aikmann4 wrote on Jul 1^st, 2010 at 12:58pm:



No, my relative advised that his MP friend felt that by allocating them more support funding (to specific key project areas)  would result in another  "stolen generation" scenario.
This and that it was essentially pointless because it would need to be ongoing, and after allocating it, it would be virtually impossible to revoke. Meaning it wouldn't be a one off payment thing, would be something that once funded, would need to be ongoing.
My parents asked me not to bug him with it, but I'm going to call him anyway. ..because I think if it's not just his mates views, this and is the general consensus of the Labor party, then the public, those with autistic kids really need to know.
My parents are certain it's the view expressed by the party on the whole, as there was believed to be some discussion about it, they were actually going to fund a certain project, but decided against it because it would need to be ongoing.

I reckon they will pull it out of their hats as a last ditch resort to appeal to voters...but only if they really have to in order to win the election.

He said a few other things too, but you can get nicked!

You have annoyed me now, so I will go have a scout around myself.

Rest assured, I wont be sharing next time.

Now, I have just found this Liberal, not Labor blog,..(Is this the one you found anthrax?).......
http://www.liberal.org.au/Issues/Community/Disabilities/Ideas/2010/03/18/Increase-Autism-Funding-to-50000pa-per-child-for-2-years.aspx
and I agree, the individual who commented on this blog could have meant it in an entirely different manner to how my relatives friend said it, though I can assure you, my relatives Labor MP friend meant it in the way I advised, because the question my parents asked was something along the lines of..."Why don't they create more low-medium level support units for kids like our granddaughter as the majority of the existing support units are for the really sever cases"

Every Australian child  should be accommodated irrespective of disability, (our anti-discrimination and equal opportunity laws dictate just that),..though only apply to certain minorities, it would appear...thus mild to moderate assistance requiring kids should not be forced to drown in a mainstream school with minimal support teacher contact hours/intervention .....this or be forced to vegetate behind a fenced enclosure, as this is both educationally and socially  disadvantageous and dehumanising for those who are not in need of this high level care.. Think of it as putting someone with a sprained ankle into a palliative care ward...because this was the only bed available, sound familiar?
Sorry, one size does not fit all, ...we need a three tiered support/intervention unit approach, each which develop their own individual programs to give these kids the best possible chance at reaching their own potential not be categorically defined as being one of the support unit vegetables...or that kid that fell through the gaps of a flawed system.
It needs to be done with dignity, would they like their own mild-moderately autistic well-behaved/mannered (though quiet) child sitting next to a severely disordered child masturbating, simply because there wasn't anywhere else to put them for the time being?  

And given this is supposed to be a thriving, developed prosperous  country, which prides itself on equal opportunity, one of the few developed countries in the world to have escaped the full front of a global crisis, we should be doing better than most, we should be on par with or better than Finland's education, or up there with Switzerland, and would be if our politicians were doing what they are supposed to be doing, (not wasting funds on excessive travel)..exploiting their positions of trust to grow their own investment portfolios. The rate we are going, we need a government, just to regulate our government, we have turned back into a pack of thieving convicts in suits and ties.
We don't mind building detention centres for illegal immigrants, this and keeping them for extended periods while we  take our sweet time figuring out what we're going to do with them after the next federal election, so I don't think it's too much to ask that we foster a policy of charity begins at home.  And please, don't tell me that key-policy makers are just really really misguided, this and mean well also, BULL SHOOT!
If we cant even look after our own properly, then what's this saying to quality immigrants who might otherwise consider immigrating here to make a worthwhile contribution to our country, economy,  when it's clear, we have set the standard exceedingly low, this and even let vermin out on bail on temporary-visas who have already intentionally infected multiple Australians with HIV.
We are busy protecting refugees, and asylum seekers, offering them opportunities, though who is looking out for us?

Time to get real!

Sorry didn't really mean to offend, but basing an argument on hearsay,is well you know.
But seeing you are so passionate about the disabled & so down on Labor for their poor performance in this area perhaps you'd enlighten us to the great steps forward achieved by Mr Abbott as health Minister and the Liberal party in general over their 11 years of office & not just the empty 190 million promised if they got re-elected in 2007.
Assumptions are also tricky to considering that my vote would be for the liberals if just about anyone but the H.R.Nicolls puppet was leading the party

shampain socialist wrote on Jul 1^st, 2010 at 4:33pm:


Yes
Dream Team -
Turnbull PM
Keating Treasurer

skippy. wrote on Jul 1^st, 2010 at 12:37pm:

Hey Mellie, in your rush to murky the waters with your "hearsay" you failed to address my question, when are interest rates going to be as high as when the coalition left office?

So you've lied again, not a good look Mellie.Why do you lie so much?

skippy. wrote on Jul 1^st, 2010 at 5:31pm:


At the moment Australian interest rates are on hold due to outside influeneces.
If not for European instability making markets jittery they would have been raised last month and agian this month.
Labor cannot really cliam the low rates as anything to do with their particluar governence, if not for the GFC rates I suspect would probably be 2 - 3% higher than when they took office.
What are we about 10 x .25% raises below when they took office and allowing 3 maybe 4  months off to access re-action I'd say 1 to 1.5 years away.
Some intresting observations are made in this video
http://www.themonthly.com.au/great-financial-panic-paul-keating-and-david-wessel-2472
And to clarify my earlier dream team a more likely and nearly just as good a team would be
Turnbull/Costello
Whilst Costello never really had the vision and drive of Keating he was still a steady hand on the economy.
I don't think Turnbull is driven by personality/ego but a desire to see Australia do well, he could of given in to Mitchen to save his leadership, he could of just voted against the ETS but stood firm to his belief that we must move our economy in that direction to the detriment of his standing in the party, he could have walked into the NSW Premiership but he remains and continues to be a calm sensible voice among the shrill soundbites of the modern politicial spectrum