by Jimmy_041 » Sun Sep 29, 2013 5:56 pm
by bulldogproud2 » Sun Sep 29, 2013 7:47 pm
Jimmy_041 wrote:Appointing a Minister for ANZAC Day but no Minister for Aged Care, Disability Services, Science nor Multicultural Affairs. Are you saying nothing will happen with Aged Care, Disability Services, Science and Multicultural Affairs because there's no Minister named whereas most have been included in the Social Services portfolio? That's a Ruddism giving names to everything without actually doing anything. Hysterical comment about nothing
Secondly, political interference resulting in Abbott's Chief of Staff getting off a DUI despite pleading guilty. Political Interference? The future AG submitted a letter attesting to her good character the same as any person can ask any other person to do the same. Are you suggesting the judge was got at? I'd report him to ICAC then if I was you
Thirdly, the appalling situation re only one woman in Cabinet. Appalling?? Which coalition women do you think should be in there and why, or do you think there should just e more in there? It has worked so well for SA Labor. Hysterical comment about nothing
Fourthly, creating huge problems with Indonesia over foreign policy. What huge problems or do you mean? Bishop being shunted around for a photo? See next for further comment
Fifthly, having nothing to say but 'no comment' when asylum seekers died at sea. The ones that died in another country's waters? And they did comment actually - google Matthias Cormann. Maybe its time for Indonesia to take some action about their leaking borders to stop these people dying.
Sixthly, the Deputy Leader and the Attorney General being found guilty of misappropriating taxpayer funds. Found guilty by whom?
Eighthly, despite going on for years and years re the need for a surplus, announcing that they will not be aiming for a surplus at all in their term. You Labor people said Abbott would slash and burn as soon as he got to power. Now you're pissed because he's not doing it. That is laughable. Changing a deficit that size will take time and at least they're going to aim for it unlike your economic vandal mates
Ninthly, the debacle Chris Pyne has already made of the Education portfolio, with very poor ideas re student amenities and caps on education. He has already made it clear he only wants children from wealthy families to receive a university education. I heard him speak on the ABC - did you? He has made no decision on either student amenities or caps on education. He said he was reviewing the demand-driven system & that, although he was personally was against compulsory student services fees, he had no plans to scrap them & the issue was a very low priority. Hysterical comment about nothing
Tenthly, sacking heads of important departments simply because they don't agree with Abbott's political view. Happens with every change of government. Hardly a stuff up. Hysterical comment about nothing
Eleventh, seeing the whole board of the NBN resign because of the dreadful policy of the new government. Well, they were appointed by another government to do what they wanted, not what this government wanted, so they really had no choice. For further information, please see point 10. And they have done such a great job, haven't they? What's the blow out worth now?
Im taking the dogs for a walk so will come back to the NBN policy. Hopefully you've got through the above.
by The Sleeping Giant » Sun Sep 29, 2013 7:52 pm
by Q. » Sun Sep 29, 2013 8:49 pm
by Jimmy_041 » Sun Sep 29, 2013 9:06 pm
by Jimmy_041 » Sun Sep 29, 2013 10:16 pm
Abbott removes portfolios, avoids 'grandiose' titles
When announcing his new ministry, Mr Abbott said he wanted to avoid "title inflation".
"You may notice that one of the things that I have attempted to do with this new ministry is avoid the proliferation of titles, the sometimes grandiose titles of the former government where it sometimes seemed that ministers needed an extra large business card to contain all of their various titles," he said.
"Thankfully I think we've got some title deflation as a result of this ministry.
"I am trying to avoid a situation where unless something is specifically mentioned in someone's title, it is unimportant.
"There are some things that are so important that in a sense every minister should be concerned about them."
by bulldogproud2 » Mon Sep 30, 2013 1:25 am
by shoe boy » Mon Sep 30, 2013 10:34 am
by Jimmy_041 » Mon Sep 30, 2013 11:21 am
by woodublieve12 » Mon Sep 30, 2013 11:26 am
shoe boy wrote:Since the election Tony has gone missing??
Will he be well received in Indonesia today?
by Psyber » Mon Sep 30, 2013 1:34 pm
As I pointed out a week or so ago, pleading guilty does not automatically result in a fine or even a conviction.bulldogproud2 wrote: Secondly, she pleaded guilty but was given a 'not guilty' result at the urging of Brandis. Yes, you can ask for a reference etc. about your good character but in every other circumstance, this has still resulted in a 'guilty' result. Definite political interference.
by Q. » Mon Sep 30, 2013 2:00 pm
Psyber wrote:As I pointed out a week or so ago, pleading guilty does not automatically result in a fine or even a conviction.bulldogproud2 wrote: Secondly, she pleaded guilty but was given a 'not guilty' result at the urging of Brandis. Yes, you can ask for a reference etc. about your good character but in every other circumstance, this has still resulted in a 'guilty' result. Definite political interference.
I gave the example then of my fronting up on a serious traffic offence in 1987 and the Magistrate recording no conviction after my guilty plea, after he had listened to the circumstances operating at the time. I didn't have a letter from an MP testifying to my good character but did from a number of GPs.
Though no conviction was recorded, and I was not fined, I was ordered to pay $142.00 court costs.
I was also on a bond for 15 months which restricted me to driving for my work only.
(Effectively I had 1 point for the 15 months.)
by bulldogproud2 » Mon Sep 30, 2013 2:31 pm
Psyber wrote:As I pointed out a week or so ago, pleading guilty does not automatically result in a fine or even a conviction.bulldogproud2 wrote: Secondly, she pleaded guilty but was given a 'not guilty' result at the urging of Brandis. Yes, you can ask for a reference etc. about your good character but in every other circumstance, this has still resulted in a 'guilty' result. Definite political interference.
I gave the example then of my fronting up on a serious traffic offence in 1987 and the Magistrate recording no conviction after my guilty plea, after he had listened to the circumstances operating at the time. I didn't have a letter from an MP testifying to my good character but did from a number of GPs.
Though no conviction was recorded, and I was not fined, I was ordered to pay $142.00 court costs.
I was also on a bond for 15 months which restricted me to driving for my work only.
(Effectively I had 1 point for the 15 months.)
by bulldogproud2 » Mon Sep 30, 2013 2:36 pm
Jimmy_041 wrote:bp2 - let's agree to disagree because there is no common ground so no use arguing.
One thing for sure, your views and statements about Abbott and Pyne only reinforce my views on the Jesuit Order.
I hope that the next time you talk with Pyne, you remind him of what he has said publically and what he has told you privately.
by Q. » Mon Sep 30, 2013 2:40 pm
Jimmy_041 wrote:Eighthly, despite going on for years and years re the need for a surplus, announcing that they will not be aiming for a surplus at all in their term. You Labor people said Abbott would slash and burn as soon as he got to power. Now you're pissed because he's not doing it. That is laughable. Changing a deficit that size will take time and at least they're going to aim for it unlike your economic vandal mates
by bulldogproud2 » Mon Sep 30, 2013 2:41 pm
by bulldogproud2 » Mon Sep 30, 2013 2:47 pm
Q. wrote:Jimmy_041 wrote:Eighthly, despite going on for years and years re the need for a surplus, announcing that they will not be aiming for a surplus at all in their term. You Labor people said Abbott would slash and burn as soon as he got to power. Now you're pissed because he's not doing it. That is laughable. Changing a deficit that size will take time and at least they're going to aim for it unlike your economic vandal mates
Those economic vandals just delivered Australia's most 'contractionary year for fiscal policy ever seen', which has 'Hockey inheriting some of the best budget and government debt circumstances in the world.'
http://www.businessspectator.com.au/article/2013/9/30/economy/no-urgency-budget-emergency
by Q. » Mon Sep 30, 2013 2:57 pm
by Jimmy_041 » Mon Sep 30, 2013 3:09 pm
bulldogproud2 wrote:Btw, it is really weird working with the Jesuits in as much as we preach social justice issues but then for some reason we have more students join the Liberal Party than the Labor Party
However, we do produce more leading politicians and lawyers than any other college system, which is a mark of the quality of the education and concern about public issues.
Cheers
by bulldogproud2 » Mon Sep 30, 2013 3:55 pm
Q. wrote:I think the real point, that was glossed over in the article, is that Labor's cuts in an effort to return the budget to surplus actually had a negative effect on GDP growth. If the Libs are to learn from this then they would be wise to avoid too much slashing.
Competitions SANFL Official Site | Country Footy SA | Southern Football League | VFL Footy
Club Forums Snouts Louts | The Roost | Redlegs Forum |