I noted that the right wing media, led by the Australian, have started the Liberals push for another election to be held immediately.

Abbott clearly disappointed at not receiving the unquestioning subservience of the Independents, must think that if he goes back to the polls he will be a shoe in to get more votes, and somehow be able to form a government.

Am I alone in thinking that this is a very dodgy strategy for him to choose?

Does anyone think he has earned extra respect from the Australian public, with his behaviour, in the week since the Election, or actually lost some?

I can see that he currently thinks he has nothing to lose by choosing this option, but I think that is just indicative of how poor his judgement may be.

Maybe he is surrounded by extremist fanboys filling his, (not inconsiderable) ;D, ears, with rhetoric similar to some of the wilder musings that we have seen here, and he truly believes he deserves his time to rule.

For a moment there I thought you were implying that Tony has slipped one into Foolya. ;D

mozzaok wrote on Aug 27^th, 2010 at 2:17pm:

I noted that the right wing media, led by the Australian, have started the Liberals push for another election to be held immediately. Abbott clearly disappointed at not receiving the unquestioning subservience of the Independents, must think that if he goes back to the polls he will be a shoe in to get more votes, and somehow be able to form a government. Am I alone in thinking that this is a very dodgy strategy for him to choose? Does anyone think he has earned extra respect from the Australian public, with his behaviour, in the week since the Election, or actually lost some? I can see that he currently thinks he has nothing to lose by choosing this option, but I think that is just indicative of how poor his judgement may be. Maybe he is surrounded by extremist fanboys filling his, (not inconsiderable) ;D, ears, with rhetoric similar to some of the wilder musings that we have seen here, and he truly believes he deserves his time to rule.

Yes you are alone.

I'm thinking that Abbott is rightly waiting until all the votes have been counted before declaring his hand on pretty much anything hence why he is dragging his heels on lots of issues. Rightly so too. The will of the people has not been shown fully yet.

[quote author=mozzaok link=1282882659/0#0 date=1282882658]I noted that the right wing media, led by the Australian, have started the Liberals push for another election to be held immediately.

The only push (if you can call it that) by the media that I've seen, and I've checked out all the papers,  is that they are saying Windsor would seem to be leaning that way.

Maybe a House of reps. election might be a good thing,  hopefully give a clear result for one or other to govern without all the difficulties the minorities could cause either of the two majors.  Just a thought.

Quote:

Maybe a House of reps. election might be a good thing,  hopefully give a clear result for one or other to govern without all the difficulties the minorities could cause either of the two majors.  Just a thought.

How so? The GREENS will still run and could well win their seat again the independents will win their seats again and I think we'll either end up with the same result, with maybe even more people voting for independents and GREENS.
The problem is BOTH MAJOR PARTIES SUCK and the voters have worked that out.
The only way I see a major party benefiting from another election is Labor getting back some of those GREENS first preference votes, but I cant see the coalition getting any more, the people who were pissed off with Labor mostly went to the GREENS, the coalition will not attract any new votes.

mozzaok wrote on Aug 27^th, 2010 at 2:17pm:

I noted that the right wing media, led by the Australian, have started the Liberals push for another election to be held immediately. Abbott clearly disappointed at not receiving the unquestioning subservience of the Independents, must think that if he goes back to the polls he will be a shoe in to get more votes, and somehow be able to form a government. Am I alone in thinking that this is a very dodgy strategy for him to choose? Does anyone think he has earned extra respect from the Australian public, with his behaviour, in the week since the Election, or actually lost some? I can see that he currently thinks he has nothing to lose by choosing this option, but I think that is just indicative of how poor his judgement may be. Maybe he is surrounded by extremist fanboys filling his, (not inconsiderable) ;D, ears, with rhetoric similar to some of the wilder musings that we have seen here, and he truly believes he deserves his time to rule.

I think if he forces another election so soon after this one the voters will punish him like no other party has been punish. It will be the end of the liberal party as we know it now.

It will be a Labor Goverment with a Green opposition.

Do I think Abbott is pushing for a new election, YES
Do I think its a smart thing to do, NO
All the attack dogs like Ackerman are out there today calling for another election, everybody knows that Ackerman doesn't pick his nose without asking Abbott what to do with the resulting boogers.

Another election would be interesting - would the liblabs have any money for advertising??

John S wrote on Aug 27^th, 2010 at 2:45pm:

I think if he forces another election so soon after this one the voters will punish him like no other party has been punish. It will be the end of the liberal party as we know it now. It will be a Labor Goverment with a Green opposition.

Who knows what we'll end up with, but I think the Liberals will suffer as a result.

No-one wants to vote again. The expense is astronomical and what an extravagance for an economically conservative party to suggest more waste in the hope of self gain.  

I think if we were forced back to the polls that a record number would not even bother turning up. I won't vote again on principle. The result speaks for itself, if they can't accept it, bad luck.

Please delete wrote on Aug 27^th, 2010 at 2:46pm:

Another election would be interesting - would the liblabs have any money for advertising??

I don't think they should be allowed to campaign the way they did in the lead up to this one....rather should be expected to maintain a relative passive stance, this and allow the public to engage in the debate the way we weren't encouraged to do last time round as could be demonstrated by their having closed down numerous media-associated news message boards in the lead up to their last election campaign.

Even our leading media opinion-polls were biased, whereby only certain opinions were allowed to be posted on certain sites.

Murdoch - Left

Fairfax - right



Perhaps they should be granted fair and even media coverage...(so many hours)...this and only allowed so many self-funded adds (not at the public's expense).... this and be instructed to keep vicious 3rd party's out of their smear campaigns, like the Australian Workers Unions tacky "Abbott family" youtube clips and false scaremongering adds, they had hoped would go viral.

Rather ironic I thought, given it's the Labor party who appear to all be related to one-another.

How could we regulate the fair use of our media, so neither party exploits it for financial gain?

Also, electoral betting should be scrapped, it's down right unethical...and like all betting, only increases the odds of corruption and cheatery.

Not to mention false misleading figures, so as to appease the punters who bet their houses on them thinking they might cash in..

We need a more transparent and ethical electoral system, this is without a doubt, ideally an electoral reform decided by neither one party or the other, only for it to get changed again whenever someone else becomes PM.

The preference voting system is critically flawed, and is in need of reform.

People should be able to list their preferred independents without having to align themselves with their chosen representatives own preferences.


8-)i

I read that the only way they  can go straight to another election would be for the parliament to meet and be so deadlocked that no full-time government could be formed.


However, in the mean time...

So have Hockey and Robb, and maybe Abbott, committed a criminal offence by referring to the costings of the Coalition election promises an an 'Audit'?
petermartin.blogspot.com/.../...or-as-good-as.html

and

"Subsequently, I was informed by the Australian Electoral Commission that following an internal audit, an AEC employee had now admitted to improperly dealing with approximately 3000 ballot papers and that numerous potential breaches of the Commonwealth Electoral Act had occurred."
www.adelaidenow.com.au/.../story-fn5rhd15-1225910892936

mantra wrote on Aug 27^th, 2010 at 3:00pm:

John S wrote on Aug 27th, 2010 at 2:45pm: I think if he forces another election so soon after this one the voters will punish him like no other party has been punish. It will be the end of the liberal party as we know it now. It will be a Labor Goverment with a Green opposition. Who knows what we'll end up with, but I think the Liberals will suffer as a result. No-one wants to vote again. The expense is astronomical and what an extravagance for an economically conservative party to suggest more waste in the hope of self gain.

More waste? Since when was the ALP worried about waste?

I am more concerned with three people holding either side to randsom.

We will see pork barrelling of the highest order.

A Born-to-Rule mindset is part of Liberal Party DNA

The Liberal Party of Australia has ALWAYS seen itself as a government-in-exile when on the opposition benches

Abbot thought he had it 'in the bag' before election day

Verge wrote on Aug 27^th, 2010 at 3:18pm:

I am more concerned with three people holding either side to randsom. We will see pork barrelling of the highest order.

I'm confident Tony knows what he's doing, and think in the long run, he will be the better PM for it.

When it's clear, Tonys perceived duty is to his people 'firstly', whereas Gillard only wishes to negotiate the terms of her tenorship with her ALP infiltrates, Independents , board-room power-brokers and campaign strategists. Many of which appear to be politically aligned and or related.

The ALP have lost touch with the people, their more humble and traditional partys ways....they have become drunk with greed and power, and need to be taken down a peg or two.

Here is what their own Fabian society had to say about them on the whole, and it's a universal thing, not just applicable with Australia's Labor candidates.

http://www.fabians.org.uk/general-news/general-news/



They too believe Labor has lost it's way...though go into more detail as to how and why.

:)

Abbott's wilted under fire...has agreed to let the independents get a treasury analysis of the liberal costings...but doesn't want them made public, or the government to see them..what does THAT tell you ( well MOST people) then!

wrote on Aug 27^th, 2010 at 3:34pm:

Abbott's wilted under fire...has agreed to let the independents get a treasury analysis of the liberal costings...but doesn't want them made public, or the government to see them..what does THAT tell you ( well MOST people) then!

Reading tea leaves again vegetable

;D

mellie wrote on Aug 27^th, 2010 at 3:32pm:

Verge wrote on Aug 27th, 2010 at 3:18pm: I am more concerned with three people holding either side to randsom. We will see pork barrelling of the highest order. I'm confident Tony knows what he's doing, and think in the long run, he will be the better PM for it. When it's clear, Tonys perceived duty is to his people 'firstly', whereas Gillard only wishes to negotiate the terms of her tenorship with her ALP infiltrates, Independents , board-room power-brokers and campaign strategists. Many of which appear to be politically aligned and or related. The ALP have lost touch with the people, their more humble and traditional partys ways....they have become drunk with greed and power, and need to be taken down a peg or two. :)

LOL...I still can't tell whether you are naturally counter-intuitive and/or deliberately predisposed to partisan double-think and hypocrisy!?

Either way, the irony of making those sorts of partisan claims seems to be lost on you...

Statement from the Institute of Chartered Accountants in Australia

26 August 2010

The Institute of Chartered Accountants in Australia (the Institute) has received a complaint about a matter that involves publicly raised allegations regarding the conduct of two members with accountancy firm, WHK Horwath, Perth.

The Institute has commenced an investigation which involves an opportunity for the members to respond to the allegations.


Professional Conduct Process

As a professional organisation, membership of the Institute is based on meeting the highest standards of professional conduct and performance. The Institute treats matters that bring the profession into disrepute very seriously.

Issues arising from members’ conduct are investigated under the Institute’s By-laws and relevant cases are referred to the Professional Conduct Tribunal for determination.

Based on legal advice, specific commentary cannot be provided while matters are considered for investigation or for the duration of any subsequent Tribunal hearings. All information relating to complaints lodged with the Institute and produced during the investigation process is confidential.

To ensure the privilege of professional membership is upheld the Professional Conduct Tribunal has the power to impose sanctions on individual members who act inappropriately.

The ultimate sanction that can be imposed is exclusion from membership and withdrawal of the right to use the Chartered Accountants designation. Other sanctions include suspension, reprimand, fines or the requirement to undertake additional professional training.

For further information about the Institute's disciplinary process please visit http://www.charteredaccountants.com.au/A116936841

Philby wrote on Aug 27^th, 2010 at 2:28pm:

mozzaok wrote on Aug 27th, 2010 at 2:17pm: I noted that the right wing media, led by the Australian, have started the Liberals push for another election to be held immediately. Abbott clearly disappointed at not receiving the unquestioning subservience of the Independents, must think that if he goes back to the polls he will be a shoe in to get more votes, and somehow be able to form a government. Am I alone in thinking that this is a very dodgy strategy for him to choose? Does anyone think he has earned extra respect from the Australian public, with his behaviour, in the week since the Election, or actually lost some? I can see that he currently thinks he has nothing to lose by choosing this option, but I think that is just indicative of how poor his judgement may be. Maybe he is surrounded by extremist fanboys filling his, (not inconsiderable) ;D, ears, with rhetoric similar to some of the wilder musings that we have seen here, and he truly believes he deserves his time to rule. Yes you are alone. I'm thinking that Abbott is rightly waiting until all the votes have been counted before declaring his hand on pretty much anything hence why he is dragging his heels on lots of issues. Rightly so too. The will of the people has not been shown fully yet.

There's no relevant precedent for going back to the polls - it won't happen unless and until neither major party can (and/or wants to) sustain a Minority Govt...

Either way, the born-to-rule Libs won't be able to force a DD: -

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1282852895/14#14


Equitist wrote on Aug 27^th, 2010 at 9:04am:

Here's the Antony Green 7:30 Report transcript: - http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2010/s2992379.htm Quote: Green updates on seats still in doubt Broadcast: 24/08/2010 KERRY O'BRIEN, PRESENTER: [...] Election analyst Antony Green has been making his own assessment of the latest figures. [...] KERRY O'BRIEN: [...] Now just quickly, let's come to the Senate because it's unusual, is it not, that there's quite a gap before the new Senate in which the Greens will have the balance of power will take its place. That doesn't happen until July next year. Now that's 10 months. ANTONY GREEN: Yeah, we've normally had our legislations between October and November - September to November in recent years..... This is only the third winter election in Australian history, which is why the gap's longer. The Senate is a fixed term and it will take its seats next year. KERRY O'BRIEN: So in fact whichever side forms minority government will be dealing with the current Senate through until July-August next year, which means that the challenge of having to deal with the Greens as the sole balance of power is a long way away yet in political terms. ANTONY GREEN: Yeah. If the Coalition forms government, they're in a better position until July next year and then their position deteriorates. So that's one of their problems. KERRY O'BRIEN: So now answer me this question: because Tony Windsor said again today, "Don't rule out the possibility of us having to go back to the polls." Now, if there is another early election, what happens with the Senate? Is it a half-Senate election? Is there any possibility of a double dissolution which has very strict rules on when you can have a double dissolution? Or are we just going to see - if it happens - an election just for the Lower House? ANTONY GREEN: It would have to be just for the House. I can't see how they can have a - a double dissolution requires a trigger; there isn't a trigger, so that's out for the moment. And even if they get a trigger between now and July next year, I think there would be an implict block on having a double dissolution because the Senate is about to change anyway. I don't think you can have a half-Senate - you'd get a constitutional lawyer's opinion on this one, but I think implicitly it's in the Constitution that you can't have another half-Senate election now having already held one, issued the writs and had the writs returned. [...] ANTONY GREEN: So I'd say anytime up until the end of next year, you can have a separate House election and it doesn't get the House out of step with the Senate. So I think there would be the possibly in the next months - next 18 months of having a separate House election if the House becomes unworkable in some manner. KERRY O'BRIEN: Now very briefly: Rob Oakeshott's hopeful idea that maybe the major parties could think outside the square and possibly pull together. Any precedent for that? ANTONY GREEN: Well, I think back to 1940 when we last had a hung Parliament produced by an election. That was during the War and there wasn't enough good will to get a coalition government out of it. At that time, the Labor Party stayed in Opposition. They formed a consultative committee, but there was certainly no formation of a Cabinet in the time of war. So it strikes me as hard to believe that in this era, when there isn't a war on, that you can get that sort of good will between the two sides of politics. [...]

Hmmnnn...the Lib plot thickens...


wrote on Aug 27^th, 2010 at 3:46pm:

Statement from the Institute of Chartered Accountants in Australia 26 August 2010 The Institute of Chartered Accountants in Australia (the Institute) has received a complaint about a matter that involves publicly raised allegations regarding the conduct of two members with accountancy firm, WHK Horwath, Perth. The Institute has commenced an investigation which involves an opportunity for the members to respond to the allegations. Professional Conduct Process As a professional organisation, membership of the Institute is based on meeting the highest standards of professional conduct and performance. The Institute treats matters that bring the profession into disrepute very seriously. Issues arising from members’ conduct are investigated under the Institute’s By-laws and relevant cases are referred to the Professional Conduct Tribunal for determination. Based on legal advice, specific commentary cannot be provided while matters are considered for investigation or for the duration of any subsequent Tribunal hearings. All information relating to complaints lodged with the Institute and produced during the investigation process is confidential. To ensure the privilege of professional membership is upheld the Professional Conduct Tribunal has the power to impose sanctions on individual members who act inappropriately. The ultimate sanction that can be imposed is exclusion from membership and withdrawal of the right to use the Chartered Accountants designation. Other sanctions include suspension, reprimand, fines or the requirement to undertake additional professional training. For further information about the Institute's disciplinary process please visit http://www.charteredaccountants.com.au/A116936841

Curiouser and curiouser...

Does anybody have any info on the nature of the complaint/s!?

buzzanddidj wrote on Aug 27^th, 2010 at 3:19pm:

A Born-to-Rule mindset is part of Liberal Party DNA The Liberal Party of Australia has ALWAYS seen itself as a government-in-exile when on the opposition benches Abbot thought he had it 'in the bag' before election day

This born to rule line you keep spouting is utter garbage.

No party wants to sit on the opposition side.

The lines of support for both parties is so seriously blurred these days to make such claims is just sad.

wrote on Aug 27^th, 2010 at 3:46pm:

Statement from the Institute of Chartered Accountants in Australia 26 August 2010 The Institute of Chartered Accountants in Australia (the Institute) has received a complaint about a matter that involves publicly raised allegations regarding the conduct of two members with accountancy firm, WHK Horwath, Perth. The Institute has commenced an investigation which involves an opportunity for the members to respond to the allegations. Professional Conduct Process As a professional organisation, membership of the Institute is based on meeting the highest standards of professional conduct and performance. The Institute treats matters that bring the profession into disrepute very seriously. Issues arising from members’ conduct are investigated under the Institute’s By-laws and relevant cases are referred to the Professional Conduct Tribunal for determination. Based on legal advice, specific commentary cannot be provided while matters are considered for investigation or for the duration of any subsequent Tribunal hearings. All information relating to complaints lodged with the Institute and produced during the investigation process is confidential. To ensure the privilege of professional membership is upheld the Professional Conduct Tribunal has the power to impose sanctions on individual members who act inappropriately. The ultimate sanction that can be imposed is exclusion from membership and withdrawal of the right to use the Chartered Accountants designation. Other sanctions include suspension, reprimand, fines or the requirement to undertake additional professional training. For further information about the Institute's disciplinary process please visit http://www.charteredaccountants.com.au/A116936841

Be very very careful what you are inferring here Vege.  If you are inferring that this is because of their actions in the costings of the Coalitions policies, or that the company WHK of Perth is acting dishonestly, you might need reminding that a message board is not a haven.

Mr Robb also defended WHK Howarth's work, as the Institute of Chartered Accountants launched a formal investigation into its conduct.

The institute revealed late yesterday it had received a complaint about the conduct of two members of WHK Horwath.

The Age reported last week that Sydney University accountancy professor Bob Walker was to make the complaint in a private capacity, arguing it was not an audit in accordance with the relevant standard, despite Coalition figures including shadow treasurer Joe Hockey repeatedly calling it an audit.

The institute will decide whether to refer the complaint to its professional conduct tribunal, ''which has the power to impose sanctions on individual members who act inappropriately''.

Please delete wrote on Aug 27^th, 2010 at 3:59pm:

Mr Robb also defended WHK Howarth's work, as the Institute of Chartered Accountants launched a formal investigation into its conduct. The institute revealed late yesterday it had received a complaint about the conduct of two members of WHK Horwath. The Age reported last week that Sydney University accountancy professor Bob Walker was to make the complaint in a private capacity, arguing it was not an audit in accordance with the relevant standard, despite Coalition figures including shadow treasurer Joe Hockey repeatedly calling it an audit. The institute will decide whether to refer the complaint to its professional conduct tribunal, ''which has the power to impose sanctions on individual members who act inappropriately''.

Hmmnnn....I wonder if this is more a problem of Joe Jockstrap's misrepresentation of the nature of the report...

Presumably, this matter would be largely determined by the title and/or parameter disclaimers documented within the report itself - and any associated public representations made by the relevant members of the firm...

Robb says Perth auditor "as good as Treasury" as investigation begins, Peter Martin
The Coalition has defended the work of the Perth accountancy firm that costed its election promises as the Institute of Chartered Accountants has launched a formal investigation into its conduct.
Horwath had "looked at the veracity" of the Coalition's assumptions and the Coalition would put itself at risk by allowing the Treasury to do the same

petermartin.blogspot.com/.../...or-as-good-as.html

Be very very careful what you are inferring here Vege.  If you are inferring that this is because of their actions in the costings of the Coalitions policies, or that the company WHK of Perth is acting dishonestly, you might need reminding that a message board is not a haven

===============

Not a haven, Im not sure what your referring to. I pasted whats in todays news and on whats on daily news blog sites like I always do....

Please delete wrote on Aug 27^th, 2010 at 3:59pm:

The institute revealed late yesterday it had received a complaint about the conduct of two members of WHK Horwath. The Age reported last week that Sydney University accountancy professor Bob Walker was to make the complaint in a private capacity, arguing it was not an audit in accordance with the relevant standard

I am interested in what is the exact issue.

Failing to comply with one of the hundred of standards is one thing, and could have been overlooked unintentionally, however people are suggesting the company has inappropirately, which is another whole issue.

Is  the Coalition  scared of scrutiny? !!

On Wednesday, Abbott said he couldn’t give his numbers to Treasury because they could not understand how the Opposition’s numbers were put together.

Twenty-four hours ago, the story changed.
Andrew Robb proclaimed that there was no chance that Treasury would see their costings until the alleged Treasury leaker was identified and prosecuted. The ‘process’ was corrupt – and by inference, so was Treasury. The mere suggestion that Treasury should see the Coalition’s numbers was outrageous, not to be contemplated. The Independents could see the private audit completed by WHK Horwath, but that was it. (And it’s worth noting that the firm in question is now the subject of a complaint to the Institute of Chartered Accountants). Robb drew a sharp line in the sand, and if the Independents didn’t like it, tough.
In fact, the Coalition claimed, Gillard’s willingness to co-operate with the Independents’ requests showed that she was willing to ‘trash the Westminster system’. They called her ‘weak’, and an ‘appeaser’. By contrast, Abbott was taking a ‘principled stand’.

Now, another day further on, the story has changed again.
Suddenly, the corrupt process no longer exists. Suddenly, Treasury is capable of understanding the Opposition’s costings. With a wave of some political magic wand, Abbott has fixed the problem and Treasury is no longer under a cloud. How confident, how masterful, how – Prime Ministerial.

It’s been a long, long time since I’ve seen spin this blatant. And this stupid.

You only have to read the letters exchanged between Abbott and Gillard to see that the story is very different to what Abbott announced not twenty minutes ago. The Herald-Sun helpfully provided links to them in the article linked above. Media conferences given by the respective leaders can be found via ABC News or Sky News.

http://consciencevote.wordpress.com/2010/08/27/spin-me-right-round-baby/

Verge wrote on Aug 27^th, 2010 at 4:38pm:

Please delete wrote on Aug 27th, 2010 at 3:59pm: The institute revealed late yesterday it had received a complaint about the conduct of two members of WHK Horwath. The Age reported last week that Sydney University accountancy professor Bob Walker was to make the complaint in a private capacity, arguing it was not an audit in accordance with the relevant standard I am interested in what is the exact issue. Failing to comply with one of the hundred of standards is one thing, and could have been overlooked unintentionally, however people are suggesting the company has inappropirately, which is another whole issue.

Agreed!

Thanks to Vegitamatey's link, I'm trying to trace the issues on a dodgy netbook comfuser via a slow Macca's Wifi connection...

Meantime, here's the relevant covering letter to Abbott & Co: -

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_KbiBt2BFLiI/TG2oBGG7LJI/AAAAAAAABs4/MJSbhBbyHAk/s1600/WHK+HORWATH+LETTER.JPG

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_KbiBt2BFLiI/TG2oBGG7LJI/AAAAAAAABs4/MJSbhBbyHAk/s1600/WHK+HORWATH+LETTER.JPG

Verge wrote on Aug 27^th, 2010 at 3:56pm:

buzzanddidj wrote on Aug 27th, 2010 at 3:19pm: A Born-to-Rule mindset is part of Liberal Party DNA The Liberal Party of Australia has ALWAYS seen itself as a government-in-exile when on the opposition benches Abbot thought he had it 'in the bag' before election day This born to rule line you keep spouting is utter garbage. No party wants to sit on the opposition side. The lines of support for both parties is so seriously blurred these days to make such claims is just sad.

A TYPICAL response - from the self-proclaimed Ruling Class

Also thanks to Vegitamatey: -

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/special-reports/heats-on-tony-abbott-to-show-independents-election-policy-costings/story-fn5ko0pw-1225910669329


Quote:

Tony Abbott opens books to independents bloc    * Matthew Schulz and AAP        * August 27, 2010     * 64 comments UPDATE 2.35pm: TONY Abbott has backed down on key independents demands for costings on its election promises, Julia Gillard says. Prime Minister Julia Gillard said a short time ago, that Mr Abbott had agreed to give briefings on costings of policies and promises to three crossbench MPs, after agreeing to make crucial changes to caretaker conditions. Three country MPs Bob Katter, Tony Windsor and Rob Oakeshott will have the final say on who will form government and demanded to be briefed on how those election promises would affect the bottom line, among seven demands. Ms Gillard said the "total range" of costings of Labor and Coalition policies would be provided. "I am pleased to report that Mr Abbott has generally agree that the independents should be able to get the material they seek.," Ms Gillard said in the lunchtime announcement. She said her office and Mr Abbott had exchanged a number of letters since mid-week about the issue, before they struck the agreement. Read the blow-by-blow negotiations between Julia Gillard and Tony Abbott, and the internal briefing to Ms Gillard from Prime Minister and Cabinet below. PM&C briefing to the PM on the independents' request for information http://mp3.news.com.au/hwt/PMC%20Brief.pdf PM's letter to Tony Abbott 25 August 2010 http://mp3.news.com.au/hwt/PM%20to%20Leader%20of%20the%20Opposition%2025%20Aug.pdf PM's letter to Tony Abbott 26 August 2010 http://mp3.news.com.au/hwt/PM%20to%20Leader%20of%20the%20Opposition%2026%20Aug.pdf PM's letter to Tony Abbott 27 August 2010 http://mp3.news.com.au/hwt/PM%20to%20Leader%20of%20the%20Opposition%2027%20August%202010.pdf Tony Abbott's response to the PM 27 August 2010 http://mp3.news.com.au/hwt/Response%20to%20Caretaker%20PM.pdf “I am pleased to report that Mr Abbott has generally agreed that the independents should be able to get the material that they seek,'' she said. “I welcome Mr Abbott's general agreement to that.'' After scheduling a live media conference, Ms Gillard delaying her appearance for about 45 minutes, before receiving the final assent from Mr Abbott. Ms Gillard stressed the independents would get the briefing and “what they do with that is up to them”. But she called on Mr Abbott to be “as transparent, open and honest with the Australian people as I am prepared to be” and allow the public to see the costings too. Ms Gillard said that after Treasury had completed its assessment of Opposition costings, they should be released publicly, the same way Labor had released the costs of its promises. “Every Australian has access to the government's costings. Every Australian should have access to Mr Abbott's costings done by Treasury,'' she said. “That is fundamental to the national interest and Mr Abbott should agree to that. “It seems to me that Mr Abbott cannot find a credible objection to that.'' Mr Abbott’s agreement came with conditions including that any background information, costings and assumptions not be given to Ms Gillard’s office, Treasury or the Department of Finance. “And of course, I've agreed to that,'' she said. Mr Abbott also demanded that the ALP give details of its mineral resources rent tax and $43 billion broadband network, although Ms Gillard pointed out that information was already contained it the pre-election fiscal outlook Both leaders had agreed to amend caretaker government conventions so that the bloc of three independent MPs could be given a Treasury briefing about the budget impact of Labor and coalition policies. Ms Gillard said the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet had advised her about the changes needed. Ms Gillard said her actions had been focused on continuing to provide "stable and responsible government" throughout the negotiations. Coalition won't play the spoiler Along the same lines, Opposition leader Tony Abbott today stated he would not back a Family First threat to block supply as he was accused of trying to force fresh elections. Mr Abbott indicated today that the Coalition would be responsible and not combine with Senator Fielding to block supply. Family First senator Steve Fielding had threatened to throw a spanner in the works by blocking legislation by any Labor government after the Australian people decided they did not want the Labor government returned for a further three years. “The election gave Labor a huge slap across the face, saying you're not worthy of a second term,'' he told ABC Radio today. Senator Fielding, who is struggling to retain his own place in Parliament following the election, is one of seven crossbenchers who will hold the balance of power in the Upper House until June 30, 2011. He would not rule out voting against all Labor legislation or guaranteeing support for government supply bills. The coalition with Senator Fielding's support could stymie any legislation that comes from the lower house during the first eight or nine months of the new parliament. Senator Fielding said the governor-general needed to take into account the situation in both houses of parliament when considering... ...

Please delete wrote on Aug 27^th, 2010 at 2:46pm:

Another election would be interesting - would the liblabs have any money for advertising??

The question you should be asking is if LABOR have the money for an election.

buzzanddidj wrote on Aug 27^th, 2010 at 6:51pm:

Verge wrote on Aug 27th, 2010 at 3:56pm: buzzanddidj wrote on Aug 27th, 2010 at 3:19pm: A Born-to-Rule mindset is part of Liberal Party DNA The Liberal Party of Australia has ALWAYS seen itself as a government-in-exile when on the opposition benches Abbot thought he had it 'in the bag' before election day This born to rule line you keep spouting is utter garbage. No party wants to sit on the opposition side. The lines of support for both parties is so seriously blurred these days to make such claims is just sad. A TYPICAL response - from the self-proclaimed Ruling Class

The reason that bitter losers like yourself call it the "ruling Class' is that the libs spend far mor time in govt than in opposition. So much time in fact that we can be considered the Ruling Class because we do in fact RULE most of the time!

Please delete wrote on Aug 27^th, 2010 at 3:59pm:

Mr Robb also defended WHK Howarth's work, as the Institute of Chartered Accountants launched a formal investigation into its conduct. The institute revealed late yesterday it had received a complaint about the conduct of two members of WHK Horwath. The Age reported last week that Sydney University accountancy professor Bob Walker was to make the complaint in a private capacity, arguing it was not an audit in accordance with the relevant standard, despite Coalition figures including shadow treasurer Joe Hockey repeatedly calling it an audit. The institute will decide whether to refer the complaint to its professional conduct tribunal, ''which has the power to impose sanctions on individual members who act inappropriately''.

And you dont smell a POLITICAL element to this???? seriously, think about why such a 'complaint' has come about JUST NOW and amazingly about the Lib Party?  If you dont think it is political in nature then you are a fool. If it WERENT political in nature, the complaint would be held back a few weeks until it could be shown to NOT be political!

urgh....uhm....aaahhhh......turn the boats around

It's Tony on the boat phone




http://resources2.news.com.au/images/2010/08/22/1225908/458086-tony-abbott.jpg

Apparently it's 73 all now, just goes to show people hate labor and liberals the same.

longweekend58 wrote on Aug 27^th, 2010 at 7:07pm:

Please delete wrote on Aug 27th, 2010 at 3:59pm: The Age reported last week that Sydney University accountancy professor Bob Walker was to make the complaint in a private capacity, arguing it was not an audit in accordance with the relevant standard, despite Coalition figures including shadow treasurer Joe Hockey repeatedly calling it an audit. And you dont smell a POLITICAL element to this???? seriously, think about why such a 'complaint' has come about JUST NOW and amazingly about the Lib Party?  If you dont think it is political in nature then you are a fool. If it WERENT political in nature, the complaint would be held back a few weeks until it could be shown to NOT be political!

LOL...there's a political element to all of this - noting that the Libs ought to have stuck to their own Charter of Budget Honesty in the first instance and not sought to subvert the political procedural precedent that they themselves set (and previously held the Labs to)!

That said, here's the text of Abbott's last aforementioned letter to Gillard: -



Quote:

The Hon. Tony Abbott MHR Leader of the Opposition Parliament House, Canberra ACT 2600. Tel: (02) 6277 4022 Fax: (02) 6277 8562 27 August 2010 Hon Julia Gillard MP Caretaker Prime Minister Parliament House CANBERRA ACT 2600 Dear Ms Gillard Thank you for your letter dated 25 August 2010 enclosing advice you sought from the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet in relation to the various requests for information from Hon Bob Katter MP, Mr Tony Windsor MP and Mr Robert Oakeshott MP. In the first instance, I note that access to information under the ‘caretaker conventions’ is extended only to the Caretaker Government and the Opposition. However, I support providing the three unaligned independents with access to economic advice from the Secretary of Treasury and the Secretary of Finance under the same ‘caretaker convention’ parameters as the briefing that was afforded to me earlier this week. I also support the provision of caretaker ministerial briefs to the three unaligned independents and I will make my shadow ministers similarly available to them next week. An extension of the ‘caretaker convention’ briefings to include ‘the costings and impacts of Government and Opposition election promises and policies on the Budget’ requires additional considerations and would provide to the independents with a level of information that has not even been provided to the Opposition at this time. I have considered the advice provided by the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet carefully and my Chief of Staff has held supplementary oral briefings with the Secretary. With this additional information, I make the following comments: 1) The Opposition will support the provision of briefing information to the three unaligned independents that extend beyond the scope of normal ‘caretaker convention’ briefings in strict accordance with the proposal put forward by Secretary Moran in his advice dated 25 August 2010 at Attachment C with a number of additional caveats: i. That the Secretary of the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet provide an undertaking that information provided to the Department in this process is kept confidential and not provided to the caretaker Prime Minister or her office (I note he indicated a willingness to give this undertaking in his meeting with my Chief of Staff); ii. That the Secretary of the Treasury provide an undertaking that information provided to the Department in this process is kept confidential and not provided to the caretaker Treasurer or his office; iii. That the caretaker Government’s mining tax negotiated with BHP Billiton, Xstrata and Rio Tinto just prior to the election being called is subject to full costing by Treasury and that information is shared with the Opposition to provide a proper Budget assessment; iv. That the caretaker Government’s NBN proposal be subject to full costing by Treasury and that information is shared with the Opposition to provide a proper Budget assessment; 2) That the final arrangements for consultations with the three unaligned independents as proposed in Attachment C is settled by Secretary Moran and Secretary Henry with my office; 3) That the Coalition’s agreement to the release of information to the three unaligned independents is not taken to be agreement to release of information beyond the immediate parties and that any release or briefings to other independents or parties be subject to separate request and consultation; and 4) That the Opposition makes it clear to the caretaker Government that it will vehemently oppose any release of the formal ‘Incoming Government Briefs’ prepared for a new or returned government. These briefs are prepared with particular recipients in mind and could not go to others without compromising the integrity of the Westminster process. As a former Cabinet Minister, I regard preserving the confidentiality of these ‘Incoming Government Briefs’ as essential to the provision of frank and fearless advice by the public service. I have copied this letter to the Secretary of the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet Mr Terry Moran and the Secretary of Treasury, Mr Ken Henry. Yours sincerely TONY ABBOTT

Well it seems now that Abbott will become PM with a 76/74 majority. About time too!

And who do you want for a PM ?

a backstabbing, billion $ losing, g/f of a hairdresser?

Or an Ironman who makes the right decision under pressure ?

Sprintcyclist wrote on Aug 27^th, 2010 at 7:37pm:

And who do you want for a PM ? a backstabbing, billion $ losing, g/f of a hairdresser? Or an Ironman who makes the right decision under pressure ?

Abbott has earned the right with a significantly higher vote and a higher number of seats. (I am including tony crook who stood as a coalition member. changing his mind on the night of the election count is a bit late for the voters!)

longweekend58 wrote on Aug 27^th, 2010 at 7:52pm:

Or an Ironman who makes the right decision under pressure ?

A dubious claim clearly unsupported by his record.

longweekend58 wrote on Aug 27^th, 2010 at 7:52pm:

Abbott has earned the right with a significantly higher vote and a higher number of seats. (I am including tony crook who stood as a coalition member. changing his mind on the night of the election count is a bit late for the voters!)

Australian Labor Party      (votes)   5,366,947   (Percentage)  50.41%
Liberal/National Coalition   (votes)  5,279,156   (Percentage)  49.59%



Liberal                          44 divisions won

Australian Labor Party    72  divisions won

When the actual facts show the opposite is true do you then reverse your position to say that Gillard has earned the right or was your original uninformed position somewhat self serving and hypercritical?

as you can see, the situation is beyond measuring borderline majorities. That is not acceptable in this situation. Labor has suffered a massive landslide against it, and should not be permitted to form a minority government by falling over the line on technicalities. Unacceptable!!
To a lot of Australians, particularly given the track record of Labor in this last term, which has caused a LANDSLIDE AGAINST them.
Out. Stand aside.

shampain socialist wrote on Aug 27^th, 2010 at 8:24pm:

as you can see, the situation is beyond measuring borderline majorities. That is not acceptable in this situation. Labor has suffered a massive landslide against it, and should not be permitted to form a minority government by falling over the line on technicalities. Unacceptable!! To a lot of Australians, particularly given the track record of Labor in this last term, which has caused a LANDSLIDE AGAINST them. Out. Stand aside.

I bet if the Liberals had 50.5% and Labor 49.5% you would not be saying to give the result to the loser.

Dnarever wrote on Aug 27^th, 2010 at 8:45pm:

shampain socialist wrote on Aug 27th, 2010 at 8:24pm: as you can see, the situation is beyond measuring borderline majorities. That is not acceptable in this situation. Labor has suffered a massive landslide against it, and should not be permitted to form a minority government by falling over the line on technicalities. Unacceptable!! To a lot of Australians, particularly given the track record of Labor in this last term, which has caused a LANDSLIDE AGAINST them. Out. Stand aside. I bet if the Liberals had 50.5% and Labor 49.5% you would not be saying to give the result to the loser.

Jesus Christ man, you guys don't have moan you know.

Do you not agree that a First Term Government who sees its majority completely wiped out has not been wholeheartedly rejected by the people and must go.

They have been a disaster for so many of us, particularly those of us in the middle incomes.

Dnarever wrote on Aug 27^th, 2010 at 8:18pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Aug 27th, 2010 at 7:52pm: Abbott has earned the right with a significantly higher vote and a higher number of seats. (I am including tony crook who stood as a coalition member. changing his mind on the night of the election count is a bit late for the voters!) Australian Labor Party      (votes)   5,366,947   (Percentage)  50.41% Liberal/National Coalition   (votes)  5,279,156   (Percentage)  49.59% Liberal                          44 divisions won Australian Labor Party    72  divisions won When the actual facts show the opposite is true do you then reverse your position to say that Gillard has earned the right or was your original uninformed position somewhat self serving and hypercritical?

If you want to include in labors vote, votes that actually for other parties then go ahead, but on PRIMARY votes - the only votes we know for sure are guenine, libs hav 500,000 MORE. you want to play the pathetic 2PP route then go ahead - but you wil be seeking to justfiy denying the voters actual intentions - Abbott as PM.

Dnarever wrote on Aug 27^th, 2010 at 8:45pm:

shampain socialist wrote on Aug 27th, 2010 at 8:24pm: as you can see, the situation is beyond measuring borderline majorities. That is not acceptable in this situation. Labor has suffered a massive landslide against it, and should not be permitted to form a minority government by falling over the line on technicalities. Unacceptable!! To a lot of Australians, particularly given the track record of Labor in this last term, which has caused a LANDSLIDE AGAINST them. Out. Stand aside. I bet if the Liberals had 50.5% and Labor 49.5% you would not be saying to give the result to the loser.

Loser? Abbott has more votes and more seats (73). You ahve a funny definition of 'loser'.

longweekend58 wrote on Aug 27^th, 2010 at 9:17pm:

...If you want to include in labors vote, votes that actually for other parties then go ahead, but on PRIMARY votes - the only votes we know for sure are guenine, libs hav 500,000 MORE. you want to play the pathetic 2PP route then go ahead - but you wil be seeking to justfiy denying the voters actual intentions - Abbott as PM.

To put it in perspective:
- more people voted for the Coalition (primary vote);
- fewer people voted against Labor (distributed preferences).

Which more accurately reflects the will of the electorate? It is a preferential system, after all.

Dnarever wrote on Aug 27^th, 2010 at 8:45pm:

shampain socialist wrote on Aug 27th, 2010 at 8:24pm: as you can see, the situation is beyond measuring borderline majorities. That is not acceptable in this situation. Labor has suffered a massive landslide against it, and should not be permitted to form a minority government by falling over the line on technicalities. Unacceptable!! To a lot of Australians, particularly given the track record of Labor in this last term, which has caused a LANDSLIDE AGAINST them. Out. Stand aside. I bet if the Liberals had 50.5% and Labor 49.5% you would not be saying to give the result to the loser.

Yup, and I note that these pro-Libs are conveniently ignoring the fact that the so-called 5.4% "landslide" against the Labs was NOT a 'landslide' to the Libs.

The Libs only just gained 2.0%.

The Greens gained nearly twice that, with a 3.7% swing!

Let us not forget that there was a record informal vote too!

Clearly, the majority of the swinging voters in the electorate were unhappy with the Labs - but: as DNA's above figures show, they were less happy with the Libs!

Abbott has shown himself to be a lying and cheating tosser - and few would trust him as far as they could throw him!

What's probably worse, is that his worshippers are OK with his divisive and evasive deceit and dishonesty...

So far, the Independents haven't had a kind word to say about him - and that's not just because of the way he's behaved since Saturday either! They've known him for years...

longweekend58 wrote on Aug 27^th, 2010 at 9:19pm:

Dnarever wrote on Aug 27th, 2010 at 8:45pm: shampain socialist wrote on Aug 27th, 2010 at 8:24pm: as you can see, the situation is beyond measuring borderline majorities. That is not acceptable in this situation. Labor has suffered a massive landslide against it, and should not be permitted to form a minority government by falling over the line on technicalities. Unacceptable!! To a lot of Australians, particularly given the track record of Labor in this last term, which has caused a LANDSLIDE AGAINST them. Out. Stand aside. I bet if the Liberals had 50.5% and Labor 49.5% you would not be saying to give the result to the loser. Loser? Abbott has more votes and more seats (73). You ahve a funny definition of 'loser'.

Just to add to your enjoyment Longweekend, have you seen the cricket?
This Pakistani 18 year old has just ripped right through our top order......
>:(

Equitist wrote on Aug 27^th, 2010 at 9:29pm:

The Greens got more than twice that, with a 3.7% SWING!

And have the princely return of 1 (yes ONE) MP.
;D

Labor is where it is because it has been unable to have an original thought about Abbott - or anything else, for that matter.
Underestimating Abbott is for idiots - see Turnbull, Rudd, Gillard, almost the entire Australian media, posters here who are hot for a Labor / Green coalition.

Soren wrote on Aug 27^th, 2010 at 9:31pm:

Labor is where it is because it has been unable to have an original thought about Abbott - or anything else, for that matter. Underestimating Abbott is for idiots - see Turnbull, Rudd, Gillard, almost the entire Australian media, posters here who are hot for a Labor / Green coalition.

Abbott ran an excellent campaign.
He had a Labor Party totally underestimate him and he made the right noises about key issues -

The huge debt with which Labor has landed us all.

The influx of utter garbage into the country from the third world on leaky boats.

The absurd idea of taxing us all more to satisfy the whims of the feel good anti-carbon greenies.

The waste of OUR money on useless schemes.


These were issues people care about.
Stop wasting our money, pay back the debt, stop the boats coming and it worked.

A Government has just lost its majority after just ONE TERM.
Almost unheard of!!!

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Aug 27^th, 2010 at 9:31pm:

Equitist wrote on Aug 27th, 2010 at 9:29pm: The Greens got more than twice that, with a 3.7% SWING! And have the princely return of 1 (yes ONE) MP. ;D

For the record, I had typed the post using older figures - and checked the ABC web-site at the last minute and updated the figures. I forgot to change the associated text - hence the apparent mathematical error in the post quoted by Android...

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Aug 27^th, 2010 at 9:34pm:

Soren wrote on Aug 27th, 2010 at 9:31pm: Labor is where it is because it has been unable to have an original thought about Abbott - or anything else, for that matter. Underestimating Abbott is for idiots - see Turnbull, Rudd, Gillard, almost the entire Australian media, posters here who are hot for a Labor / Green coalition. Abbott ran an excellent campaign. He had a Labor Party totally underestimate him and he made the right noises about key issues - The huge debt with which Labor has landed us all. The influx of utter garbage into the country from the third world on leaky boats. The absurd idea of taxing us all more to satisfy the whims of the feel good anti-carbon greenies. The waste of OUR money on useless schemes. These were issues people care about. Stop wasting our money, pay back the debt, stop the boats coming and it worked. A Government has just lost its majority after just ONE TERM. Almost unheard of!!!

FFS, your amoral roots are showing - again...

What is amoral is paying for people who arrive with no skills, no assets and who have paid nothing into the country.

Not that you care about not wasting people's tax dollars.

Amoral is thinking we should accept everyone and anyone without any thought as to how we can afford it.

"What's always fascinating is that the people who scream loudest about how our tax money should be spent are usually the ones who pay the least in the first place"

- A.A Gill.

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Aug 27^th, 2010 at 9:31pm:

Equitist wrote on Aug 27th, 2010 at 9:29pm: The Greens got more than twice that, with a 3.7% SWING! And have the princely return of 1 (yes ONE) MP. ;D

And gained after finishing a distant second in the primary vote. Apparently you lot like to take some pride in getting seats as the result of STRATEGIC preferences from the Liberals.  Who knows... maybe ONE day you perennial losers will gain a seat on your own votes - not those of others!

Latest .......

Seats won: Labor 72, Coalition 73, Greens 1, Others 4. (76 seats required for victory)

Note: The Coalition's total of 73 seats includes Tony Crook from the WA Nationals, however he has indicated he intends to sit on the crossbenches.


http://www.abc.net.au/elections/federal/2010/





So that's 72 Labor - 72 Coalition - 1 Green -  5 Other

ALP's campaign is an absolute joke.. and this is what they pan on slapping a party together with?

ahahaha

Latelines on the ABC....   bbs

8-)....  The election debate with be on last, you watch  ...sigh~

Abbott fights to the very last inch.
He does not waver or blink.
He plays it to the last card.

I want him negotiating on my behalf on the worldwide stage.
he will get the very best for Aussie.

buzzanddidj wrote on Aug 27^th, 2010 at 10:13pm:

Latest ....... Seats won: Labor 72, Coalition 73, Greens 1, Others 4. (76 seats required for victory) Note: The Coalition's total of 73 seats includes Tony Crook from the WA Nationals, however he has indicated he intends to sit on the crossbenches. http://www.abc.net.au/elections/federal/2010/ So that's 72 Labor - 72 Coalition - 1 Green -  5 Other

Very desperate Buzz... the wa NAT does have to support a side in a confidence motion. He cant abstain or he is effectively voting no. so he will have to choose a side and which one do you think that will be? he was elected by a coalition electorate and will support Abbott. the 3 ex-NATs might dislike the coalition (and listening to them you'd say they probably dislike EVERYONE other than themselves) but they HATE labor. They too will support the coalition. that makes 76 votes and govt.

it is getting very close to the time to gloat.  and we will do just that.

Sprintcyclist wrote on Aug 27^th, 2010 at 10:20pm:

Abbott fights to the very last inch. He does not waver or blink. He plays it to the last card. I want him negotiating on my behalf on the worldwide stage. he will get the very best for Aussie.

I think everyone secretly does, with the exemption of the unpatriotic minority who would sooner see our nation raped and or cannibalised by it's own capitalism.

It's a wake up call, we need to protect our beautiful country, and not take anything else for granted.

:)...let alone entrust it's welfare with a dysfunctional Labor party who don't even know who's coming and going among their own ranks.

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Aug 27^th, 2010 at 9:45pm:

What is amoral is paying for people who arrive with no skills, no assets and who have paid nothing into the country.Not that you care about not wasting people's tax dollars. Amoral is thinking we should accept everyone and anyone without any thought as to how we can afford it. "What's always fascinating is that the people who scream loudest about how our tax money should be spent are usually the ones who pay the least in the first place" - A.A Gill.

And what tax have you ever paid into this country andrei you get paid through your company the Channel Island.

You are the one that keeps screaming about how much the goverment is spending

mellie wrote on Aug 27^th, 2010 at 10:27pm:

I think everyone secretly does, with the exemption of the unpatriotic minority who would sooner see our nation raped and or cannibalised by it's own capitalism. It's a wake up call, we need to protect our beautiful country, and not take anything else for granted. :)...let alone entrust it's welfare with a dysfunctional Labor party who don't even know who's coming and going among their own ranks.

Both parties are dysfunctional at the moment. We may as well flip a coin to form a government. I think we'll be forced to have another election.

mellie wrote on Aug 27^th, 2010 at 10:27pm:

Sprintcyclist wrote on Aug 27th, 2010 at 10:20pm: Abbott fights to the very last inch. He does not waver or blink. He plays it to the last card. I want him negotiating on my behalf on the worldwide stage. he will get the very best for Aussie. I think everyone secretly does, with the exemption of the unpatriotic minority who would sooner see our nation raped and or cannibalised by it's own capitalism. It's a wake up call, we need to protect our beautiful country, and not take anything else for granted. :)...let alone entrust it's welfare with a dysfunctional Labor party who don't even know who's coming and going among their own ranks.

DoG you pair come up with some ridiculous shyte...

mantra wrote on Aug 27^th, 2010 at 10:33pm:

mellie wrote on Aug 27th, 2010 at 10:27pm: I think everyone secretly does, with the exemption of the unpatriotic minority who would sooner see our nation raped and or cannibalised by it's own capitalism. It's a wake up call, we need to protect our beautiful country, and not take anything else for granted. :)...let alone entrust it's welfare with a dysfunctional Labor party who don't even know who's coming and going among their own ranks. Both parties are dysfunctional at the moment. We may as well flip a coin to form a government. I think we'll be forced to have another election.

The Coalition are not dysfunctional. Quite the contrary in fact. They are ready to assume office and only waiting on the interminable independants to finally end their embarrassing grandstanding and get to vote for a govt.

Equitist wrote on Aug 27^th, 2010 at 10:40pm:

mellie wrote on Aug 27th, 2010 at 10:27pm: Sprintcyclist wrote on Aug 27th, 2010 at 10:20pm: Abbott fights to the very last inch. He does not waver or blink. He plays it to the last card. I want him negotiating on my behalf on the worldwide stage. he will get the very best for Aussie. I think everyone secretly does, with the exemption of the unpatriotic minority who would sooner see our nation raped and or cannibalised by it's own capitalism. It's a wake up call, we need to protect our beautiful country, and not take anything else for granted. :)...let alone entrust it's welfare with a dysfunctional Labor party who don't even know who's coming and going among their own ranks. DoG you pair come up with some ridiculous shyte...

Surely EVEN YOU are not going to say that labor have been even close to competent are you?  Pleas say yes... I so need the laugh!!!

longweekend58 wrote on Aug 27^th, 2010 at 10:24pm:

buzzanddidj wrote on Aug 27th, 2010 at 10:13pm: Latest ....... Seats won: Labor 72, Coalition 73, Greens 1, Others 4. (76 seats required for victory) Note: The Coalition's total of 73 seats includes Tony Crook from the WA Nationals, however he has indicated he intends to sit on the crossbenches. http://www.abc.net.au/elections/federal/2010/ So that's 72 Labor - 72 Coalition - 1 Green -  5 Other Very desperate Buzz... the wa NAT does have to support a side in a confidence motion. He cant abstain or he is effectively voting no. so he will have to choose a side and which one do you think that will be? he was elected by a coalition electorate and will support Abbott. the 3 ex-NATs might dislike the coalition (and listening to them you'd say they probably dislike EVERYONE other than themselves) but they HATE labor. They too will support the coalition. that makes 76 votes and govt. it is getting very close to the time to gloat.  and we will do just that.

Why wait ?

You now have 'one of your own' in the new Senate ....




BALLARAT blacksmith John Madigan never expected he would be preparing for life in Canberra, as the first Democratic Labor Party representative there for 36 years

It is not yet certain the anti-communist, largely Catholic party will take the final Victorian Senate seat from Family First's Steve Fielding, and the DLP is carefully not claiming it. But the party's only state MP, Peter Kavanagh, yesterday claimed it was ''back in business''.

The DLP held the balance of power in the federal Senate from 1970 to 1974, but was wiped out in the double-dissolution election of 1974, losing every seat.

On Saturday, it polled fifth with 2.24 per cent of the vote, behind Labour, the Coalition, Greens and Family First - and only .01 per cent ahead of the Australian Sex Party - but, with about 70 per cent of the vote counted, had moved past Family First and the second Liberal on preferences to hold the last quota.

Mr Madigan, 44, said the expected a hung parliament would be a good result because it would keep whoever was the government on its toes. But he would not ally himself with either major party, saying, ''I vote with my conscience and the principles I've grown up with. The DLP philosophy is to judge people and policy on their merits.'' But he shares some conservative social policies with the man he may replace. ''I'm unashamedly pro-life and for the protection and sanctity of life, from the moment of conception to natural death. That's a cornerstone of the DLP.''
The father of two said: ''I'm sure there will be a call for a recount. I don't covet the position. If it turns out it's correct, it's a great responsibility. I hope I can make a contribution.''

He said he grew up in a home that identified strongly with the DLP's inspirers, Catholic activist B. A. Santamaria, Melbourne archbishop Daniel Mannix, Frank McManus, Vince Gair and Jack Little. ''B. A. Santamaria was a great Australian, and a very humble man,'' Mr Madigan said.

The DLP split from Labour in the 1950s over concerns that communists were controlling the trade unions, and was blamed for keeping Labour out of power from then until 1972 because it instructed supporters to give their preferences to the Liberals rather than Labour. In 1969, when Gough Whitlam's Labour won 18 seats back from the Coalition, another four seats - achievable if Labour had DLP preferences - would have won it the election.

The DLP was wound up in 1978, but reconstituted soon after. It fielded candidates in all states on Saturday, but is strongest in Victoria


http://www.theage.com.au/federal-election/ballarat-blacksmith-forges-ahead-with-...




About ....

The party has a comprehensive policy platform, and Peter Kavanagh has referred to the heritage of the historic Democratic Labor Party, saying that "The DLP remains the only political party in Australia which is pro-family, pro-life and genuinely pro-worker."

The DLP website claims to be not “left” or “right” but centre-“decentralist”.
The DLP’s stated principles are “democracy”, “liberty” and “peace”.

Its policies promote:

the pro-life position (against abortion, euthanasia and the destruction of human embryos;
traditional marriage and the natural family (opposed to giving homosexual unions the same status as marriage)
economic and social justice (sharing out/decentralising power and resources);
a decent society (its policies and values are influenced by Christian thought as to the definition of decency);
a self-reliant and secure Australia (which means building up defensive capacity).
These policies are not dissimilar to the five primacies of the National Civic Council (NCC), however the DLP does not regard itself as a Catholic or Christian party as such.
An examination of its policies indicate that the DLP is opposed to libertarianism in the form of economic rationalism (neo-liberalism) and in the form of “progressive” social liberalism.


http://www.dlp.org.au/

longweekend58 wrote on Aug 27^th, 2010 at 10:45pm:

Surely EVEN YOU are not going to say that labor have been even close to competent are you?  Pleas say yes... I so need the laugh!!!

The Rudd/Gillard Labs were no less competent than their Howard/Costello Lib predecessors - if anything, they were far more responsible and honourable...

The main difference lies in the volumes of petty whinging and divisive doublespeak that their respective Oppositions got media attention on...

If you were objective and honest, then you would acknowledge that: the Howardian Era was riddled with wanton opportunity costs, waste, porkbarrelling, neglect and incompetence - but the Lab Opposition (and the media) didn't crap on about every petty detail...

In particular, the Lab Opposition had the integrity not to whinge and whine about the little short-term things - and instead focused on the bigger, longer term issues...

Certainly the Libs copped a lot of documented flack, about their counter-productive antics from the business community, right wing think tanks and welfare organisations - it is just that it wasn't publicised ad nauseum ad infinitum and blown out of all proportion (if anything, it was metaphorically swept under the media carpet by those who had a partisan or other vested interest in maintaining the status quo)...

You know it, I know it!

Sprintcyclist wrote on Aug 27^th, 2010 at 10:20pm:

Abbott fights to the very last inch. He does not waver or blink. He plays it to the last card. I want him negotiating on my behalf on the worldwide stage. he will get the very best for Aussie.

Abbott's pugnacious aggression will probably have us at war on several fronts if he becomes Prime Minister. The man's dangerous.

mantra wrote on Aug 27^th, 2010 at 10:33pm:

Both parties are dysfunctional at the moment.

So how do we fix them? A democracy needs functional politics. Would we be better off without parties?


mantra wrote on Aug 27^th, 2010 at 10:33pm:

We may as well flip a coin to form a government.

At least it would be cheap. :)


mantra wrote on Aug 27^th, 2010 at 10:33pm:

I think we'll be forced to have another election.

I hope not. Right now, what we have is what we need. Whoever forms government should know they have no mandate. Of course, they won't admit that.

Abbott runs out of his own press conferences! Even now!

No thanks, I want a doughtier PM than that simian representing Australia! Julia Gillard is every inch the PM. The Indies will support her for sure. Sure he may try a bit more to become PM but after that?

The Long Depression is about to hit, housing in the US went backwards, the Tories are ripping £130Bn out of UK Budget = millions unemployed, same thing is happening all over europe. We will have Depression and deflation too. I do NOT want a simian that says he is “bored with economics” and doesn’t understand anything complex!

<<Abbott's pugnacious aggression will probably have us at war on several fronts if he becomes Prime Minister. The man's dangerous. >>
......................................................................................

That could be plan B, if he can't get the unemployed down the mines, he'll get them in the forces for 'national protection'. He is dangerous.

# wrote on Aug 28^th, 2010 at 8:12am:

Sprintcyclist wrote on Aug 27th, 2010 at 10:20pm: Abbott fights to the very last inch. He does not waver or blink. He plays it to the last card. I want him negotiating on my behalf on the worldwide stage. he will get the very best for Aussie. Abbott's pugnacious aggression will probably have us at war on several fronts if he becomes Prime Minister. The man's dangerous.

Agreed, David!

Unfortunately, most right whingers can't see past the divisive and draconian win/lose dogma that extremists like Abbott champion...

Apparently, they don't see the parallels betwixt Abbott and that other rabid puppet GWB - he too looks like a dangerous idiot on the world stage and he won't ever be regarded with respect at an inter/national level...

If only they had the capacity to appreciate the moderating value of win/win ideology, eh!?

Equitist wrote on Aug 28^th, 2010 at 7:55am:

longweekend58 wrote on Aug 27th, 2010 at 10:45pm: Surely EVEN YOU are not going to say that labor have been even close to competent are you?  Pleas say yes... I so need the laugh!!! The Rudd/Gillard Labs were no less competent than their Howard/Costello Lib predecessors - if anything, they were far more responsible and honourable... The main difference lies in the volumes of petty whinging and divisive doublespeak that their respective Oppositions got media attention on... If you were objective and honest, then you would acknowledge that: the Howardian Era was riddled with wanton opportunity costs, waste, porkbarrelling, neglect and incompetence - but the Lab Opposition (and the media) didn't crap on about every petty detail... In particular, the Lab Opposition had the integrity not to whinge and whine about the little short-term things - and instead focused on the bigger, longer term issues... Certainly the Libs copped a lot of documented flack, about their counter-productive antics from the business community, right wing think tanks and welfare organisations - it is just that it wasn't publicised ad nauseum ad infinitum and blown out of all proportion (if anything, it was metaphorically swept under the media carpet by those who had a partisan or other vested interest in maintaining the status quo)... You know it, I know it!

You can't get sense from an idiot like Thy Egotist..........what was that egghead........massive surplus turned into a massive DEBT in three years...........that's right the Dudd/Dillard government surely acted "responsibly"...........oh yes, then the "honourable" Dillard really gave the Dudd a leg up...... ;D

Shyte for brains....... :D

Coalition(73) plus 4 independents equals 77. Done!

Gillard, Rudd, Bob Brown, and Adam Bandt can all go and have a beer summit together, munching over Bob Brown’s grilled banana and cream. All strongly advised to wear heavy body gear.

Del_has_returned wrote on Aug 28^th, 2010 at 8:28am:

Equitist wrote on Aug 28th, 2010 at 7:55am: longweekend58 wrote on Aug 27th, 2010 at 10:45pm: Surely EVEN YOU are not going to say that labor have been even close to competent are you?  Pleas say yes... I so need the laugh!!! The Rudd/Gillard Labs were no less competent than their Howard/Costello Lib predecessors - if anything, they were far more responsible and honourable... The main difference lies in the volumes of petty whinging and divisive doublespeak that their respective Oppositions got media attention on... If you were objective and honest, then you would acknowledge that: the Howardian Era was riddled with wanton opportunity costs, waste, porkbarrelling, neglect and incompetence - but the Lab Opposition (and the media) didn't crap on about every petty detail... In particular, the Lab Opposition had the integrity not to whinge and whine about the little short-term things - and instead focused on the bigger, longer term issues... Certainly the Libs copped a lot of documented flack, about their counter-productive antics from the business community, right wing think tanks and welfare organisations - it is just that it wasn't publicised ad nauseum ad infinitum and blown out of all proportion (if anything, it was metaphorically swept under the media carpet by those who had a partisan or other vested interest in maintaining the status quo)... You know it, I know it! You can't get sense from an idiot like Thy Egotist..........what was that egghead........massive surplus turned into a massive DEBT in three years...........that's right the Dudd/Dillard government surely acted "responsibly"...........oh yes, then the "honourable" Dillard really gave the Dudd a leg up...... ;D Shyte for brains....... :D

Hey Shyte for Brains!

Howz about you formally document your analysis of the Federal Budgets from FY06 onwards - paying particular attention to tax revenue streams and black hole WEALTHfare waste under Howardian policies - ta!?

I especially look forward to reviewing your figures on the immediate Post-Howardian Structural Deficit...

;)

simonhall1900 wrote on Aug 28^th, 2010 at 8:31am:

Coalition(73) plus 4 independents equals 77. Done! Gillard, Rudd, Bob Brown, and Adam Bandt can all go and have a beer summit together, munching over Bob Brown’s grilled banana and cream. All strongly advised to wear heavy body gear.

What makes you so sure of that simple outcome, Simon - and, given that the Libs are split right down the middle, how long do you think that Abbott could keep such a loose rabble of a Coalition going!?

In particular, have the powerful Moderates like Turnbull and Hockey - and their supporters - been sufficiently neutered by attack-dogs Abbott & Co!?

simonhall1900 wrote on Aug 28^th, 2010 at 8:31am:

Coalition(73) plus 4 independents equals 77. Done!

Except the WA National says he isn't in the Coalition and the Green has declared for Labor. Don't count your chickens before they hatch.

Equitist wrote on Aug 28^th, 2010 at 8:35am:

Del_has_returned wrote on Aug 28th, 2010 at 8:28am: Equitist wrote on Aug 28th, 2010 at 7:55am: longweekend58 wrote on Aug 27th, 2010 at 10:45pm: Surely EVEN YOU are not going to say that labor have been even close to competent are you?  Pleas say yes... I so need the laugh!!! The Rudd/Gillard Labs were no less competent than their Howard/Costello Lib predecessors - if anything, they were far more responsible and honourable... The main difference lies in the volumes of petty whinging and divisive doublespeak that their respective Oppositions got media attention on... If you were objective and honest, then you would acknowledge that: the Howardian Era was riddled with wanton opportunity costs, waste, porkbarrelling, neglect and incompetence - but the Lab Opposition (and the media) didn't crap on about every petty detail... In particular, the Lab Opposition had the integrity not to whinge and whine about the little short-term things - and instead focused on the bigger, longer term issues... Certainly the Libs copped a lot of documented flack, about their counter-productive antics from the business community, right wing think tanks and welfare organisations - it is just that it wasn't publicised ad nauseum ad infinitum and blown out of all proportion (if anything, it was metaphorically swept under the media carpet by those who had a partisan or other vested interest in maintaining the status quo)... You know it, I know it! You can't get sense from an idiot like Thy Egotist..........what was that egghead........massive surplus turned into a massive DEBT in three years...........that's right the Dudd/Dillard government surely acted "responsibly"...........oh yes, then the "honourable" Dillard really gave the Dudd a leg up...... ;D Shyte for brains....... :D Hey Shyte for Brains! Howz about you formally document your analysis of the Federal Budgets from FY06 onwards - paying particular attention to tax revenue streams and black hole WEALTHfare waste under Howardian policies - ta!? I especially look forward to reviewing your figures on the immediate Post-Howardian Structural Deficit... ;)

The only "black hole" is the VOID between your smacking ears dickhead...........just like Dillard........not an original thought in your empty head.........Shyte for brains...... ;D ;D ;D

Even Costello had a deficit one year because the economy went into a minor recession.

The GFC was more than a minor recession. In a severe recession we have up to 8-10% unemployment and that unemployment takes years to recover and is a drain on the budget  for all that time. This time unemployment maxed at 5.8% and since then rapid job creation has seen that fall to 5.1% then 5.3% due to an increase in the participation rate. It is estimated that the stimulus returned $16m in tax revenue—much, much better than8-10% unemployment for a decade!

Now a Long Recession, entirely induced by so called “deficit hawks” will clamp down and eventually we will feel that due to china buying less and less of our dirt. This will be tricky to handle—so no PM who says economics is a bore, please!

Del_has_returned wrote on Aug 28^th, 2010 at 8:42am:

Equitist wrote on Aug 28th, 2010 at 8:35am: Del_has_returned wrote on Aug 28th, 2010 at 8:28am: Equitist wrote on Aug 28th, 2010 at 7:55am: longweekend58 wrote on Aug 27th, 2010 at 10:45pm: Surely EVEN YOU are not going to say that labor have been even close to competent are you?  Pleas say yes... I so need the laugh!!! The Rudd/Gillard Labs were no less competent than their Howard/Costello Lib predecessors - if anything, they were far more responsible and honourable... The main difference lies in the volumes of petty whinging and divisive doublespeak that their respective Oppositions got media attention on... If you were objective and honest, then you would acknowledge that: the Howardian Era was riddled with wanton opportunity costs, waste, porkbarrelling, neglect and incompetence - but the Lab Opposition (and the media) didn't crap on about every petty detail... In particular, the Lab Opposition had the integrity not to whinge and whine about the little short-term things - and instead focused on the bigger, longer term issues... Certainly the Libs copped a lot of documented flack, about their counter-productive antics from the business community, right wing think tanks and welfare organisations - it is just that it wasn't publicised ad nauseum ad infinitum and blown out of all proportion (if anything, it was metaphorically swept under the media carpet by those who had a partisan or other vested interest in maintaining the status quo)... You know it, I know it! You can't get sense from an idiot like Thy Egotist..........what was that egghead........massive surplus turned into a massive DEBT in three years...........that's right the Dudd/Dillard government surely acted "responsibly"...........oh yes, then the "honourable" Dillard really gave the Dudd a leg up...... ;D Shyte for brains....... :D Hey Shyte for Brains! Howz about you formally document your analysis of the Federal Budgets from FY06 onwards - paying particular attention to tax revenue streams and black hole WEALTHfare waste under Howardian policies - ta!? I especially look forward to reviewing your figures on the immediate Post-Howardian Structural Deficit... ;) The only "black hole" is the VOID between your smacking ears dickhead...........just like Dillard........not an original thought in your empty head.........Shyte for brains...... ;D ;D ;D

Thanks, parrot, for confirming that you have NFI about economics - nor politics for that matter...

::)

A real governance problem.by Andrew Bartlett, blogg
It is hard to think of a more serious attack on the integrity of a group of
public servants who are largely the same ones who served the Government of
John Howard for more than a decade

As Glen Milne at The Drum notes Abbott’s obstructionist conduct demonstrates
that he’s still stuck in campaign mode. That is; adversarial and aggressive

Hi Thy-

Abbott will always be the Opposition leader , even IF he is the leader. Showing he isn't leadership material at all.....

The Vegetable and you (Shyte for brains) make the perfect team..............two cabbages together ;) ;)

Equitist wrote on Aug 28^th, 2010 at 8:39am:

simonhall1900 wrote on Aug 28th, 2010 at 8:31am: Coalition(73) plus 4 independents equals 77. Done! Gillard, Rudd, Bob Brown, and Adam Bandt can all go and have a beer summit together, munching over Bob Brown’s grilled banana and cream. All strongly advised to wear heavy body gear. What makes you so sure of that simple outcome, Simon - and, given that the Libs are split right down the middle, how long do you think that Abbott could keep such a loose rabble of a Coalition going!? In particular, have the powerful Moderates like Turnbull and Hockey - and their supporters - been sufficiently neutered by attack-dogs Abbott & Co!?

Actually, Simon et al...the negotiation process has only just begun - and attack-dog Abbott is not the right type of leader, to negotiate and honour a power sharing deal with staunch Independents who previously rejected and split with the Coalition...

What makes you so sure, that the Independents won't baulk during the process, over rabid Abbott's habitual bullying and porkbarrelling tactics - and insist on dealing with a more suitable Coalition Leader!?

What will happen, if the Independents declare that they won't negotiate with the Coalition, unless and until the Libs have installed a stable moderate like Turnbull or Hockey at the helm!?

How then will you Libs solve a problem like Tony Abbott!?

Will you go into pragmatic self-preservation mode and cut him down - or will you stubbornly reject the reasonable proposition that the nation needs a sane, predictable, mature, responsible and stable leader!?

I think there is a dung bettle :-[ in this forum...or a flywith sticky feet....

Del_has_returned wrote on Aug 28^th, 2010 at 9:01am:

The Vegetable and you (Shyte for brains) make the perfect team..............two cabbages together ;) ;)

Hi baha...how's that igloo going in Antarctica? value going ever upward I suppose, it must be worth a fortune by now.

How many of your many ID's have you had banned from ozpolitics?

wrote on Aug 28^th, 2010 at 8:55am:

Hi Thy- Abbott will always be the Opposition leader , even IF he is the leader. Showing he isn't leadership material at all.....

Hi Vegitamatey!


wrote on Aug 28^th, 2010 at 8:53am:

A real governance problem.by Andrew Bartlett, blogg It is hard to think of a more serious attack on the integrity of a group of public servants who are largely the same ones who served the Government of John Howard for more than a decade As Glen Milne at The Drum notes Abbott’s obstructionist conduct demonstrates that he’s still stuck in campaign mode. That is; adversarial and aggressive

Indeed, Abbott is an agitator - not a leader! Fact!

Sooner or later, this fact will become apparent, to all but the most dogmatic and rusted-on right whingers...

wrote on Aug 28^th, 2010 at 9:05am:

I think there is a dung bettle :-[ in this forum...or a flywith sticky feet....

BETTLE.....????? FFS ........like I said two cabbages  :D

The Institute of Chartered Accountants have received a complaint….

http://petermartin.blogspot.com/2010/08/robb-says-perth-auditor-as-good-as.html

Not even the “auditor” really understood the Libs’ “costings.”  ;D ;D ;D

Talking about cabbbage and alot of wind...

'If Abbott does not win government this time around, expect behaviour like that
of the Coalition during the Whitlam Government – intent from day one on causing
such disruption that the Government is forced back to an early election

Abbott's Great Big Treasury Backflip , John, True Politik
As late as last night, Coalition Shadow Finance spokesman, Andrew Robb, said
"We don't want to have a fight with these guys (the Independents), but we're
not going to be dictated to and not tug our forelock..'

Darwin wrote on Aug 28^th, 2010 at 8:44am:

Even Costello had a deficit one year because the economy went into a minor recession. The GFC was more than a minor recession. In a severe recession we have up to 8-10% unemployment and that unemployment takes years to recover and is a drain on the budget  for all that time. This time unemployment maxed at 5.8% and since then rapid job creation has seen that fall to 5.1% then 5.3% due to an increase in the participation rate. It is estimated that the stimulus returned $16m in tax revenue—much, much better than8-10% unemployment for a decade! Now a Long Recession, entirely induced by so called “deficit hawks” will clamp down and eventually we will feel that due to china buying less and less of our dirt. This will be tricky to handle—so no PM who says economics is a bore, please!

This is where the waste and incompetence of the previous ALP Federal Government comes back to bite us.  The longer the duration of the Global Financial downturn, the more severely we`ll miss our wasted  National savings and the harder out huge debt will be to service.  Short sighted ALP has inflicted long term damage.  >:(

aussiefree2ride wrote on Aug 28^th, 2010 at 9:21am:

Darwin wrote on Aug 28th, 2010 at 8:44am: Even Costello had a deficit one year because the economy went into a minor recession. The GFC was more than a minor recession. In a severe recession we have up to 8-10% unemployment and that unemployment takes years to recover and is a drain on the budget  for all that time. This time unemployment maxed at 5.8% and since then rapid job creation has seen that fall to 5.1% then 5.3% due to an increase in the participation rate. It is estimated that the stimulus returned $16m in tax revenue—much, much better than8-10% unemployment for a decade! Now a Long Recession, entirely induced by so called “deficit hawks” will clamp down and eventually we will feel that due to china buying less and less of our dirt. This will be tricky to handle—so no PM who says economics is a bore, please! This is where the waste and incompetence of the previous ALP Federal Government comes back to bite us.  The longer the duration of the Global Financial downturn, the more severely we`ll miss our wasted  National savings and the harder out huge debt will be to service.  Short sighted ALP has inflicted long term damage.  >:(

LOL...your ignorant roots are showing...again...

have a look at Wilkie’s website:
http://www.andrewwilkie.org

For instance

 
Quote:

Work Choices    I would never support “Work Choices” or anything like it. The rights of workers must be genuinely protected, for instance their right to a fair day’s pay for a fair day’s work must be enshrined in award safety nets.    Super Profits Tax    The most profitable companies should pay more tax on those profits. But the Rudd Government’s Resource Super Profit Tax was recklessly constructed, especially regarding retrospectivity, threshold and rate. The replacement Minerals Resource Rent Tax also seems far from perfect in its detail and more work will be needed if it is to function well. In both cases the policy appears to have been developed too quickly.   National Broadband Network    The National Broadband Network will genuinely provide essential infrastructure for Australia’s future economic and social prosperity. It must be allowed to proceed.    Asylum seekers    Australia must honour the UN Refugee Convention to which it is a signatory. It must protect people fleeing persecution, war or violence, promptly hear their claims and give refuge to those in genuine need of asylum. The full weight of intelligence, police and legal capabilities should be brought to bear on the people smugglers.    Climate change    Humanity is undoubtedly influencing climate change. Not only does Australia have an environmental and social obligation to help do something about it, but to do so will also be in Australia’s economic interest. A price must be put on carbon pollution, possibly as part of an enhanced Emissions Trading Scheme.

Going on that I would suspect that Wilkie would favor Labor, unless Abbott has some 11th hour change of heart on many issues. Abbott the desperate would backflip on NBN but never on WC, ETS or MRRT! Remember, our worst ever Treasurer, Howard, had to close the “under the harbor” tax loophole, after several times being told by Fraser to do so (notice that the “under the harbor” came back as part of WC) and consequently was hated by big business and that set back his rise to oppn Leader and PM.

So Labor 72 + Green + Wilkie = 74

Wonder if Labor can bribe the WA Nat? Pork for Tuckey’s long-neglected electorate? BW Tuckey is having a prolonged hissy fit about being turfed out, has not spoken to the media yet  :D

Lib 72 + 3 Indies - 1 Speaker = 74

So I think the indies will go Labor’s way 74 + 3 - 1Speaker = 76, 77 with the WA Nat (that Nat only has to support labor in No Confidence motions, or even abstain.)

Quote:

What will happen, if the Independents declare that they won't negotiate with the Coalition, unless and until the Libs have installed a stable moderate like Turnbull or Hockey

As much as I agree with you that Abbott has the potential to be a terribly bad PM, and even your more normal Liberal voter, recognises that he is a "peculiar" person, and the twin edged trait of bully/coward, is always lurking just beneath the surface veneer of moderate respectability, the chance of him being dumped by his party at the present time is unimaginable, even if the Independents asked for it.

So, we need to accept the fact that if the Independents choose to back a coalition minority, Abbott will lead it for some time to come.

Equitist wrote on Aug 28^th, 2010 at 9:24am:

aussiefree2ride wrote on Aug 28th, 2010 at 9:21am: Darwin wrote on Aug 28th, 2010 at 8:44am: Even Costello had a deficit one year because the economy went into a minor recession. The GFC was more than a minor recession. In a severe recession we have up to 8-10% unemployment and that unemployment takes years to recover and is a drain on the budget  for all that time. This time unemployment maxed at 5.8% and since then rapid job creation has seen that fall to 5.1% then 5.3% due to an increase in the participation rate. It is estimated that the stimulus returned $16m in tax revenue—much, much better than8-10% unemployment for a decade! Now a Long Recession, entirely induced by so called “deficit hawks” will clamp down and eventually we will feel that due to china buying less and less of our dirt. This will be tricky to handle—so no PM who says economics is a bore, please! This is where the waste and incompetence of the previous ALP Federal Government comes back to bite us.  The longer the duration of the Global Financial downturn, the more severely we`ll miss our wasted  National savings and the harder out huge debt will be to service.  Short sighted ALP has inflicted long term damage.  >:( LOL...your ignorant roots are showing...again...

I could have sworn I never slept with you?  :-*

Equitist wrote on Aug 28^th, 2010 at 7:55am:

longweekend58 wrote on Aug 27th, 2010 at 10:45pm: Surely EVEN YOU are not going to say that labor have been even close to competent are you?  Pleas say yes... I so need the laugh!!! The Rudd/Gillard Labs were no less competent than their Howard/Costello Lib predecessors - if anything, they were far more responsible and honourable... The main difference lies in the volumes of petty whinging and divisive doublespeak that their respective Oppositions got media attention on... If you were objective and honest, then you would acknowledge that: the Howardian Era was riddled with wanton opportunity costs, waste, porkbarrelling, neglect and incompetence - but the Lab Opposition (and the media) didn't crap on about every petty detail... In particular, the Lab Opposition had the integrity not to whinge and whine about the little short-term things - and instead focused on the bigger, longer term issues... Certainly the Libs copped a lot of documented flack, about their counter-productive antics from the business community, right wing think tanks and welfare organisations - it is just that it wasn't publicised ad nauseum ad infinitum and blown out of all proportion (if anything, it was metaphorically swept under the media carpet by those who had a partisan or other vested interest in maintaining the status quo)... You know it, I know it!

Talk about trying to re-write history...

wrote on Aug 28^th, 2010 at 9:20am:

Talking about cabbbage and alot of wind... Abbott's Great Big Treasury Backflip , John, True Politik As late as last night, Coalition Shadow Finance spokesman, Andrew Robb, said "We don't want to have a fight with these guys (the Independents), but we're not going to be dictated to and not tug our forelock..'

And isnt that actually a highly honourable and proper way to act? Labor are ready to kneel to them to get govt and imagine life in a govt where KATTER called the shots???? The libs are stating that they will not be controlled by these 3 - something you should hope labor is saying as well.

mozzaok wrote on Aug 28^th, 2010 at 9:43am:

Quote: What will happen, if the Independents declare that they won't negotiate with the Coalition, unless and until the Libs have installed a stable moderate like Turnbull or Hockey As much as I agree with you that Abbott has the potential to be a terribly bad PM, and even your more normal Liberal voter, recognises that he is a "peculiar" person, and the twin edged trait of bully/coward, is always lurking just beneath the surface veneer of moderate respectability, the chance of him being dumped by his party at the present time is unimaginable, even if the Independents asked for it. So, we need to accept the fact that if the Independents choose to back a coalition minority, Abbott will lead it for some time to come.

Thank you for a rational assessment of Abbott the leader. the others here are just embarrassing themselves with their paranoid delusions and fantasies. It does not describe labor supporters in a good light.

I am surprised that anyone would still be defending the two major parties after both of their performances over the last few years and especially during the election campaign.
The people have spoken and unless you were an unthinking rusted on Labor or Liberal voter you either voted independent or Green.
The only common sense, straight talking and respect for the Australian people and this country Ive heard since the election has come from the independents and the Greens
Lets have another election in a few months and vote in more independents and Greens  :)

adelcrow wrote on Aug 28^th, 2010 at 10:24am:

I am surprised that anyone would still be defending the two major parties after both of their performances over the last few years and especially during the election campaign. The people have spoken and unless you were an unthinking rusted on Labor or Liberal voter you either voted independent or Green. The only common sense, straight talking and respect for the Australian people and this country Ive heard since the election has come from the independents and the Greens Lets have another election in a few months and vote in more independents and Greens  :)

what straight talking? the Greens come up with a handful of uncosted and unrealistic policies and hte rest are nothing more than sweet-sounding motherhood statements. Frankly, if you voted Green you either didnt know their polcies or were stupid - or both. Sorry, but my contempt for Greens voters is high. You voted for death duties, higher taxes and less democracy.

PASS!

Death duties on a sliding scale starting at 5 million dollars excluding the family home, businesses etc.
I doubt that will effect anyone because we all know people in that bracket are smart enough to already be hiding their real worth and non business assets, investments and money  :)
You are voting for wasting billions more of our money on middle class welfare, pork barreling and western suburbs baby making machines by voting Labor or Liberal.
Anyway...you dont need to vote Green and I would never expect you to agree with any their policies..vote for a right leaning independent my argument is with the two lying, lazy, corrupt major parties not with the left, right or middle ground  :)

adelcrow wrote on Aug 28^th, 2010 at 10:48am:

Death duties on a sliding scale starting at 5 million dollars excluding the family home, businesses etc. I doubt that will effect anyone because we all know people in that bracket are smart enough to already be hiding their real worth and non business assets, investments and money  :) You are voting for wasting billions more of our money on middle class welfare, pork barreling and western suburbs baby making machines by voting Labor or Liberal. Anyway...you dont need to vote Green and I would never expect you to agree with any their policies..vote for a right leaning independent my argument is with the two lying, lazy, corrupt major parties not with the left, right or middle ground  :)

Once a tax come sit is is very very easy to just tweak it a little to bring in more of the revenue that the govt has gotten used to. $5M now and in a few years time back to $2M which includes a LOT of people.

But the point here is that you are defending DEATH DUTIES!! You are supporting a person paying taxes all their life and before they are cold and buried the govt comes along and extorts MORE money from them - after they are dead! There are probably few more morally reprehensible taxes than this one. The fact that it probabyl wont affect you is a very poor rationale for it! That is the 'andrei affect' - supporting ant negative policy that doesnt affect you directly.

As for other Greens policies... it is pretty hard to debate policies that are limited to "make tax fairer" - whatever that is supposed to mean!

aussiefree2ride wrote on Aug 28^th, 2010 at 9:21am:

Darwin wrote on Aug 28th, 2010 at 8:44am: Even Costello had a deficit one year because the economy went into a minor recession. The GFC was more than a minor recession. In a severe recession we have up to 8-10% unemployment and that unemployment takes years to recover and is a drain on the budget  for all that time. This time unemployment maxed at 5.8% and since then rapid job creation has seen that fall to 5.1% then 5.3% due to an increase in the participation rate. It is estimated that the stimulus returned $16m in tax revenue—much, much better than8-10% unemployment for a decade! Now a Long Recession, entirely induced by so called “deficit hawks” will clamp down and eventually we will feel that due to china buying less and less of our dirt. This will be tricky to handle—so no PM who says economics is a bore, please! This is where the waste and incompetence of the previous ALP Federal Government comes back to bite us.  The longer the duration of the Global Financial downturn, the more severely we`ll miss our wasted  National savings and the harder out huge debt will be to service.  Short sighted ALP has inflicted long term damage.  >:(

How incompetence when Labor did save hundreds of thousands of jobs, and that hit to the budget bottom line?

And waste? There have been three enquiries so far show minimal waste in the BER.

Forget downturn, forget GFC, we are facing a Long Depression much like the 1930s. Libs will make that worse like they did last time.

Our debt is pretty minimal, and is mostly due to the drop in tax revenues due to the GFC, compounded by the fact Howard’s pork barreling and middleclass welfare and Costello’s tax cuts for the rich are unsustainable—as I argued even before 2008—and the chickens have come home to roost with the GFC.

If we had 8% unemployment for years and years the Budget would have faced an even heavier hit! For goodness sake, any of you Lib lovers know any economics or simple logic?

Darwin wrote on Aug 28^th, 2010 at 10:56am:

aussiefree2ride wrote on Aug 28th, 2010 at 9:21am: Darwin wrote on Aug 28th, 2010 at 8:44am: Even Costello had a deficit one year because the economy went into a minor recession. The GFC was more than a minor recession. In a severe recession we have up to 8-10% unemployment and that unemployment takes years to recover and is a drain on the budget  for all that time. This time unemployment maxed at 5.8% and since then rapid job creation has seen that fall to 5.1% then 5.3% due to an increase in the participation rate. It is estimated that the stimulus returned $16m in tax revenue—much, much better than8-10% unemployment for a decade! Now a Long Recession, entirely induced by so called “deficit hawks” will clamp down and eventually we will feel that due to china buying less and less of our dirt. This will be tricky to handle—so no PM who says economics is a bore, please! This is where the waste and incompetence of the previous ALP Federal Government comes back to bite us.  The longer the duration of the Global Financial downturn, the more severely we`ll miss our wasted  National savings and the harder out huge debt will be to service.  Short sighted ALP has inflicted long term damage.  >:( How incompetence when Labor did save hundreds of thousands of jobs, and that hit to the budget bottom line? And waste? There have been three enquiries so far show minimal waste in the BER. Forget downturn, forget GFC, we are facing a Long Depression much like the 1930s. Libs will make that worse like they did last time. Our debt is pretty minimal, and is mostly due to the drop in tax revenues due to the GFC, compounded by the fact Howard’s pork barreling and middleclass welfare and Costello’s tax cuts for the rich are unsustainable—as I argued even before 2008—and the chickens have come home to roost with the GFC. If we had 8% unemployment for years and years the Budget would have faced an even heavier hit! For goodness sake, any of you Lib lovers know any economics or simple logic?

and yet anothr post from our stellar fool, Darwin. Virtually everything you posted was either opinion, conjecture or lies.

We expect no better from you, poor deluded labor supporter!

Like I said longweekend..I dont expect you to ever agree with Green policies or vote for them.

Vote for  right leaning independents in both houses and bore it up the inbred born to rulers in the Liberal Party and the corrupt union run Labor Party by putting them last and second to last (in the order of your choice) on your ballot papers  :)

Again with the personal insults are they really necessary or are you just mad you are losing the argument?


Quote:

Laura Tingle’s Friday AFR Canberra observed column is worth the $3 alone.    In this week’s column she says that unless the remaining seats fall noticeably in favour of the Coalition (I think she means 74/71) their strategy is to hand the “poisoned chalice” to Labor.    Opposition Leader Tony Abbott’s approach this week reeks of this, she says.    “Armed with the support of News Ltd, which did everything in its power to get the Coalition into power this time around and which is now already campaigning for a fresh election, the Opposition thinks it would be likely to win another election held in the next six months.” (Emphasis added)    Discredit and destabilise,    “knowing you also have an extra problem, which is that your election costings don’t add up, leaving your economic credibility vulnerable.”    She thinks there are “profound problems”, both in the costings as such and their politics.

http://larvatusprodeo.net/2010/08/27/tingle-on-friday/

longweekend58 wrote on Aug 28^th, 2010 at 11:07am:

and yet anothr post from our stellar fool, Darwin. Virtually everything you posted was either opinion, conjecture or lies. We expect no better from you, poor deluded labor supporter!

LOL, Bates...limp tools who trade in petty platitudes should remember that cyberspace is tracking every barrowload of your bigoted shyte: -

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?action=usersrecentposts;username=longweekend58


Quote:

2       General Discussion / Politicians Suck / Re: Greens alliance spells death knell for Labor on: Today at 11:04am the oddest - and most uninformed - thing that people keep repeating is that NOW the govt will have to deal with the GReens. what happened with labor in the last govt? if the libs didnt support legislation in the senate then they had to... say it... DEAL WITH THE GREENS. In the new senate if the opposition doesnt support the legislation then theywill have to deal with the greens. So tell me again what has changed... besides Mr X no longer having a balance of power vote? Thats right... NOTHING!     3       General Discussion / Politicians Suck / Re: Tony Abbott on: Today at 10:57am And on cue in comes the worst bad-loser of the lot! Darwin, that freak of nature that mocked Galaxy's 17 seat loss prediction only to see that they were virtually spot on. Darwin, that weirdo who continues to contend that Bob Katter will support Labor. Poor losers, one and all.     4       General Discussion / Politicians Suck / Re: Does Abbott think he has it in the bag? on: Today at 10:54am Once a tax come sit is is very very easy to just tweak it a little to bring in more of the revenue that the govt has gotten used to. $5M now and in a few years time back to $2M which includes a LOT of people. But the point here is that you are defending DEATH DUTIES!! You are supporting a person paying taxes all their life and before they are cold and buried the govt comes along and extorts MORE money from them - after they are dead! There are probably few more morally reprehensible taxes than this one. The fact that it probabyl wont affect you is a very poor rationale for it! That is the 'andrei affect' - supporting ant negative policy that doesnt affect you directly. As for other Greens policies... it is pretty hard to debate policies that are limited to "make tax fairer" - whatever that is supposed to mean!     5       General Discussion / Politicians Suck / Re: Greens alliance spells death knell for Labor on: Today at 10:49am I do not understand the Greens slavish devotion to the labor cause. Labor has publically abused them and frequently refused to follow the environmental policies that supposedly got the Greens support in the first place. I just dont get it! The liberals did as much for the environment in the last 3 years as labor did - and from opposition! NOTHING AT ALL. And yet the Greens still fall over themselves to elect a labor govt and now even talking about a formal coalition! They are political amateurs as well as doing so will end any hope of people not believing that 'a vote for the greens is a vote for labor'. Apparently there are a lot of stupid people who didnt realise that was already true! If the Greens and Labor make a coalition then both parties will live (maybe) to regret it. Any pact with the Devil will hurt you!     6       General Discussion / Politicians Suck / Re: Tony Abbott on: Today at 10:42am What is it with you nutjobs and the Senate? CAn you not count??? with Abbott as PM he will still need the Greens votes to pass legislation that Labor opposes. They do not have a majority even with Fielding and mr X. In this, nothing really changes in a year's time. IN effect all that changes is that Libs will need to negotiate only with the Greens instead of fielding and Mr X as well but the Greens STILL will have the power to block legislation if labor opposes it. NOTHING CHANGES. Your paranoia about Abbott is most unbecoming Phil. I expect less of this unjustified craziness from you.     7       General Discussion / Politicians Suck / Re: Greens alliance spells death knell for Labor on: Today at 10:38am ONE SEAT deserves a cabinet post??? Oh Joolya is getting desperate!!!     8       General Discussion / Politicians Suck / Re: Will it be a YES! YES! YES! anticlimax? on: Today at 10:36am You will be needing humour for a very long time to carry you thru the next 15 years of liberal govt where the only 'alternative' to PM Tony Abott will come from withing the Liberal party. Did you read the news today where the indies electorates are demanding that they support a Coalition govt? Or is your anti-liberal filter that good that you naturally filter out any good news for libs and only read that which supports your beloved Labor Party which you grovel before and serve slavishly.     9       General Discussion / Politicians Suck / Re: Tony Abbott on: Today at 10:34am This is an awesome thread. This is where the bad losers form the labor party cheer squad come to vomit up their bile and bad attitude. It is all very entertaining and yet more proof that labor is undeserving of govt. From the lies from Darwin to the extremism of equitsit and of course the juvenile idiocy of vegy and shop-assistant(pansi) all you do is show why the libs will win not only this election but the 4 to come. We are brighter, happier, more intelligent, more rational and less loathsome...

Katter reminds me very much of my father-in-law.

He's a Townsville born and bred man who lives there all his life.

His view and generally those around him, who also are the type of character as Katter.

Melbourne is full of latte sipping wogs.
Sydney is packed with Asians and poofters.
Brisbane to quote him 'wouldn't know shyte from clay when they come up here'

Things are quite simplistic up there and they call it as they see it.

I agree with some of their bluntness.

I just think the funniest thing is to see Buzz aligning himself with these guys this week. LOL

You are certainly a distasteful character Andrei, a self absorbed little, homophobic, racist.
Your family must be so proud.

Could you imagine any function where you would be expected to converse with these extreme right wing loons?

I seriously question the seemingly tenuous relationship these extremists have with reality, I mean how do they function on a daily basis with such overtly dysfunctional personalities, and such extraordinarily distasteful opinions?

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Aug 28^th, 2010 at 12:53pm:

Katter reminds me very much of my father-in-law. He's a Townsville born and bred man who lives there all his life. His view and generally those around him, who also are the type of character as Katter. Melbourne is full of latte sipping wogs. Sydney is packed with Asians and poofters. Brisbane to quote him 'wouldn't know shyte from clay when they come up here' Things are quite simplistic up there and they call it as they see it. I agree with some of their bluntness. I just think the funniest thing is to see Buzz aligning himself with these guys this week. LOL

Actually, he's of Lebanese ancestry, and for what it's worth, I doubt he's gay, rather am thinking Labor are desperately trying to allude to him somehow denouncing his own sexuality, (making his statement about homosexuality OK)....ie...it's PC for a gay to pass remark on their electorates not containing gay's though not really acceptable for heterosexuals, as it appears discriminatory.

I don't believe Katter is Gay.

8-)

The Mad Katter... ;D

mellie wrote on Aug 28^th, 2010 at 3:57pm:

I don't believe Katter is Gay. 8-)

An ex member said last week - "when you point a finger, there's usually 3 pointing back at you". Quite profound!   ::)

This might apply to Katter and if he's 'man' enough to come out - he could just join the Lab/Greens coalition.

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Aug 28^th, 2010 at 12:53pm:

Katter reminds me very much of my father-in-law. He's a Townsville born and bred man who lives there all his life. His view and generally those around him, who also are the type of character as Katter. Melbourne is full of latte sipping wogs. Sydney is packed with Asians and poofters. Brisbane to quote him 'wouldn't know shyte from clay when they come up here' Things are quite simplistic up there and they call it as they see it. I agree with some of their bluntness. I just think the funniest thing is to see Buzz aligning himself with these guys this week. LOL

Qld country and regional areas are full of city folk. The populations of these towns have blown out of all proportion in the last 20+ years, due to sea and tree change people moving away from the big smoke/squash.

Most people in regional towns know city people, have contact with city people and are very much in touch with the city, considering they have to travel to the city for health care etc, due to the lack of it in the country.

If you go to Townsville, you will see the young lads, and the not so young lads in their brand name surf gear, their mp3 players attached, their emo haircuts, the same as Brisbane.

There will be the odd oldie, stuck in a time warp, but that would be the exception.

Townsville is army, international uni students, housing estates and hotels.  

You guys need to do your homework....check out Bob Katter Sr's (His fathers)  Labor roots.

He's a wolf in sheep's clothing.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bob_Katter,_Sr.

A labor man trying to allude to the false notion of him being independent.

8-)...I don't think he's gay, though was attempting to appeal to a conservative electorate.

Of which is quite red-necked, racist and homophobic.

This is why it's very important for any PM to nose out their cabinet, and make sure those within it are who they claim to be.

.....Oh yes, and Kennedy like his father, is pro-Republican also.

Katter employed a right-wing conservative 'face' to hurtle himself into a left-wing republic senate.

We wary of Turn-coat Turnbulls bearing gifts.

8-)

It's quite funny Mellie - my wife is from Townsville and she said to me a couple of days ago that Katter has been around for years up there.

She's seen him various times driving around in his ute with his ten gallon hat on.

Even in Townsville and Charters Towers he is known as "Mad Dog".

To have him deciding the colour of the Government of Australia is quite amusing.

To have Left wingers like Buzz praising his policies in nothing short of bizarre.

I'd quite like him to side with the one that has the little Green MP twerp just to see the fireworks.
The same Katter that called climate change 'a whole heap of bullshyte' in bed with a tree hugger!

Who'd have thunk it.

mozzaok wrote on Aug 28^th, 2010 at 3:49pm:

You are certainly a distasteful character Andrei, a self absorbed little, homophobic, racist. Your family must be so proud. Could you imagine any function where you would be expected to converse with these extreme right wing loons? I seriously question the seemingly tenuous relationship these extremists have with reality, I mean how do they function on a daily basis with such overtly dysfunctional personalities, and such extraordinarily distasteful opinions?

You still sound like buzzzzzzz mozzzzzzzz  ;D


http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y240/pjo1011/182011115646ae91834ca97.gif

Del_has_returned wrote on Aug 28^th, 2010 at 4:59pm:

mozzaok wrote on Aug 28th, 2010 at 3:49pm: You are certainly a distasteful character Andrei, a self absorbed little, homophobic, racist. Your family must be so proud. Could you imagine any function where you would be expected to converse with these extreme right wing loons? I seriously question the seemingly tenuous relationship these extremists have with reality, I mean how do they function on a daily basis with such overtly dysfunctional personalities, and such extraordinarily distasteful opinions? You still sound like buzzzzzzz mozzzzzzzz  ;D

It's difficult to say if that's a compliment for one, the other, or both ?

mozzaok wrote on Aug 28^th, 2010 at 3:49pm:

You are certainly a distasteful character Andrei, a self absorbed little, homophobic, racist. Your family must be so proud. Could you imagine any function where you would be expected to converse with these extreme right wing loons? I seriously question the seemingly tenuous relationship these extremists have with reality, I mean how do they function on a daily basis with such overtly dysfunctional personalities, and such extraordinarily distasteful opinions?

Do you mean the Greens????

Quote:

You are certainly a distasteful character Andrei, a self absorbed little, homophobic, racist.

Leave the troll alone.

Life_goes_on wrote on Aug 28^th, 2010 at 6:26pm:

Quote: You are certainly a distasteful character Andrei, a self absorbed little, homophobic, racist. Leave the troll alone.

Seems like Mozzaok is the troll

buzzanddidj wrote on Aug 27^th, 2010 at 6:51pm:

Verge wrote on Aug 27th, 2010 at 3:56pm: buzzanddidj wrote on Aug 27th, 2010 at 3:19pm: A Born-to-Rule mindset is part of Liberal Party DNA The Liberal Party of Australia has ALWAYS seen itself as a government-in-exile when on the opposition benches Abbot thought he had it 'in the bag' before election day This born to rule line you keep spouting is utter garbage. No party wants to sit on the opposition side. The lines of support for both parties is so seriously blurred these days to make such claims is just sad. A TYPICAL response - from the self-proclaimed Ruling Class

Independent MP Rob Oakeshott has questioned Coalition tactics on forming a minority government after receiving a ''Rambo-style'' phone call from a senior Liberal politician.

Mr Oakeshott said he wanted to know whether a smear campaign, reportedly being launched against him, is an attempt to destabilise his negotiations with the major parties.

Mr Oakeshott, who is in Canberra this week to continue talks, is seeking a ''please explain'' from Opposition Leader Tony Abbott.

He has already received an apology from an unnamed Liberal who called his family home claiming to be ''the Devil'' when his wife answered.

It follows reports that Liberal backbencher Alby Schultz phoned and abused fellow independent Tony Windsor, telling him to back the Coalition in forming government.

Mr Oakeshott said Mr Abbott needed to come clean on whether the calls were part of a wider Liberal strategy.

http://www.theage.com.au/federal-election/oakeshott-slams-rambostyle-prank-calls-20100830-13xy5.html?autostart=1

Crikey, does Tony Abbott actually believe any of this!?

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/opinion/why-im-the-one-to-govern/story-e6frezz0-1225914207324


Quote:

Why I'm the one to govern    * Tony Abbott    * From: The Sunday Telegraph    * September 05, 2010 12:00AM AUSTRALIA is more likely to have stable government from an alliance of 76 broadly like-minded MPs than from a rainbow coalition of fractured Laborites, Greens and country conservatives. Australia is far more likely to get a fresh start from a new government than from a Labor Party that's humble only because it has no choice. Why would the country independents throw a lifeline to a seriously bad government that's just got worse since it executed a democratically elected prime minister? For all her undoubted political skills, Julia Gillard's actual decisions - to subcontract climate change policy to an unelected assembly, to resurrect a previously promised and dumped railway, and to export the boat people problem to an unwilling East Timor (as well as the disastrous school halls program) - suggest that she would be a worse prime minister than Kevin Rudd. Nine weeks ago, on the prime minister's own assessment, the government had lost its way. Two weeks ago, it lost its majority and its legitimacy but it still has not lost office and might actually cling to power through ruthless exploitation of incumbency. Independent and minor party MPs have every right to make their own assessment of the respective merits of the caretaker government and opposition. Still, if they decide to back Labor - or decide not to decide (which amounts to the same thing) - they will be endorsing factional warlordism, the political execution of an elected prime minister, and the kind of incompetence that produced the roof batts tragedy, the school hall rip-offs and a $43 billion commitment to turning back the clock on telecommunications without even a business plan to justify it. So far, the caretaker prime minister has won the support of one Green MP and one former Green who is now an independent. The Greens have already changed Labor's climate policy from a 150 person citizens' assembly with no predetermined outcome to a parliamentary committee dedicated to setting a carbon price. If Labor's mining tax is to pass the Senate, it will have to satisfy the Greens who want it to be much heavier. A mining tax and a carbon tax will be a double whammy hit on the mining industry. A carbon tax will impose big new costs on farmers who are already struggling with low prices and high production costs. Then there's the Greens' commitment to reducing irrigation and turning at least 30 per cent of Australia's coastal waters into marine parks. A Labor/Green alliance spells doom for regional Australia's economic base. The slightest move towards Green defence and foreign policies would put the American alliance at risk. By cutting funding for independent schools, abolishing the private health insurance rebate, and ending offshore processing of illegal boat people it would damage the social fabric too. The prime minister's claim that Labor's policies won't be hostage to the Greens is inconsistent with her promise to give the Greens more access to ministers and public servants than she has afforded to Labor MPs. Fourteen million Australians have given the Coalition the most seats and the most votes but the election now turns on the decision of just three country independent MPs. They can opt for the Labor Party, in defiance of the expressed political preference and the economic interests of their own electorates. Or they can opt for the Coalition and form the most country-oriented national government since World War Two. Six members of the Coalition shadow cabinet live in regional areas. No Labor cabinet ministers do. Not one. If the Gillard government limps on, the waste will continue, the debt will mount, the new taxes will accumulate and the boats will just keep coming. There have been seven boats in the fortnight since the election. International investors will continue to worry about sovereign risk. The soap opera of leak and counter leak between the supporters of Gillard and Rudd will resume. Buying off potential critics and surrendering to the unions will be the only policy agenda. A government addicted to spin and spending will continue to be all announcement and no delivery because there can be no new politics from an old government. The alternative under the Coalition is no new taxes, an end to wasteful spending programmes, faster repayment of debt, and strong action to protect our borders. It's genuine parliamentary reform with a parliamentary budget office. A Coalition government means more spending on economically responsible regional programmes, a standing Green Army to help with landcare projects, a climate change policy that boosts agricultural productivity, a Murray Darling plan which will guarantee food security as well as better environmental flows, locally-run hospitals and schools, and a new compact with indigenous Australia to deliver jobs as well as constitutional recognition. A Labor Party that was unstable and incompetent when it had a parliamentary majority will go from bad to worse if it has to function as a minority government. The Coalition is best placed to provide effective government for the next three years and to protect voters from a premature return to the polls.

Quote:

A government addicted to spin and spending will continue to be all announcement and no delivery because there can be no new politics from an old government.

Other ironies notwithstanding, is Abbott really proposing to ditch all the old Howard Govt Ministers from his cabinet!?


Quote:

Abbott has confirmed jobs in government for key frontbenchers. Joe Hockey would be treasurer, Andrew Robb finance minister, Julie Bishop foreign minister – even Bronwyn Bishop has been guaranteed she would be minister for seniors. An Abbott ministry would bring to the job considerable experience of government. Fifteen shadow cabinet members have been ministers; Abbott campaigns on the line "we won't have to learn on the job because we've done the job before". The trickiest decision would be what to do with Malcolm Turnbull. The key economic jobs for which he's qualified – treasury and finance – are already assigned. Greg Hunt is dug into environment and, anyway, putting Turnbull into anything remotely connected to climate change, on which he profoundly differs with Abbott, would be a recipe for disaster. Defence would be appropriately big for Turnbull; even more apt perhaps would be communications. That would match his "tech head" interests – although whether it would satisfy him is another matter. Any situation that doesn't have Turnbull at the top of the pile is always going to leave the man who entered Parliament to be PM somewhat unhappy. Despite the amount of ministerial experience within the Abbott ranks, a Coalition government would still be an interesting and unknown beast. Abbott has grown in the job as Opposition Leader; his challenge as prime minister would be to remain as disciplined in the marathon as he has been in the sprint.

http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/parties-consider-the-shape-of-cabinets-to-come-as-they-enter-countdown-week-20100814-123zc.html

Equitist wrote on Sep 5^th, 2010 at 4:33pm:

Quote: A government addicted to spin and spending will continue to be all announcement and no delivery because there can be no new politics from an old government. Other ironies notwithstanding, is Abbott really proposing to ditch all the old Howard Govt Ministers from his cabinet!? [quote] Abbott has confirmed jobs in government for key frontbenchers. Joe Hockey would be treasurer, Andrew Robb finance minister, Julie Bishop foreign minister – even Bronwyn Bishop has been guaranteed she would be minister for seniors. An Abbott ministry would bring to the job considerable experience of government. Fifteen shadow cabinet members have been ministers; Abbott campaigns on the line "we won't have to learn on the job because we've done the job before". The trickiest decision would be what to do with Malcolm Turnbull. The key economic jobs for which he's qualified – treasury and finance – are already assigned. Greg Hunt is dug into environment and, anyway, putting Turnbull into anything remotely connected to climate change, on which he profoundly differs with Abbott, would be a recipe for disaster. Defence would be appropriately big for Turnbull; even more apt perhaps would be communications. That would match his "tech head" interests – although whether it would satisfy him is another matter. Any situation that doesn't have Turnbull at the top of the pile is always going to leave the man who entered Parliament to be PM somewhat unhappy. Despite the amount of ministerial experience within the Abbott ranks, a Coalition government would still be an interesting and unknown beast. Abbott has grown in the job as Opposition Leader; his challenge as prime minister would be to remain as disciplined in the marathon as he has been in the sprint.

http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/parties-consider-the-shape-of-cabinets-to-come-as-they-enter-countdown-week-20100814-123zc.html


[/quote]


in fact, I have to admit that the Howard Govt was more good than bad, while the ALP Govt has been a complete balls up.

I can't see Abbott being capable of running the country. He has very few policies, his costings are stuffed up and he is just not a good representative for Australia. He's not an ideas man, nor has he had an administrative background. He has some good qualities obviously - his work for the community and sporting prowess - but he doesn't come across as credible or confident.

Gillard isn't fantastic either, but she's got a lot of mental stamina and is willing to concede on her mistakes. You know she'll do better if she's given the chance. She isn't arrogant and has been willing to shake hands with the Greens and commit to sharing a mixed government.

I think the Independents might be wary of siding with the coalition because they know they'll be caught back up in the same old doctrine - "you are either with us or against us". They don't want to lose their autonomy which is what the Coalition expects.

Hockey and a few others continue to display their selfish arrogance in demanding the Independents become part of "their" team - because that's the way it's supposed to be.

The Independents also have to consider where their preferences came from - we don't know whether a majority of them came from Labor or the Greens.

mantra wrote on Sep 6^th, 2010 at 7:51am:

I can't see Abbott being capable of running the country. He has very few policies, his costings are stuffed up and he is just not a good representative for Australia. He's not an ideas man, nor has he had an administrative background. He has some good qualities obviously - his work for the community and sporting prowess - but he doesn't come across as credible or confident. Gillard isn't fantastic either, but she's got a lot of mental stamina and is willing to concede on her mistakes. You know she'll do better if she's given the chance. She isn't arrogant and has been willing to shake hands with the Greens and commit to sharing a mixed government. I think the Independents might be wary of siding with the coalition because they know they'll be caught back up in the same old doctrine - "you are either with us or against us". They don't want to lose their autonomy which is what the Coalition expects. Hockey and a few others continue to display their selfish arrogance in demanding the Independents become part of "their" team - because that's the way it's supposed to be. The Independents also have to consider where their preferences came from - we don't know whether a majority of them came from Labor or the Greens.

That`s a bit wishy washy really.

aussiefree2ride wrote on Sep 6^th, 2010 at 7:57am:

That`s a bit wishy washy really.

Is this wishy washy? I would think the 3 independents would be under the same sort of pressure from the Coalition.


ONE of the three rural independents insists he will not be dictated to by the Coalition or his constituents to commit to a conservative outcome and install a minority government led by Tony Abbott.

As Coalition fears grew that Julia Gillard would receive the seats needed to form a Labor minority government, Tony Windsor, the independent MP for New England, hit back at growing calls from the opposition that the independents not forget their conservative roots.

''The philosophy of who is to be the next government and who is not isn't what this is about,'' he told the Herald from his farm in Tamworth.

''It's about allowing someone to form a government on the floor of the House that would hopefully last for some time. And that's the adjudication we're going to make: who's most likely to be there in three years' time.'' And how is that best assessed? ''Gut.''

The Opposition Leader, Tony Abbott, made another appeal yesterday for the trio - Mr Windsor, Rob Oakeshott and Bob Katter - to side with the Coalition.

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-election/abbott-losing-his-grip-on-the-house-of-windsor-20100905-14w4b.html?autostart=1

wishy washy ??

Fish are less wishy washy than that.

Gillard isn't fantastic either, but she's got a lot of mental stamina and is willing to concede on her mistakes. You know she'll do better if she's given the chance. She isn't arrogant and has been willing to shake hands with the Greens and commit to sharing a mixed government


lol!! its good to see someone still holds the faith in gillard after all she has done... you seem to forget she was deputy PM for all those years..lol.. and she was right behind everything... and as for admitting the BER was a stuff up first I have heard of that.. all she did was make excuses.. and shes still doing it.. dont forget moving forward was all about not looking back on her record.. keep the belief... you need it!lol

Quote:

lol!! its good to see someone still holds the faith in gillard after all she has done... you seem to forget she was deputy PM for all those years..lol.. and she was right behind everything... and as for admitting the BER was a stuff up first I have heard of that.. all she did was make excuses.. and shes still doing it.. dont forget moving forward was all about not looking back on her record.. keep the belief... you need it!lol

Gillard isn't perfect, far from it - but Abbott is worse.

As far as the BER scheme goes - there is actually positive news about it at present. Schools are increasing their revenue raising by leasing out these new halls in the evenings and weekends and doing exceptionally well from it.

Gillard has admitted that there were problems, but will follow the new guidelines for distribution of the funds.

She might have been Deputy PM under Abbott, but she had to follow his orders. He might have been the one to demand that these schemes be rolled out as fast as possible. Rudd was no administrator - nor is Abbott.

julia admitted her errors with BER, then went on and said "YOu know what, I'ld do it all agaion !!!!!!!!!"

Sprintcyclist wrote on Sep 6^th, 2010 at 8:36am:

julia admitted her errors with BER, then went on and said "YOu know what, I'ld do it all agaion !!!!!!!!!"

Yes - that is true. She should have added but I'll do things differently with the next rollout as per the Orgill review.

An error of admission or a lie?

Who knows with politicians.

Julia is looking a little confident, isn't she?