Turn­bull a rank po­lit­i­cal be­trayer

The West Australian - - LETTERS -

If ever there was a sker­rick of doubt that to Mal­colm Turn­bull the Lib­eral Party was noth­ing more than a con­ve­nient and dis­pens­able ve­hi­cle to al­low him to in­dulge his con­sum­ing nar­cis­sism, his de­spi­ca­ble con­duct since his re­moval has en­tirely put that doubt to rest.

Hav­ing re­signed his seat in the clear hope it fell to La­bor and de­stroyed the Lib­eral Gov­ern­ment he has scur­ried off the New York to sate his re­venge from afar.

Turn­bull’s lob­by­ing of his for­mer col­leagues to cross the floor to vote with La­bor to re­fer Peter Dut­ton’s el­i­gi­bil­ity to sit in the Par­lia­ment un­der Sec­tion 44 of the Con­sti­tu­tion is a starkly naked view of his soul.

Dut­ton has le­gal ad­vice from a for­mer solicitor-gen­eral and an em­i­nent QC that he is el­i­gi­ble to sit in the Par­lia­ment.

The cur­rent Solicitor-Gen­eral has opined that Dut­ton is “not in­ca­pable” of sit­ting in Par­lia­ment.

The ques­tion of Dut­ton’s el­i­gi­bil­ity was never ques­tioned by Turn­bull dur­ing his time as prime min­is­ter. He has never sought the le­gal ad­vice that Dut­ton holds.

More­over, when the mat­ter was the sub­ject of a La­bor vote in the Par­lia­ment, Turn­bull as prime min­is­ter and Julie Bishop as his deputy both sup­ported Dut­ton’s el­i­gi­bil­ity, vot­ing against the motion.

Turn­bull’s Dam­a­scene mo­ment, which has led to his cru­sade to have Dut­ton re­ferred to the High Court, came dur­ing the lead­er­ship week when Dut­ton be­came a can­di­date.

Turn­bull’s wretched and un­re­lent­ing cam­paign to hand gov­ern­ment over to the La­bor Party is ut­terly in­con­ceiv­able to any right-think­ing per­son.

Can there be a greater be­trayal of the Lib­eral Party and its or­di­nary mem­bers, who un­selfishly give so much with­out thought of re­ward other than for the elec­tion of a Lib­eral gov­ern­ment?

Can there be any greater be­trayal of vot­ers who, in faith and trust, cast a Lib­eral vote for a Lib­eral gov­ern­ment?

Noel Crich­ton-Browne, Leighton

Fac­tual ABC’s facts

I agree whole­heart­edly with Peter Hall (Let­ters, 11/09).

The ABC re­ports facts. It seems to me that con­ser­va­tives think that facts are bi­ased to the Left and com­plain about the ABC when they don’t hear what they want to hear.

Not agree­ing with what is be­ing said, doesn’t make it bi­ased. Mak­ing vague,un­sub­stan­ti­ated com­plaints about prej­u­dice at the ABC doesn’t make it so. James Valen­tine, Waikiki

Mal­colm Turn­bull

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Australia

© PressReader. All rights reserved.