An unpaid appointment it may be, but it is still a Public...

An unpaid appointment it may be, but it is still a Public appointment by the Government and there is a clear case of potential bias and conflict of interest here.

As regards Mr Howard's bailout of the textile business owned by his brother Stan, that was a discgaceful abuse of taxpayer funds and Howard should have been rolled for it.

But Mr Rudd was going to be "different", he was elected because he offered the people an alternative to all that was supposedly wrong with the Howard govt.

He set the standard and that is how he will now be judged, NOT on the actions of his predecessor who he defeated.

So let's look forward, be objective, and assess THIS governments actions as that is the only one we can pass judgement on at the ballot box, +ve or -ve depending on one's point of view at the time.