May I direct you to Hansard, where every position opposed by the Coalition in the recent Labor government shambles was addressed at length. Perhaps we don't see Parliament as a forum for speeches nowadays, and our attention in this internet age does not extend past headlines and soundbites.It's when there are differences of opinion that the rubber hits the road, and in that arena Abbot (and the Coalition) displayed little capacity to get past "no"…
You may, but it appears you didn't.May I direct you to Hansard, where every position opposed by the Coalition in the recent Labor government shambles was addressed at length.
For example ?Nevertheless, the Coalition put a great deal of thought and research into underpinning their opposition to some of the government's policies.
Given how much the Coalition's position from the last 5 years has shifted in the last few weeks, I'd be surprised if the voters knew what the Coalition's positions - other than "not Labor" - even were.And, given the recent election result, it appears that the voters were inclined to support the Coalition position over that of Labor.
Given how much the Coalition's position from the last 5 years has shifted in the last few weeks, I'd be surprised if the voters knew what the Coalition's positions - other than "not Labor" - even were.
That was, after all, the essence of their campaign and policy platform.
You may, but it appears you didn't.
For example ?
Given how much the Coalition's position from the last 5 years has shifted in the last few weeks, I'd be surprised if the voters knew what the Coalition's positions - other than "not Labor" - even were.
That was, after all, the essence of their campaign and policy platform.
Even that's entirely correct as he cherry picked a number of alp policies that he'd previously opposed. NDIS for example.
Anyway, there is one policy that he had for a long time. Direct Action! A policy that boils down to spend $3.2 billion and don't worry if it achieves anything. That sounds like a well thought out and considered policy.
Well the last lot spent a lot more than 3.2B and achieved diddly
You're making assumptions anyway he's been in the job for less than 12 hours you won't give him a chance you want him to fail because you hate him.
Labor were judged on what they'd achieved which wasn't enough which is why they got booted out. The same will happen to TA if everyone thinks Billy & Co will do a better job.
Even that's entirely correct as he cherry picked a number of alp policies that he'd previously opposed. NDIS for example.
I'm not a big fan of positive discrimination just for political correctness to achieve some perceived ideal balance.
You're either the best person for the job or you're not.
You missed out Green it was not Labor & not Green
That's what people voted for
I try to stay out of political discussions but I had to laugh at this statement.Gillard was a very good PM.
A lot of men also missed out on cabinet positions. Does that make them incompetent as well?Anyway, the lack of women in abbott's ministry, despite them having significant experience suggests that liberal women lack competence. Unless there is something else going on.
Only a matter of time before Milne is dumped......their vote is down 3.26%. Thats massive when you only have 11% to start with.
PUP performance really shines the light on how bad the Greens performed.
He was lying you were excluded from "all Australians" never mind only about 1000 sleeps till Billy gets a go lol
AFF Supporters can remove this and all advertisements
I try to stay out of political discussions but I had to laugh at this statement.
A lot of men also missed out on cabinet positions. Does that make them incompetent as well?
Why does everything have to come down to equality amongst the sexes?
"That company is not a good company because only 20% of senior management is female!" And would that company be a good company if 50% of senior management were female?
medhead,"We will strive to govern for all Australians, including those who didn't vote for us" - Abbott.
The man is an absolute joke who clearly doesn't have the first clue about democratic principles.
Try reading this in context of the other posts instead. The contex is all the liberals claiming that the cabinet members are choose on merit only. I'm just pointing out the logical conclusion if their claims where true. I'm applying the standards of the Abbott admirers claims. I'm not sure why that is so hard to understand. Perhaps people choose not to get the point You would find a newspaper opinion piece that agrees with my point.
I certainly have not said anything about affirmative action. Especially as my position is that there are plenty of competent women who seem to have been excluded just because they are women.
Abbott certainly agrees with my view of Gillard given the way he is adopting a majority of her achievements.