This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2015/jul/17/bronwyn-bishop-referred-to-afp-by-labor-over-helicopter-flight

The article has changed 6 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Bronwyn Bishop referred to AFP by Labor over helicopter flight Bronwyn Bishop referred to AFP by Labor over helicopter flight
(34 minutes later)
Labor has written to the Australian federal police to ask them to look into Bronwyn Bishop’s decision to take a taxpayer-funded helicopter trip from Melbourne to Geelong.Labor has written to the Australian federal police to ask them to look into Bronwyn Bishop’s decision to take a taxpayer-funded helicopter trip from Melbourne to Geelong.
The opposition had earlier called on the Speaker to release the form she signed to claim $5,227.27 for chartered flights from Melbourne to Geelong and back on 5 November 2014.The opposition had earlier called on the Speaker to release the form she signed to claim $5,227.27 for chartered flights from Melbourne to Geelong and back on 5 November 2014.
Bishop announced on Thursday she would repay the charter flight money even though she maintained her belief that the travel “was conducted within the rules”.Bishop announced on Thursday she would repay the charter flight money even though she maintained her belief that the travel “was conducted within the rules”.
But the Labor MP Pat Conroy wrote to the AFP on Friday to ask it to examine the issue. But the Labor MP Pat Conroy wrote to the AFP on Friday to ask it to investigate the issue “as a priority”.
Labor has pointed a standard government form for charter certification for parliament’s presiding officers that says “office holders may use charter transport (including aircraft, helicopters and other vehicles) for their personal transport in connection with their office holder duties”. Related: Bronwyn Bishop moves quickly to calm expenses storm but questions remain
“Parliamentary entitlements are only permitted to be used for official purposes,” Conroy wrote. “Parliamentarians have previously been prosecuted for fraud for deliberately misusing their entitlements.”
The letter points to a standard government form for charter certification for parliament’s presiding officers that says “office holders may use charter transport (including aircraft, helicopters and other vehicles) for their personal transport in connection with their office holder duties”.
According to that form, the office holder must certify that “knowingly giving false or misleading information is a serious offence under the Criminal Code Act 1995” and that they “travelled on the charter and it was provided for official purposes”.According to that form, the office holder must certify that “knowingly giving false or misleading information is a serious offence under the Criminal Code Act 1995” and that they “travelled on the charter and it was provided for official purposes”.
The leader of opposition business, Tony Burke, said the letter asked the AFP “to investigate what Bronwyn Bishop is currently trying to hide”. Conroy said media reports indicated the helicopter flight was to attend a fundraiser for Ron Nelson, a Liberal candidate in the Victorian state election.
The leader of opposition business, Tony Burke, said the AFP should “investigate what Bronwyn Bishop is currently trying to hide”.
“If there is a reasonable explanation, then Bronwyn Bishop should give it to the Australian people, and she should provide it to the Australian Federal Police,” Burke said.“If there is a reasonable explanation, then Bronwyn Bishop should give it to the Australian people, and she should provide it to the Australian Federal Police,” Burke said.
“But if Bronwyn Bishop is claiming that part of the official purposes of being Speaker of the House of Representatives is to attend a Liberal Party fundraiser, then we all know she’s wrong and if she has claimed that on this form, then she has done so knowing the serious criminal consequences that will follow.“But if Bronwyn Bishop is claiming that part of the official purposes of being Speaker of the House of Representatives is to attend a Liberal Party fundraiser, then we all know she’s wrong and if she has claimed that on this form, then she has done so knowing the serious criminal consequences that will follow.
“I say to Bronwyn Bishop, if you’ve got nothing to hide, release the document, release it to the public, release it to the police. The Australian people believe that this one is completely beyond a joke. This is a born to rule attitude gone absolutely mad.”“I say to Bronwyn Bishop, if you’ve got nothing to hide, release the document, release it to the public, release it to the police. The Australian people believe that this one is completely beyond a joke. This is a born to rule attitude gone absolutely mad.”
Guardian Australia wrote to Bishop’s office early on Friday to ask which form she signed, whether she would release it, and how the event in Geelong was consistent with her office-holder duties. Bishop is yet to respond. Related: Joe Hockey says Bronwyn Bishop's $5,000 helicopter trip doesn't pass 'sniff test'
The Speaker denied wrongdoing when she announced the plan to repay the funds on Thursday afternoon. “Whilst my understanding is that this travel was conducted within the rules, to avoid any doubt I will reimburse the costs,” she said in a brief statement. Guardian Australia wrote to Bishop’s office early on Friday to ask which form she signed, whether she would release it, and how the event in Geelong was consistent with her office-holder duties. Bishop has yet to respond but has previously denied wrongdoing.
The AFP pursued a previous speaker, Peter Slipper, over his use of taxi vouchers to visit wineries outside Canberra in 2010.
In 2014 a magistrate convicted Slipper of dishonestly causing a risk of loss to the commonwealth and ordered him to repay the $954.
But Slipper won a legal battle to overturn the conviction in February 2015. In doing so, the Australian Capital Territory supreme court highlighted considerable uncertainty over the definition of parliamentary business.
Slipper repeatedly argued he was a victim of double standards given other MPs had been allowed to repay expenses under the Minchin Protocol.