Deputy Liberal leader Julie Bishop is embroiled in her second plagiarism controversy in a month after a chapter she contributed to a book was found to comprise slabs of a speech made by New Zealand businessman Roger Kerr.
Ms Bishop was accused of lifting material from The Wall Street Journal late last month, just three days into her job as Opposition treasury spokeswoman. She faced new allegations yesterday, that a chapter submitted under her name and for the book out this week, Liberals and Power: the Road Ahead, contained paragraphs that copied word for word or closely paraphrased a 1999 speech by Mr Kerr. Her chief of staff, Murray Hansen, has taken full responsibility for the offence, saying he had ''knocked it together very quickly'' on Ms Bishop's behalf and forgotten to add footnotes acknowledging the sources for the ideas in the chapter.
Ms Bishop has telephoned Mr Kerr to apologise. Mr Kerr, a member of the New Zealand Business Round Table, said yseterday he had no intention of suing Ms Bishop.
Liberal leader Malcolm Turnbull expressed confidence in his deputy.
''Julie has dealt with that matter and she's answered it and she has my ... she has my complete confidence and she has dealt with it.''
But the Government seized on the issue, with Treasurer Wayne Swan saying, ''Once again, you would expect better from a shadow treasurer, but I guess it's probably a window into why there isn't an alternative economic policy.''
The book's editor, academic Peter van Onselen, expressed his disappointment that Ms Bishop outsourced the chapter to her staff.
''Whilst I understand how political offices work, it is still disappointing to learn that Julie Bishop didn't see fit to write herself a chapter in a book that is meant to be about ideas for the future of the Liberal Party.''
Australian National University copyright specialist Matthew Rimmer said Mr Kerr would probably have grounds to seek redress.
''The key question is what the author thinks of the borrowings,'' he said. ''Copyright law never provides absolute protection of work ... but the moral right of attribution is more of a live issue in this case.'' He said the issue would be a caution to those working in political circles.
''Politicians are always going to be vulnerable to allegations of plagiarism when they are so dependent upon ghostwriters who are working under the burden of tight time pressures and limited resources.
''And perhaps it's a reflection, too, that the political discourse has no great claim to originality ...''