The interesting sound of silence.

[medhead]

The ALP had the power in the Senate from 2010 to 2013 to introduce tough measures, but failed to do so. How come? How did they plan to pay for Gonski and the NDIS? Where was the business plan for the $40B NBN?

Remember there are no royalties being paid by the O&G companies on top of the PRRT. The Mining Tax may have been palatable if the State Royalties had been abolished, but which State government would ever want to let go of that revenue?

Norway’s policies are always quoted, but they have some structural problems of their own. Have a read:

The End Of An Oil Boom Is Threatening Norway's Welfare Model | Business Insider
VITENBERG: Norway's shame: How a nation squandered its oil riches - Washington Times

It’s working well now, but how will they adjust the welfare state once the oil money runs out?

No, they didn't have control of the senate. The fact that their measures didn't pass the senate tells us that.

 

[serfty]

It does not help that Opposition have been helping block $5b of their own savings measures.
Labor blocking $5 billion of its own savings measure

 

[medhead]

As we were told numerous times before the last election, the opposition is not required to pass the government's legislation.

 

[serfty]

As we were told numerous times before the last election, the opposition is not required to pass the government's legislation.

Not relevant.

This relates to the opposition not helping pass the opposition's own legislation.

 

[OATEK]

As we were told numerous times before the last election, the opposition is not required to pass the government's legislation.

So you have to be happy that they are little different to their predecessors in opposition. A bit like the Greens refusing to re-index fuel taxes after they carried on about its removal some years ago. Nothing like political expediency trumping policy principles.

 

[medhead]

Not relevant.

This relates to the opposition not helping pass the opposition's own legislation.

Who introduced the legislation to the parliament? The Government? It's not opposition legislation. Remember we had an election. The adults are now running the show.

Remember the adults told us that everything about the last government was wrong

 

[medhead]

So you have to be happy that they are little different to their predecessors in opposition. A bit like the Greens refusing to re-index fuel taxes after they carried on about its removal some years ago. Nothing like political expediency trumping policy principles.

Oh I see everyone has to work together for the country and not be politically expedient, except the LNP. You reap as you sow.

The fact is that Abbott promised to fix everything easily. It is up to him to fix it. It is not up to the opposition to run the country. Governance is the job of the government. Hawke and Keating lead us to fix massive problems. They explained the issues, the solutions and implemented it. It is called leadership and the ball is firmly with Tony Abbott to lead. He asked for the job, now he has to perform.

Plenty of people here say his leadership and his proposed solutions are a dog's breakfast. Why should the opposition support that?

 

[serfty]

Who introduced the legislation to the parliament? The Government? It's not opposition legislation. Remember we had an election. The adults are now running the show....

The ALP introduced facets of legislation which they are now helping to block those same facets being enacted. These represent $5 Billion in savings.

Even the ABC agrees: Labor blocking $5 billion of its own savings measures

 

[OATEK]

Oh I see everyone has to work together for the country and not be politically expedient, except the LNP. You reap as you sow.

The fact is that Abbott promised to fix everything easily. It is up to him to fix it. It is not up to the opposition to run the country. Governance is the job of the government. Hawke and Keating lead us to fix massive problems. They explained the issues, the solutions and implemented it. It is called leadership and the ball is firmly with Tony Abbott to lead. He asked for the job, now he has to perform.

Plenty of people here say his leadership and his proposed solutions are a dog's breakfast. Why should the opposition support that?

All I'm saying is it is hard to take the high moral ground when your side, whichever side that might be (ie. those that supported Tony in opposition, or Bill now) when they exhibit the same expedient politics. I am not saying they should do anything different, just that if they act like their predecessors then don't try an make out they are holding the moral high ground, or could be relied upon to put good policy ahead of expediency if they find themselves elected next time. They have the same feet of clay as those that went before, and probably those that will come after, in my opinion.

 

[Moody]

Watching the Q&A circus for maybe the last time tonight - Quentin Dempster and the ABC are so scared of further cuts that they are giving Alan Jones a soapbox to spew his particularly putrid right wing diatribe. Chris Bowen gets 20 seconds before Alan or Jamie Braggs interject with "it's all Labour's fault".

Heather Ridout makes the most sense followed by Corinne Grant ... but they are shoved to the sidelines. Typical of the times I suppose.

 

[medhead]

The ALP introduced facets of legislation which they are now helping to block those same facets being enacted. These represent $5 Billion in savings.

Even the ABC agrees: Labor blocking $5 billion of its own savings measures

It's a false premise. That the lnp's legislation now. They've adopted it. And as I recall the ALP are blocking those measure because the ALP introduce them with linkages to other measures that the LNP have thrown out. In that situation it is no longer the ALPs measure.

 

[medhead]

All I'm saying is it is hard to take the high moral ground when your side, whichever side that might be (ie. those that supported Tony in opposition, or Bill now) when they exhibit the same expedient politics. I am not saying they should do anything different, just that if they act like their predecessors then don't try an make out they are holding the moral high ground, or could be relied upon to put good policy ahead of expediency if they find themselves elected next time. They have the same feet of clay as those that went before, and probably those that will come after, in my opinion.

We've seen different in the past. If we had a leader, who leads us to Damascus, then political expediency will be sidelined.

 

[burmans]

Gee, that's an interesting twist. I had thought that a vote of confidence would be in not having any spill at all.

It is, but this is politics after all and people like to spin it!

 

[serfty]

It's a false premise. That the lnp's legislation now. They've adopted it. And as I recall the ALP are blocking those measure because the ALP introduce them with linkages to other measures that the LNP have thrown out. In that situation it is no longer the ALPs measure.

It is not a false premise - even ABC's "Fact Check" don't agree with you.

 

[medhead]

It is not a false premise - even ABC's "Fact Check" don't agree with you.

Yet that is still my opinion. I'm not sure why you're trying to prove me wrong.

The government have adopted it as their policy. It is the government's legislation. Especially as the government have retained the full ALP package. You know very well that the LNP is trying to pass a much bigger package that does not have the support of the ALP. So yet again it is a false premise to single out one measure and ignore the rest of the changed situation.

And let's take the key quote from joe hockey in the fact check

"$5 billion of their own savings that they promised the Australian people at the last election".

Last I checked te ALP was not returned to government at the last election. The people rejected their promises. It's up to the LNP if they want to go ahead and introduce similar measures. Those measures belong to the LNP if they wish to adopt them.

 

[JohnK]

I guess rather then calling Tony, one term Tony, in the future it will be half term Tony.

I am not a fan of Abbott but at least he won an election to become Prime Minister of Australia.

 

[Moody]

I am not a fan of Abbott but at least he won an election to become Prime Minister of Australia.

So did Kevin Rudd and so did Julia Gillard.

 

[whatmeworry]

I am not a fan of Abbott but at least he won an election to become Prime Minister of Australia.

Don’t know if Abbott actually won but rather done a Bradbury?

 

[burmans]

So did Kevin Rudd and so did Julia Gillard.

Actually no, to be pedantic none of these people won the election. We get to vote for our local member only, the party room chooses the leader and this has always been the case.

This may sound like a small distinction but in fact it's not really, there are countries where you can vote for a leader, Australia is not one.

 

[Moody]

Actually no, to be pedantic none of these people won the election. We get to vote for our local member only, the party room chooses the leader and this has always been the case.

This may sound like a small distinction but in fact it's not really, there are countries where you can vote for a leader, Australia is not one.

Yep - it sounds like a small distinction because it is (and a petty one at that). Kevin Rudd lead the Labour party to the 2007 federal election, at which they gained the majority of seats and formed government with KR at the helm. Julia Gillard did the same in 2010 (after negotiations with other parties). As they were the party leader they were both sworn in as Prime Minister. This is how the Westminster system works, and whilst it may be technically possible for a party to roll their leader before the swearing in ... it will never happen.

Now shall we get back to discussing whether TA will do the decent thing for his country and his party?