V8Central Forums
Home | Profile | Register | Active Topics | Active Polls | Members | Search | FAQ | Links | Private Messages
Username:
Password:
Save Password
Forgot your Password?

 All Forums
 General Topics
 General chit-chat
 General Libs vs ALP Thread
 New Topic  New Poll New Poll
 Reply to Topic
 Printer Friendly Share
Previous Page | Next Page
Author Previous Topic Topic Next Topic
Page: of 589

karter
Team Manager


11736 Posts
joined 21 Sep 04

 offline

Posted - 10 Sep 2013 :  08:01:10  Show Profile Send karter a Private Message  Reply with Quote Copy this URL to Link to this Reply
quote:
Originally posted by Trev

quote:
Originally posted by bundy5

But the thing about the two maternity leave schemes is one doesn't encourage and reward mothers for hard work and achievement and that is Labor's flat payment.

why should any of them receive 'benefits' like this when they are working, why are both parents holding down jobs? Simple really, they have over committed their debt and are looking for the taxpayers to bail them out, well **** them, harden the **** up and stop spending your money on **** you don't 'need'




Yeah Trev, women belong at home, in the kitchen, barefoot and pregnant, right?
Go to Top of Page

bigcol
Team Manager



Australia
13314 Posts
joined 06 Feb 04

 offline

Posted - 10 Sep 2013 :  08:34:18  Show Profile Send bigcol a Private Message  Reply with Quote Copy this URL to Link to this Reply
We all complain that Liberal and Labor are out of touch with the general public and then we get some general public voted in and we're still complaining.

I don't care if he's some useless dole bludging bogan. If he votes on what he thinks is right it's better than some numb nut idiot that votes along party lines regardless of whether it's right or wrong.


You can spin it which ever way you like Bundy but Tony's maternity leave is welfare, and for some it's welfare for the rich who don't need it in the first place.

Zac you're cracking me up

ONLY LITTLE BOYZ WEAR BOWTIES
Go to Top of Page

bundy5
BANNED



2755 Posts
joined 24 Feb 13

 offline

Posted - 10 Sep 2013 :  08:39:52  Show Profile Send bundy5 a Private Message  Reply with Quote Copy this URL to Link to this Reply
Can anyone imagine that candidate from the Motoring Enthusiasts Party or that sports candidate from WA for that matter if they get up being able to sit on Senate committes and be able to scrutinise legislation or inquire into national issues?

I think optional preferential voting is the way to go. The preference deals done by PUP in particular was a disgrace.

To respond to Bruce in the NRL thread: it is probably the single hardest loss I have had to deal with at Souths to lose Bully. Much worse than Sam Burgess as he didn't symbolise Souths as Bully did. I think a lot will underestimate just how much a loss he will be to Souths but I fully understand how engrossed he is with NZ and I think given that he will make the successful transition that others haven't.

Edited by - bundy5 on 10 Sep 2013 08:41:41
Go to Top of Page

CP
Safety Car Pilot



Australia
11165 Posts
joined 22 Jan 09

 offline

Posted - 10 Sep 2013 :  08:42:55  Show Profile  Visit CP's Homepage Send CP a Private Message  Reply with Quote Copy this URL to Link to this Reply
Micro party candidates have defended their legitimacy to a seat on the crossbench amid calls to reform the Senate voting system.

It is predicted that a combination of micro party members will hold the balance of power in the new Senate - even though they only received a few thousand primary votes.

Vote-counting for the Senate is a complex, painstaking affair and the final make-up is still subject to change.

But there are six micro party candidates who look on track to enter the Upper House next July, joining others such as the Democratic Labour Party's (DLP) John Madigan.

The group includes Wayne Dropulich from the Australian Sports Party, the Liberal Democrats' David Leyonhjelm and .

In New South Wales the theory is that some people may have confused the Liberal Democrats for the Liberals, and Mr Leyonhjelm was the lucky name in the first column on the vast Senate voting paper.

But Mr Leyonhjelm believes his party would have picked up votes regardless where it was positioned on the ballot.

"We think we would've won no matter where we were on the ballot paper. Our vote in South Australia, Western Australia and Tasmania was 3.5 to 4 per cent, and by our calculations that would've meant we were elected anyway," he told the ABC's 7.30 program.

"So we think we would've got there without the donkey vote, but I'm quite happy to have the donkey vote.

"Every party in every election, every ballot paper wants to have the first position, so we were just lucky."

Mr Dropulich also says his party was open about its principles.

"Whether it's the way that the system is run for the Senate, and we've campaigned out there and got our votes and the preferences look like they're going to be going our way," he said.

"We spoke to all the other parties that were contesting Western Australia in the Senate and explained to them our policy and what we're all about.

"They obviously thought that what we stood for and our agenda is a good thing, and they agreed with what they stand for. So they've obviously preferenced us accordingly and so it's resulted in where we are at the moment."

Senator Madigan added none of the micro or minor parties made the rules for the Senate voting system.

"They haven't broken the rules. They've done nothing to deceive people. They've stood for election and they've been elected and that's what a democracy's about," he said.

Crossbenchers to hold balance of power

The biggest challenge potentially facing the Abbott Government over the next three years could be an unruly Senate.

Both Labor and the Greens have indicated they will not support moves to dump the carbon pricing scheme.

This would would leave the bill deadlocked in the Senate and could trigger a double dissolution election - an option Mr Abbott has said is on the table.

An alternative would be to wait until the newly-elected senators take their seats next July, though that would mean negotiating with a disparate group.

Mr Dropulich would not be drawn on what his party's position is on the carbon tax, .

"At this stage we're about a week away probably before we find out if we definitely have won a seat in the WA Senate," he said.

"The Electoral Commission said that and when that time comes and if we are still fortunate enough to have one of those seats in the WA Senate, we'll then move on to the next phase of this whole process and then come out with all our various policies and all those various issues."

Mr Leyonhjelm says his libertarian party is in favour of low taxes, less bureaucracy, smaller government and less expenditure.

He says he would then be in favour of the carbon tax being repealed - but not other Coalition policies.

"We would definitely support that... But we are not in favour of the Coalition's policy on climate change, for example. It's just a large amount of money down a black hole which will achieve nothing."

New government's mandate to repeal carbon tax

Mr Leyonhjelm added he would be guided by his party's principles when voting on legislation.

"We respect his (Mr Abbott's) mandate and we wouldn't seek to block anything that didn't contravene our two principles, that is, a reduction in tax - reduction in taxes or an increase in liberty," he said.

"So as long as he wasn't aiming to increase taxes or deprive us of any of our freedoms, we respect his mandate."

Senator Madigan also wants to see the carbon tax scrapped.

"But we are concerned deeply about what's happening down at Yallourn in Victoria in the La Trobe Valley," he said.

"There's 75 workers who've been shut out of Energy Australia's plant. We're concerned about the transition to the so-called clean energy future and the fact - where's the money that the La Trobe Valley was promised, for instance?

"We're concerned about the Energy Security Council and the $500-odd million that Energy Australia received from the Federal Government.

"And in the abolition of the carbon tax, what are they going to do about the Clean Energy Regulator and the systemic regulatory failure that has come about in the wind industry and also the problems in the solar industry?"

Senator Madigan says he hopes the Senate continues to be a house of review.

"Being elected to Parliament, to the Senate, is a privilege, it's not a licence to bludgeon," he said.

"But it is a licence to put forward people's concerns and to express sections of our society that get ignored."

http://au.news.yahoo.com/latest/a/-/latest/18855792/micro-party-senate-hopefuls-defend-their-legitimacy-amid-electoral-reform-push/

I think the reasoning why some people voted for the minor parties, or the ones with the weirdest names, is that they were that disillusioned with what we had prior to Saturday, which was a dysfunctional government, and an opposition that really didn't have to do anything to get in, and the general public just wanted someone else in power, and didn't really care who it was.

Edited by - CP on 10 Sep 2013 08:44:07
Go to Top of Page

Legendary Gerry
Moderator



Australia
22232 Posts
joined 19 Feb 07

 offline

Posted - 10 Sep 2013 :  08:44:18  Show Profile Send Legendary Gerry a Private Message  Reply with Quote Copy this URL to Link to this Reply
quote:
Originally posted by bundy5

Can anyone imagine that candidate from the Motoring Enthusiasts Party or that sports candidate from WA for that matter if they get up being able to sit on Senate committes and be able to scrutinise legislation or inquire into national issues?

I think optional preferential voting is the way to go. The preference deals done by PUP in particular was a disgrace.



Many people in this world start out in a job that doesn't appear to be suited to them and go on to greatness.
Why not give them a chance to see what they can do rather than hang them on suspicion?
Go to Top of Page

bundy5
BANNED



2755 Posts
joined 24 Feb 13

 offline

Posted - 10 Sep 2013 :  08:48:33  Show Profile Send bundy5 a Private Message  Reply with Quote Copy this URL to Link to this Reply
I think that is an over-exaggeration there CP to claim disillusionment as a reason why some of these candidates got up. I mean some got less than 1% of the vote. I was reading that the guy from the motoring enthusiasts party got something around 1000 votes but with the way the preference deals were done he is looking at getting a Senate spot. Despite this, the minor party candidates who do get up have done nothing wrong as they have played within the rules. I just think it needs to change.

To respond to Bruce in the NRL thread: it is probably the single hardest loss I have had to deal with at Souths to lose Bully. Much worse than Sam Burgess as he didn't symbolise Souths as Bully did. I think a lot will underestimate just how much a loss he will be to Souths but I fully understand how engrossed he is with NZ and I think given that he will make the successful transition that others haven't.
Go to Top of Page

bigcol
Team Manager



Australia
13314 Posts
joined 06 Feb 04

 offline

Posted - 10 Sep 2013 :  09:13:07  Show Profile Send bigcol a Private Message  Reply with Quote Copy this URL to Link to this Reply
Come on Bundy as a card carrying LNP member you should be the last to whinge about preferences seeing what the Liberals and Nationals have been getting up to for years.

Along with fixing the electoral boundaries, preferential voting kept Bjekle Petersen in power for years

ONLY LITTLE BOYZ WEAR BOWTIES
Go to Top of Page

Trev
Team Manager



Australia
5741 Posts
joined 13 Feb 03

 offline

Posted - 10 Sep 2013 :  09:26:03  Show Profile  Visit Trev's Homepage Send Trev a Private Message  Reply with Quote Copy this URL to Link to this Reply
quote:
Originally posted by karter

Yeah Trev, women belong at home, in the kitchen, barefoot and pregnant, right?

you are a ****-wit, where did I say that - ****en idiot

I questioned why I have to pay for these Y Gen people to have children, if they bought less ****, had a smaller mortgage then they might be able to afford for one of the parents to stay at home

We are creating a whole generation of free-loaders and you obviously can't see it

I reserve the right to arm bears
Go to Top of Page

Legendary Gerry
Moderator



Australia
22232 Posts
joined 19 Feb 07

 offline

Posted - 10 Sep 2013 :  09:27:11  Show Profile Send Legendary Gerry a Private Message  Reply with Quote Copy this URL to Link to this Reply
On the other hand, Kevin Rudd was re-elected despite polling fewer primary votes than Bill Glasson - works both ways.
Go to Top of Page

Trev
Team Manager



Australia
5741 Posts
joined 13 Feb 03

 offline

Posted - 10 Sep 2013 :  09:31:31  Show Profile  Visit Trev's Homepage Send Trev a Private Message  Reply with Quote Copy this URL to Link to this Reply
quote:
Originally posted by Coyote302

Trev have you ever stopped to think that people who earn good money got off their arse to improve themselves and work very hard for it. Every person in this country has the opportunity to improve their lot, some do, others don't.
what I see is a whole bunch of people who live outside their means and are expecting the average taxpayer to prop them up, this from the same party who won't help pensioners, won't help the car industry, couldn't give a **** about rural Australia, but they are going to prop up a whole bunch of over-spending yuppies because they can't control their spending - it is a load of **** and no matter what you call it it is 'middle class welfare'

I reserve the right to arm bears

Edited by - Trev on 10 Sep 2013 09:33:01
Go to Top of Page

bigcol
Team Manager



Australia
13314 Posts
joined 06 Feb 04

 offline

Posted - 10 Sep 2013 :  09:43:00  Show Profile Send bigcol a Private Message  Reply with Quote Copy this URL to Link to this Reply
quote:
Originally posted by Legendary Gerry

On the other hand, Kevin Rudd was re-elected despite polling fewer primary votes than Bill Glasson - works both ways.



That's exactly right Gerry, but it's the way it's been for years and it's not going to change now because some one got into the senate with a handful of votes

ONLY LITTLE BOYZ WEAR BOWTIES
Go to Top of Page

bigcol
Team Manager



Australia
13314 Posts
joined 06 Feb 04

 offline

Posted - 10 Sep 2013 :  09:43:48  Show Profile Send bigcol a Private Message  Reply with Quote Copy this URL to Link to this Reply
quote:
Originally posted by Legendary Gerry

On the other hand, Kevin Rudd was re-elected despite polling fewer primary votes than Bill Glasson - works both ways.



That's exactly right Gerry, but it's the way it's been for years and it's not going to change now because some one got into the senate with a handful of votes

ONLY LITTLE BOYZ WEAR BOWTIES
Go to Top of Page

Trev
Team Manager



Australia
5741 Posts
joined 13 Feb 03

 offline

Posted - 10 Sep 2013 :  10:16:40  Show Profile  Visit Trev's Homepage Send Trev a Private Message  Reply with Quote Copy this URL to Link to this Reply
whoa, double post - way to go Col - LOL

I reserve the right to arm bears
Go to Top of Page

bigcol
Team Manager



Australia
13314 Posts
joined 06 Feb 04

 offline

Posted - 10 Sep 2013 :  10:20:13  Show Profile Send bigcol a Private Message  Reply with Quote Copy this URL to Link to this Reply
Don't know how I did that.

I don't usually agree with Paul Syvret, but he's on the money here.

This is going to be entertaining

http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/queensland/opinion-coalition8217s-election-victory-doesn8217t-mean-a-mandate-to-do-anything-it-pleases/story-fnihsrf2-1226715384036


JUST what exactly is this thing we call a "mandate'' beyond being arguably one of the most abused words in the political lexicon?

Is mandate something to do with marriage equality or the electoral equivalent of a mankini (bright Speedo red, of course) except with a man and a ... Actually, let's not go there.

I ask this because to listen to some members of the incoming government, the word seems interchangeable with terms like carte blanche, or perhaps even "open season".

Certainly Australia's Climate Change Minister-in-waiting Greg Hunt seems convinced that an election win equals a "mandate" and constitutes, ipso facto, a requirement that all in the Parliament bend over and offer blind obeisance to the new world order.

Hunt claims the election was a "referendum on the carbon tax" and the Australian people have spoken overwhelmingly in favour of giving the new Government a licence to rip the carbon pricing scheme limb from limb.

Bollocks.

Polling consistently showed carbon pricing way down the list of voter concerns, making the election no more a referendum on carbon that it was on Bronwyn Bishop's hair lacquer.

Secondly, the election result gives the new Government a mandate to introduce its policies and prosecute an argument for their passage through Parliament, nothing more.

This may come as a shock to some conservative voters, but millions of Australians viewed the prospect of an Abbott government with a mixture of embarrassment and despair and voted for the other mob.

In the process we non-Abbott voters gave the party of our choice a mandate to push their policy platforms on our behalf, not to sell us out.

Personally speaking, as someone who supports carbon pricing for both economic and environmental reasons, I would view a decision by Labor to acquiesce to the Coalition's Wreck-It Ralph approach as an act of gross betrayal.

I - and the aforesaid millions of others - cast my vote for a party that believes in tackling climate change via a market-based solution, one that was building a National Broadband Network using 21st rather than 19th century technology, a party committed to better and more equitable education funding and one that believes a fair economic rent should be paid by those companies exploiting our finite natural resources.

In fact, when it comes to grandiose claims of mandates and vanquished oppositions, bear in mind that counting yesterday morning had the Labor primary vote at 33.85 per cent, and the Liberals - who will govern with the sometime fractious support of the National Party (is Australia really ready for Acting Prime Minister Barnaby Joyce?) - behind them on 31.71 per cent.

For Labor to roll over and abandon its platform just because Tony Abbott is Prime Minister (relax, it does get easier the more often you say it) is unthinkable and such a break of faith would be political poison.

You can basically trace the demise of the Australian Democrats as the third force in Australian politics to the decision by Meg Lees in 2000 to negotiate a compromise deal that allowed the passage of a (watered-down) Bill establishing the Goods and Services Tax through the Senate.

Such was the anger and acrimony over that perceived breach of trust that then-Democrat Senators Natasha Stott Despoja and Andrew Bartlett crossed the floor in a show of principle and within a few short years the Democrats were effectively dead.

So, and to borrow one of Abbott's favourite words, no, a mandate does not mean safe passage of a legislative agenda that runs counter to both Labor Party policy and the wider national interest.

In fact, Abbott should now be contemplating that old truism about reaping what one sows and casting his mind back over the past three years of obstructionism.

Will he enjoy being on the receiving end of the sort of ruthless parliamentary tactics that the Coalition deployed in relation to issues such as asylum seekers - tactics so opportunistic and cynical that the Coalition even voted against its own policy position on offshore processing in 2011 just to undermine the Gillard government?

The irony (or is it just a towering lack of self-awareness?) is sweet in an incoming Prime Minister renowned for his relentless, brutal negativity in opposition now professing to expect supine co-operation from those he destroyed.

When it comes to parliamentary behaviour, should Labor assume the incoming government deserves to be treated in the same fashion that it was for the past three years and perhaps use the Coalition's Leader of Opposition Business Christopher Pyne as the shining role model for parliamentary standards?

That would only be fair and would demonstrate Labor is prepared to pay at least the same amount of respect to the office of the prime minister and the institutions of Parliament as the Abbott opposition did

ONLY LITTLE BOYZ WEAR BOWTIES
Go to Top of Page

Trev
Team Manager



Australia
5741 Posts
joined 13 Feb 03

 offline

Posted - 10 Sep 2013 :  10:26:11  Show Profile  Visit Trev's Homepage Send Trev a Private Message  Reply with Quote Copy this URL to Link to this Reply
This whole "mandate" thing is a load of ****, now the Liberals are trying to bully the Labor Party to allow them to repeal the Carbon Tax, over 30% of Australians voted for the Labor Party as number 1, that is because those 30% like the Labor Parties policies.

I for one would be really pissed off if the Labor Party roll over on this one, Climate Change being a reality is a core belief within the Labor Party, why should they sell those values down the sink.

The Liberals have been all over the Labor Party for changing this and changing that, now the ****en idiots want them to change - well **** the Liberal Party, they want to repeal the law, then do it, but do it without Labor Party help, just like the Labor Party had to do for the last 3 years

That idiot George Brandis was trying to bully Tanya Plebisik last night and to her credit she stuck to her policy - good on her

I reserve the right to arm bears

Edited by - Trev on 10 Sep 2013 10:29:25
Go to Top of Page
Page: of 589 Previous Topic Topic Next Topic  











Previous Page | Next Page
 New Topic  New Poll New Poll
 Reply to Topic
 Printer Friendly Share
Jump To:
V8Central Forums © 2001 - 2018 V8Central Go To Top Of Page
This page was generated in 9.58 seconds.