Drink Driver has returned as minister

I don’t want my political leaders to be morally perfect – that seems nonsensical to me. I want them to be capable of doing the job. Yes, he stuffed up. And it was brought to public attention, as it should have been, and he was removed while it was investigated. Now it’s been resolved, presumably he’s competent, so he should go back to doing his job.

I can understand people who thnik that Hargreaves’ political positions are unacceptable will seize on this as a bonus reason to dismiss him, but really, it’s a bullshit argument. They are doing a job. If they’re doing it badly, they should be dismissed. But that’s about it.

Having said that, I’m happy for anybody high-profile who does something stupid to be exposed for it – it throws extra media attention on the underlying problem (dopey people who think they’re fine to drive after a boozy lunch) – and it’s part of being high profile that more attention is paid to everything you do (if Hargreaves was, for example, a Raider, I’d expect about the same degree of media attention).

And he hasn’t gotten away scott free – he just hasn’t been fired from his job. Same as most people in his position.

He may have been humiliated in public, however has he displayed the conduct we would normally expect of a leader of the community ?

When we compare it to similar incidents in more recent times it barely rates a mention (cigars and blowjobs springs to mind), however is this what you expect of a leader of OUR community ?

Perhaps it is, perhaps I believe that somebody who has put themselves forward to be elected as our representative should be more well behaved than the general Australian populace, and that this display of inproper conduct is definetly not an example for the community to replicate.

The problem with him remaining in the job, is the people who now hit the road after having a few beers, who think that it’ll be ok because the grouchy raisin has gotten away with it scott-free.

Is this the kind of conduct you want to hear about when you are listening to why your partner got killed by a drink driver in court ?

He is an example setter for the community – and he hasn’t set a very high standard.

Not that he’s surrounded by pillars of the community in his workplace anyway though.

The bloke was humiliated enough. His crime was made very public. Perhaps all drink drivers should have their photos included in the Court Report section of the Canberra Times detailing the DUIs. Driving under the influence is not a minor matter – it is dumb, selfish and dangerous.

And you have to take some account for differing circumstances. A silly P plater, driving home driunk from a party after being on their Ps for 3 days, should get a short ban, while someone who has a clean driving record of 20 years should get a (very small, one off) bit of leeway – as they do.
He was treated the same as anyone else would be on their first offence, with a fairly clean record.

What bullshit – As I said before, Hargraves was treated no differently than any other person in his position. Sure if you’re some kind of schmuck shit bag who blows 0.08 and decides to defend himself you’d expect to get a 6 month ban because that’s what all shit-bags on 0.08 defending themselves get … on the other hand with proper representation, the right character references, etc. you would expect to get what Hargraves ended up with. Justice might be blind … but it sure as hell has no obligation to go out of its way to help those who are not prepared to help themselves.

Is this going to go down in judicial history as the “Hargeaves Decision” a’la The Castle’s “Kerrigan Decision”?
I know sure as shit if i was nailed with that kind of BAC I would get my arse nailed to the wall.
What Makes John Hargreaves more of a person than me? If I cut him will he not bleed?.
I dont expect any answers soon. Fuckers.

Couldn’t agree more, peeved. This slap on the wrist doesn’t set a good example for anyone about drink-driving: if you’re caught, then you should punished accordingly.

Surely the issue is really about consistency in sentencing, pollie or commoner. You drink and drive, you get x, y, z, no exceptions. .05, 3 months license suspension, higher then .05 lower than .1, 6 months, .1, 12 months. No exceptions, no excuses, conviction registered. You want to stop DUI, get fair dinkum. We just very publicly told the community that you can drive pissed and get a wrist slap. Wrong!!!!

Just read the article in C/Times today about a Victorian MP who had the book thrown at her (even on the first offence, 6mths suspension + record).

Canberra just seems to be soft on…wasn’t there a senior police officer ‘let off the hook’ earlier in the week for boozing and then cruising?

technically its a breach of the aps code of conduct.

however, if you dont tell anyone and there is no investigation…

i do not think this applies to elected persons however as they are not employees of the commonwealth.

not sure how this applies to the local council.