Advertisement

Do you want to pay for Zed’s Senate run? [With poll]

By 12 February 2013 29

It’s a bit of a poser, Zed Seselja intends to draw a front bench Legislative Assembly salary to the last possible moment while running for the Senate (assuming he gets up in the pre-selection).

Should the Canberra community be indulging him in this?

Zed mooching around the Assembly to election day

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Please login to post your comments
29 Responses to Do you want to pay for Zed’s Senate run? [With poll]
#1
enrique9:20 am, 12 Feb 13

Bit of a loaded question…

You’d assume he still had a job responsibility to live up to in his ACT role and that he’d be held accountable to it would he?

Sure, if he really did end up getting too distracted to carry out is ACT LA role properly then questions should be asked but if he’s still effective in what he’s being paid (and voted in) to do then what’s the problem?

Having a poll like this is dangerous territory… how would you feel if you were fired the second you made your intentions known that you were going to move on from your own job…? Worse, if people didn’t feel comfortable making their intentions about moving on known (especially in high profile leadership roles) then we end up with chaos all the time as people made shock announcements and then left things in disarray the very next day.

#2
johnboy9:24 am, 12 Feb 13

He’s an elected representative, not an employee.

#3
chewy149:34 am, 12 Feb 13

Well until the elections actually called I don’t see why there would be a problem.

#4
Duffbowl9:36 am, 12 Feb 13

If Zed does head off to the Senate, am I right in thinking that the fourth placed Lib for Brindabella will become a MLA? That would be big, bad Val Jeffrey.

#5
MTK9:42 am, 12 Feb 13

The biggest issue is the primacy of sheer political amibition. Plenty of people (including elected representatives) moonlight with second jobs and job applications.

Elected Liberal knifing elected Liberal is far more unbecoming.

#6
TwainAndHume9:46 am, 12 Feb 13

Too soon after being elected to fulfill a MLA role. Definitely gives the impression he is not focused on the ACT and more on letting his ambition run away with him ….

#7
Leon9:49 am, 12 Feb 13

enrique said :

…if he’s still effective in what he’s being paid (and voted in) to do then what’s the problem?.

Spot on!

#8
Pork Hunt9:51 am, 12 Feb 13

Surely this isn’t the first time this sort of thing has happened?
In NSW, people go from local government to the state legislatures regularly. In fact, I think my local state member (Barilaro) is wearing two hats as we speak because he stayed on the council.

In the ACT, I guess there are rules and if they say Zed can stay then so be it.
If you don’t like that then speak to the people that make the rules.

#9
Billy_Shears9:54 am, 12 Feb 13

We’ll still be paying for him either way, whether he stays on London Circuit or moves up to the red chamber on Capital Hill

#10
Ghettosmurf879:55 am, 12 Feb 13

enrique said :

Bit of a loaded question…

You’d assume he still had a job responsibility to live up to in his ACT role and that he’d be held accountable to it would he?

Except that as an elected representative, he is only held accountable at the next ACT election. Something he won’t be going to, seeing as he intends to run for the Senate in 7 months time.

He went to the ACT election, as a Liberal member, stating that he wanted to represent the people of his electorate. They voted him in to do just that. The period he is elected for is until the next ACT election.

To publicly state, just over three months after being elected, that you will not be seeing out your term but that you are happy to be remunerated anyway is pretty damn disrespectful.

The ACT public have no way to “hold him accountable” for his actions over the next 7 months. We are his employers, yet we won’t get to review his performance at all. He could sit on his ass in the Assembly and do sweet FA until the federal election and there is not a thing that can be done about it.

#11
dungfungus10:06 am, 12 Feb 13

johnboy said :

He’s an elected representative, not an employee.

Correct; and he is elected to The Senate he will still remain an elected representative for the ACT so the outcome is the same.

#12
dpm10:45 am, 12 Feb 13

Leon said :

enrique said :

…if he’s still effective in what he’s being paid (and voted in) to do then what’s the problem?.

Spot on!

I think the problem is the word ‘effective’, but that may be subjective! I can’t think of much they have done post-election…. Then again, that could cover the majority of the assembly! :-)

#13
bikhet10:50 am, 12 Feb 13

enrique said :

Bit of a loaded question…

You’d assume he still had a job responsibility to live up to in his ACT role and that he’d be held accountable to it would he?

Sure, if he really did end up getting too distracted to carry out is ACT LA role properly then questions should be asked but if he’s still effective in what he’s being paid (and voted in) to do then what’s the problem?

Assumes he’s ever been effective in his job.

enrique said :

Having a poll like this is dangerous territory… how would you feel if you were fired the second you made your intentions known that you were going to move on from your own job…? Worse, if people didn’t feel comfortable making their intentions about moving on known (especially in high profile leadership roles) then we end up with chaos all the time as people made shock announcements and then left things in disarray the very next day.

Seen it done. Say you’ve got a new job and two security guards appear at your desk, tell you to clean it out, and escort you out the door.

#14
dpm10:53 am, 12 Feb 13

dungfungus said :

johnboy said :

He’s an elected representative, not an employee.

Correct; and he is elected to The Senate he will still remain an elected representative for the ACT so the outcome is the same.

But who pays for Assembly salaries and for Senate salaries? While it all comes out of our taxes somehow, if one is from ACT Govt and one from Federal revenue, it may be that the ACT Govt could use that money elsewhere on ACT-specific projects? A bit trivial, but technically different.

#15
chewy1410:56 am, 12 Feb 13

Ghettosmurf87 said :

The ACT public have no way to “hold him accountable” for his actions over the next 7 months. We are his employers, yet we won’t get to review his performance at all. He could sit on his ass in the Assembly and do sweet FA until the federal election and there is not a thing that can be done about it.

How is that different to when any other member of any other parliament announces they won’t be standing for re-election?

It’s wholly part of our system.

#16
dungfungus11:06 am, 12 Feb 13

MTK said :

The biggest issue is the primacy of sheer political amibition. Plenty of people (including elected representatives) moonlight with second jobs and job applications.

Elected Liberal knifing elected Liberal is far more unbecoming.

Opportunities for election to the Senate in the ACT only comes concurrent with a Federal election.
Zed didn’t call the Federal election; the Prime Minister did.

#17
Girt_Hindrance11:11 am, 12 Feb 13

Can’t wait for him to move along, he must have the most boring CV after his time in the LA.
Achievements:…..
(Apart from scaring old people into voting for him with that triple the rates cr@p)

#18
Ghettosmurf8711:17 am, 12 Feb 13

chewy14 said :

Ghettosmurf87 said :

The ACT public have no way to “hold him accountable” for his actions over the next 7 months. We are his employers, yet we won’t get to review his performance at all. He could sit on his ass in the Assembly and do sweet FA until the federal election and there is not a thing that can be done about it.

How is that different to when any other member of any other parliament announces they won’t be standing for re-election?

It’s wholly part of our system.

I certainly didn’t say it was any different to members of other parliaments who resign, I responded to Enrique’s suggestion that Zed would still be held accountable, which he won’t be.

On the matter of resignation. There is certainly a difference between announcing you are leaving part way through a term (epecially barely into said term) and announcing that you don’t plan to stand for re-election.

I certainly don’t expected politicians to serve interminably until they either die or are voted out, but I do certainly have an expectation that when they put themselves forward for election, they have an intention of representing their constituents for the life of the parliament.

And to go on dungfungus’ comment about Zed not calling the federal election, that is a bit disingenuous as it was clearly known long ago that the election would be sometime before November 2013 and there were plenty of branches of the majors seeting pre-selection processes into motion before Gillard’s announcement of the Septemeber 14 date.

#19
Chop7111:27 am, 12 Feb 13

johnboy said :

He’s an elected representative, not an employee.

As an elected representative then don’t you become an employee.

That is your question in the first place, you want to stop paying him his wage (don’t you?)

#20
chewy1412:01 pm, 12 Feb 13

Ghettosmurf87 said :

chewy14 said :

Ghettosmurf87 said :

The ACT public have no way to “hold him accountable” for his actions over the next 7 months. We are his employers, yet we won’t get to review his performance at all. He could sit on his ass in the Assembly and do sweet FA until the federal election and there is not a thing that can be done about it.

How is that different to when any other member of any other parliament announces they won’t be standing for re-election?

It’s wholly part of our system.

I certainly didn’t say it was any different to members of other parliaments who resign, I responded to Enrique’s suggestion that Zed would still be held accountable, which he won’t be.

On the matter of resignation. There is certainly a difference between announcing you are leaving part way through a term (epecially barely into said term) and announcing that you don’t plan to stand for re-election.

I certainly don’t expected politicians to serve interminably until they either die or are voted out, but I do certainly have an expectation that when they put themselves forward for election, they have an intention of representing their constituents for the life of the parliament.

And to go on dungfungus’ comment about Zed not calling the federal election, that is a bit disingenuous as it was clearly known long ago that the election would be sometime before November 2013 and there were plenty of branches of the majors seeting pre-selection processes into motion before Gillard’s announcement of the Septemeber 14 date.

Yeah I’ve got no doubt he knew he was going to do this after they lost the local election. He probably should have quit the leadership then and announced he was going to run for senate at the time but that’s not unsurprising for a politician to think of themselves

I actually think it’s a good thing though, after they lost the election he either had to quit or fully commit to running as leader for the next election. At least now the Libs can have a bit of a cleanout, fresh start and maybe perform a bit better than previously. Someone has to hold our current government to account which hasn’t happened for years.

#21
enrique12:18 pm, 12 Feb 13

I’ve said it before… http://the-riotact.com/zed-messing-up-the-factions-with-his-push/94092

Why anyone in their right mind would want to be a politician is beyond me… FFS… no matter what these buggers do, good or bad, right or wrong, there is always someone that wants to crucify them!

Tall poppy syndrome is alive and well!

#22
johnboy12:21 pm, 12 Feb 13

Oh stop blubbing zed

#23
Alderney12:33 pm, 12 Feb 13

I see two issues here, the moral and the legal.

Morally, he should vacate his MLA gig if he is pre-selected to the Senate.

Legally, what do the rules of the Assembly state?

If he is legally entitled to remain so be it.

Just further evidence of the lack of moral conviction in modern day politics.

It’s all about me, and let me tell you about it for a bit. Filibuster anyone?

#24
enrique12:45 pm, 12 Feb 13

johnboy said :

Oh stop blubbing zed

=)

Good call.

Alright, alright, I see your point – I really was just stirring the pot ;-)

#25
VicePope12:52 pm, 12 Feb 13

Let me see. Zed has shown that he has no loyalty to his electorate when the soft pillow that is a guaranteed Senate spot beckons. What he lacks in loyalty is not made up for by added integrity, if the current holder of the soft pillow is to be believed. So he should pay his own way.
Or, people voted for Zed and he should stick around, as yet another backbench galoot in an assembly of drones until it is legally necessary for him to resign. If he resigns, he will likely be replaced by Val Jeffrey, a man whose public utterances suggest he will not add massively to the quality of the assembly. So he should stay.
Frankly, does anyone really care whether the worthy souls of Brindabella are one-fifth represented by a bloke who doesn’t want to be there or a bloke who a large part of the public didn’t want to be there when they voted a few months ago? But if he remains in the Assembly, it would be really nice if the Speaker and his own party shut him up if he ever tried to make a Senate election speech in the guise of something in the assembly.

#26
Matt_Watts12:55 pm, 12 Feb 13

Alderney said :

I see two issues here, the moral and the legal.

Morally, he should vacate his MLA gig if he is pre-selected to the Senate.

Legally, what do the rules of the Assembly state?

If he is legally entitled to remain so be it.

Just further evidence of the lack of moral conviction in modern day politics.

It’s all about me, and let me tell you about it for a bit. Filibuster anyone?

Legally entitled to remain as an MLA for now. If he wins preselection, he’d be allowed to remain as an MLA – legally – until he is officially nominated for the federal Senate seat (not for months, assuming no early election).

#27
Ghettosmurf871:25 pm, 12 Feb 13

Matt_Watts said :

Legally entitled to remain as an MLA for now. If he wins preselection, he’d be allowed to remain as an MLA – legally – until he is officially nominated for the federal Senate seat (not for months, assuming no early election).

Correct.

Up until the time his nomination form is lodged by the registered officer of the party endorsing him for the federal election, he is perfectly within his rights to remain an MLA. At the hour of his nomination however, he must already have resigned his position.

Morally however, SHOULD he remain an MLA? Most will have their own opinions on that one.

#28
LiberalTruth6:57 pm, 12 Feb 13

He should resign, simple as that. He lied to the people of Canberra, he lied to the members of the Liberal Party that supported him.

Zed and his brother in law Stephen Doyle along with that doyen of truth Tio Faulkner – (remember the time card affair that was hushed up in the party as those nasty Canberra Times people coming after us again, Zed stood up in Party meetings and said he took full responsibility, so what nothing happened to him) have been orchestrating this move since the last election.

Humphries removed himself from Management Committe meetings when Senate pre selection was being discussed, did Zed or any of the others that had a conflict of interest – NO they didn’t.

I hope the action taken by Gary Kent gets up and these clowns are thrown out of the party.

Jeremy Hanson – great choice, Katy seems worried already because he is a bit of a bulldog. Haerden up Katie.

#29
ExpatUk10:20 pm, 12 Feb 13

Zed was elected to represent Canberran’s in the Assembly, not in his spare time while pursuing other interests.

The Assembly positions are funded as full-time positions by Canberra’s taxpayers for the purposes of representing them in the House of Assembly.

Once pre-selected, he needs to resign immediately so he gets replaced by another from his party, who will then pick up his baton.

Did not Zed state that he would resign if pre-selected?

Follow
Follow The RiotACT
Get Premium Membership
Advertisement

Images of Canberra

Advertisement
Sponsors
RiotACT Proudly Supports
Advertisement
Copyright © 2014 Riot ACT Holdings Pty Ltd. All rights reserved.