to; clause, as amended, agreed to. END QUOTE p7 1-4-2014 INSPECTOR-RIKATI about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD A 1st edition limited special numbered book on Data DVD ISBN 978-0-9803712-6-0 PLEASE NOTE: You may order books in the INSPECTOR-RIKATI series by making a reservation, See also Http://www.schorel-hlavka.com Blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati

25

30

35

40

45

It must be clear that a Senator is only a Senator when making the oath when chosen by the Governor-General to do so to take up the seat and then can be paid for this. The person who held this seat no longer is a Senator and no longer entitled to any payments. As such, when a person vacates his/her seat being it in the Senate or the House of Representatives then all payments stop. 5 It is important that you show to be fair dinkum and not use any pretext to justify to increase cost to ordinary citizens while your mates and others are still having a cosy unconstitutional and so unlawful deal with you and so the government. 10 Awaiting your response, G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. (Friends call me Gerrit)

MAY JUSTICE ALWAYS PREVAIL

(

Our name is our motto!)

p8 1-4-2014 INSPECTOR-RIKATI about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD A 1st edition limited special numbered book on Data DVD ISBN 978-0-9803712-6-0 PLEASE NOTE: You may order books in the INSPECTOR-RIKATI series by making a reservation, See also Http://www.schorel-hlavka.com Blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati