Federal police say they have ‘not identified any evidence to support allegations of criminality’ in relation to travel expenses scandal

This article is more than 4 years old

This article is more than 4 years old

The former parliamentary Speaker Bronwyn Bishop will not face criminal charges over the travel expenses scandal that prompted her resignation from the role.

Australian federal police said they had “not identified any evidence to support allegations of criminality” in relation to the $5,227 expenses claim for return chartered helicopter flights from Melbourne to Geelong to attend a Liberal party fundraiser.

Bronwyn Bishop travel expenses scandal: how it unfolded – timeline Read more

The finding follows a referral from the Labor MP Pat Conroy, who wrote to the AFP in July saying Bishop would have been required to sign a form attesting that the journey was for “official purposes”.

Documents subsequently released under freedom of information laws showed Bishop’s signature appeared under a declaration that “knowingly giving false or misleading information is a serious offence under the Criminal Code Act 1995” and she “travelled on the charter and it was provided for official purposes”.



Ian McCartney, acting in the role of deputy commissioner of operations, said the AFP had consulted the Department of Finance “and others” in relation to two specific allegations. These allegations were that Bishop provided false or misleading information to the commonwealth, and that her existing relationships with MyJet Aviation could have influenced her decision to engage that service provider.



“The AFP has not identified any evidence to support allegations of criminality against Ms Bishop or any other person in respect of those matters,” McCartney told Conroy in a reply. “As such the AFP will not be commencing an investigation and will take no further action in relation to the allegations.”

In the letter, McCartney also said the AFP had not received any referrals from the Department of Finance in relation to allegations of Bishop misusing entitlements.

“As such, no action is being taken by the AFP with respect to those allegations. You will be advised should a referral from Finance be received and the AFP decides to commence an investigation.”

Bishop has repeatedly denied wrongdoing over the flight, arguing that when she was guest speaker at events she canvassed “the parliament and how it works”.

In mid-July, when the flight caused a political storm, Bishop pledged to repay the helicopter charter money to taxpayers because it had been an “error of judgment” but refused to apologise.

She later said she was sorry, but it was not enough to save her job as the scandal continued to damage the government. On 2 August the then prime minister, Tony Abbott, announced her resignation as Speaker of the House of Representatives and announced a review of the entitlements system, with a report due next year.

Politicians’ entitlements and expenses: help investigate four years of data Read more

Conroy had written to the AFP in July, arguing that a refusal to investigate Bishop would be inconsistent with the approach it took in the case of another former Speaker, Peter Slipper.

At the time, the AFP defended its handling of the matter, saying it had sent the Bishop complaints to the Department of Finance for assessment in accordance with the so-called Minchin protocol on entitlement breaches.

In 2014 a magistrate convicted Slipper of dishonestly causing a risk of loss to the commonwealth in a case involving the use of $954 in taxi vouchers to visit wineries outside Canberra in 2010.

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.