Why should he disregard democracy, which he would be doing if he did allow a conscience vote? I know that the ALP continuously undermine and disregrd democracy, but that's no reason to think that the Coalition should as well.

This is at least the third time you've started this same topic, mellie,grow up.

matty wrote on Feb 2^nd, 2012 at 10:06am:

Why should he disregard democracy, which he would be doing if he did allow a conscience vote? I know that the ALP continuously undermine and disregrd democracy, but that's no reason to think that the Coalition should as well.

I see that at best you have a pretty tenuous grip on the concept of democracy. Either that or you just refuse to understand.

Because a matter such as gay marriage should not be about a party platform, rather a conscience decision made by each member who can be held accountable by his or her electorate.

This is more a moral and personal issue, and the vote should reflect that over a "party position".

I believe matters such of this to be a party position just smacks in the face of true democracy. 

Because he has a conscience?

The same follows for Labor?

And Yes, I know!

Gist wrote on Feb 2^nd, 2012 at 10:38am:

matty wrote on Feb 2nd, 2012 at 10:06am: Why should he disregard democracy, which he would be doing if he did allow a conscience vote? I know that the ALP continuously undermine and disregrd democracy, but that's no reason to think that the Coalition should as well. I see that at best you have a pretty tenuous grip on the concept of democracy. Either that or you just refuse to understand.

1.A system of government by the whole population or all the eligible members of a state, typically through elected representatives.


The Coalition went to the last election with a policy of no carbon tax. For them to now have a conscience vote allows the member alone to decide, and disregard their constituents. So, please explain how I have misinterpreted democracy.

Tony Abbott's swing on same-sex marriage

LIBERAL leader Tony Abbott told senior colleagues last year he would allow MPs a free vote on same-sex marriage legislation -- but then changed his mind.

The Australian has learnt that in the aftermath of the Labor Party conference decision to back a conscience vote on same-sex marriage, Mr Abbott supported a similar position in the Coalition.

Sources said he later changed his position, telling Coalition MPs they were voted in on a platform of opposing same-sex marriage, and accused the Prime Minister of breaking her own commitments on the matter.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/tony-abbotts-swing-on-same-sex-marriage/story-fn59niix-1226250767160

He thought it was a good idea until Labor agreed to allow a concience vote as well......then reality dawned on the Mad Monk and he realised gays might actually get the right to marry eachother if he allowed a concience vote.....What a flake Abbott is considering what he told the gay community to soften his image about gays!!!

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2010-03-25/abbott-seeks-to-mend-bridges-on-gay-radio/379304

Mr Abbott, who once trained in the seminary, says while he was brought up traditionally, he strives to take people as he finds them and is in favour of gay relationships being celebrated and recognised.

matty wrote on Feb 2^nd, 2012 at 10:48am:

The Coalition went to the last election with a policy of no carbon tax. For them to now have a conscience vote allows the member alone to decide, and disregard their constituents. So, please explain how I have misinterpreted democracy.

It may surprise you matty but the members are there to represent their electorate, not to represent their party. If they were allowed a conscience vote on any issue then they are free to vote as they believe the people in their electorate would want, not how the party would want.

Any conscience vote is therefore an exercise of democratic system as was intended to be. It certainly is NOT a disregarding of democracy as you claim.

matty wrote on Feb 2^nd, 2012 at 10:06am:

Why should he disregard democracy, which he would be doing if he did allow a conscience vote?

Your "Mr" Howard disregarded democracy on at least FOUR occasions during his time as PM

Including on abortion drug RU486, euthanasia and cloning bills




http://www.aph.gov.au/library/pubs/cib/2002-03/03cib01.htm#table2

Gist wrote on Feb 2^nd, 2012 at 11:14am:

matty wrote on Feb 2nd, 2012 at 10:48am: The Coalition went to the last election with a policy of no carbon tax. For them to now have a conscience vote allows the member alone to decide, and disregard their constituents. So, please explain how I have misinterpreted democracy. It may surprise you matty but the members are there to represent their electorate, not to represent their party. If they were allowed a conscience vote on any issue then they are free to vote as they believe the people in their electorate would want, not how the party would want. Any conscience vote is therefore an exercise of democratic system as was intended to be. It certainly is NOT a disregarding of democracy as you claim.

It most certainly IS. The Liberals and Nationals went to the last election with a policy of no change to the marriage act. 72 electorates elected members. If they went and voted FOR homosexual marriage, then it IS undermining democracy.

buzzanddidj wrote on Feb 2^nd, 2012 at 11:17am:

matty wrote on Feb 2nd, 2012 at 10:06am: Why should he disregard democracy, which he would be doing if he did allow a conscience vote? Your "Mr" Howard disregarded democracy on at least FOUR occasions during his time as PM Including on abortion drug RU486, euthanasia and cloning bills http://www.aph.gov.au/library/pubs/cib/2002-03/03cib01.htm#table2

Please explain.

Verge wrote on Feb 2^nd, 2012 at 10:42am:

Because a matter such as gay marriage should not be about a party platform, rather a conscience decision made by each member who can be held accountable by his or her electorate. This is more a moral and personal issue, and the vote should reflect that over a "party position". I believe matters such of this to be a party position just smacks in the face of true democracy.

Says whom?

matty wrote on Feb 2^nd, 2012 at 1:48pm:

buzzanddidj wrote on Feb 2nd, 2012 at 11:17am: matty wrote on Feb 2nd, 2012 at 10:06am: Why should he disregard democracy, which he would be doing if he did allow a conscience vote? Your "Mr" Howard disregarded democracy on at least FOUR occasions during his time as PM Including on abortion drug RU486, euthanasia and cloning bills http://www.aph.gov.au/library/pubs/cib/2002-03/03cib01.htm#table2 Please explain.

To an ADULT - with a rudimentary understanding of the Westminster system - it's quite self explanatory


( ... ask your teacher)

buzzanddidj wrote on Feb 2^nd, 2012 at 2:04pm:

matty wrote on Feb 2nd, 2012 at 1:48pm: buzzanddidj wrote on Feb 2nd, 2012 at 11:17am: matty wrote on Feb 2nd, 2012 at 10:06am: Why should he disregard democracy, which he would be doing if he did allow a conscience vote? Your "Mr" Howard disregarded democracy on at least FOUR occasions during his time as PM Including on abortion drug RU486, euthanasia and cloning bills http://www.aph.gov.au/library/pubs/cib/2002-03/03cib01.htm#table2 Please explain. To an ADULT - with a rudimentary understanding of the Westminster system - it's quite self explanatory ( ... ask your teacher)

Did mr Howard ever go to an electio promising something (or a lack of something) and then reneged?

matty wrote on Feb 2^nd, 2012 at 10:06am:

Why should he disregard democracy, which he would be doing if he did allow a conscience vote? I know that the ALP continuously undermine and disregrd democracy, but that's no reason to think that the Coalition should as well.

Can you explain how it undermines democracy to allow elected representatives to vote how they see fit?

[quote author=5A5643434E370 He promised to never implement a GST under any government he led.

He said there were no planned changes to IR before the election and then introduced workchoices.

He went to an election insisting that children were thrown overboard and after the election they weren’t.

Dnarever wrote on Feb 2^nd, 2012 at 8:09pm:

[quote author=5A5643434E370 He promised to never implement a GST under any government he led. He said there were no planned changes to IR before the election and then introduced workchoices. He went to an election insisting that children were thrown overboard and after the election they weren’t.

Oh FFS will you get another barrow to push as this one has been around the block that often it's wheel is like one  on a shopping trolley.

Matty, these people are hideous.

We know that Mr Abbott is the real democrat. It's Juliar that's the fake.

matty wrote on Feb 2^nd, 2012 at 7:57pm:

buzzanddidj wrote on Feb 2nd, 2012 at 2:04pm: matty wrote on Feb 2nd, 2012 at 1:48pm: buzzanddidj wrote on Feb 2nd, 2012 at 11:17am: matty wrote on Feb 2nd, 2012 at 10:06am: Why should he disregard democracy, which he would be doing if he did allow a conscience vote? Your "Mr" Howard disregarded democracy on at least FOUR occasions during his time as PM Including on abortion drug RU486, euthanasia and cloning bills http://www.aph.gov.au/library/pubs/cib/2002-03/03cib01.htm#table2 Please explain. To an ADULT - with a rudimentary understanding of the Westminster system - it's quite self explanatory ( ... ask your teacher) Did mr Howard ever go to an electio promising something (or a lack of something) and then reneged?

LOL !


That's all been WELL documented ...

http://www.awu.net.au/109589607626152_5.html?H%7C19%7C109589607626152%7C1650569191203


But don't fret
ALL politicians do it
I don't even call it "lieing"

Like Gillard's carbon pricing, Howard ALSO had the need to alter elected on policy as situations altered




This is why his advisors created the term "non core" or "aspirational" policy

LIBERAL leader Tony Abbott told senior colleagues last year he would allow MPs a free vote on same-sex marriage legislation -- but then changed his mind.

The Australian has learnt that in the aftermath of the Labor Party conference decision to back a conscience vote on same-sex marriage, Mr Abbott supported a similar position in the Coalition.

Sources said he later changed his position, telling Coalition MPs they were voted in on a platform of opposing same-sex marriage, and accused the Prime Minister of breaking her own commitments on the matter.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/tony-abbotts-swing-on-same-sex-marriage/story-fn59niix-1226250767160

He thought it was a good idea until Labor agreed to allow a concience vote as well......then reality dawned on the Mad Monk and he realised gays might actually get the right to marry eachother if he allowed a concience vote.....What a flake Abbott is considering what he told the gay community to soften his image about gays!!!

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2010-03-25/abbott-seeks-to-mend-bridges-on-gay-radio/379304

Mr Abbott, who once trained in the seminary, says while he was brought up traditionally, he strives to take people as he finds them and is in favour of gay relationships being celebrated and recognised.

freediver wrote on Feb 2^nd, 2012 at 8:02pm:

matty wrote on Feb 2nd, 2012 at 10:06am: Why should he disregard democracy, which he would be doing if he did allow a conscience vote? I know that the ALP continuously undermine and disregrd democracy, but that's no reason to think that the Coalition should as well. Can you explain how it undermines democracy to allow elected representatives to vote how they see fit?

Because the Coalition MPs were elected under a platform of no change to the marriage act.

Dnarever wrote on Feb 2^nd, 2012 at 8:09pm:

[quote author=5A5643434E370 He promised to never implement a GST under any government he led. He said there were no planned changes to IR before the election and then introduced workchoices. He went to an election insisting that children were thrown overboard and after the election they weren’t.

We've been over this so many times. It's not my fault that you're too stupid to see the difference.

buzzanddidj wrote on Feb 2^nd, 2012 at 8:30pm:

matty wrote on Feb 2nd, 2012 at 7:57pm: buzzanddidj wrote on Feb 2nd, 2012 at 2:04pm: matty wrote on Feb 2nd, 2012 at 1:48pm: buzzanddidj wrote on Feb 2nd, 2012 at 11:17am: matty wrote on Feb 2nd, 2012 at 10:06am: Why should he disregard democracy, which he would be doing if he did allow a conscience vote? Your "Mr" Howard disregarded democracy on at least FOUR occasions during his time as PM Including on abortion drug RU486, euthanasia and cloning bills http://www.aph.gov.au/library/pubs/cib/2002-03/03cib01.htm#table2 Please explain. To an ADULT - with a rudimentary understanding of the Westminster system - it's quite self explanatory ( ... ask your teacher) Did mr Howard ever go to an electio promising something (or a lack of something) and then reneged? LOL ! That's all been WELL documented ... http://www.awu.net.au/109589607626152_5.html?H%7C19%7C109589607626152%7C1650569191203 But don't fret ALL politicians do it I don't even call it "lieing" Like Gillard's carbon pricing, Howard ALSO had the need to alter elected on policy as situations altered This is why his advisors created the term "non core" or "aspirational" policy Any policy on which he reneged? The best that the left have is the GST, which has been explained time and time again. He took it straight to a new election when he changed his mind.

matty wrote on Feb 2^nd, 2012 at 9:10pm:

buzzanddidj wrote on Feb 2nd, 2012 at 8:30pm: matty wrote on Feb 2nd, 2012 at 7:57pm: buzzanddidj wrote on Feb 2nd, 2012 at 2:04pm: matty wrote on Feb 2nd, 2012 at 1:48pm: buzzanddidj wrote on Feb 2nd, 2012 at 11:17am: matty wrote on Feb 2nd, 2012 at 10:06am: Why should he disregard democracy, which he would be doing if he did allow a conscience vote? Your "Mr" Howard disregarded democracy on at least FOUR occasions during his time as PM Including on abortion drug RU486, euthanasia and cloning bills http://www.aph.gov.au/library/pubs/cib/2002-03/03cib01.htm#table2 Please explain. To an ADULT - with a rudimentary understanding of the Westminster system - it's quite self explanatory ( ... ask your teacher) Did mr Howard ever go to an electio promising something (or a lack of something) and then reneged? LOL ! That's all been WELL documented ... http://www.awu.net.au/109589607626152_5.html?H%7C19%7C109589607626152%7C1650569191203 But don't fret ALL politicians do it I don't even call it "lieing" Like Gillard's carbon pricing, Howard ALSO had the need to alter elected on policy as situations altered This is why his advisors created the term "non core" or "aspirational" policy Any policy on which he reneged? The best that the left have is the GST, which has been explained time and time again. He took it straight to a new election when he changed his mind.

Oh COME ON !
Pick a number
ANY number


Quote:

John Howard Lie #10 Journalist: "Will the number of pages in the Tax Act be reduced by the introduction of a GST?" Prime Minister: "Yes it will" - John Howard, interview Alan Jones Radio 2UE, 14 August 1998 The Truth: ". . . the Tax Act has grown from 3,000 to over 9,000 pages and an additional 2.5 million words have been inserted into the Tax Act, since 1 July 2000. Apart from these overwhelming changes foisted onto small businesses, we now have over 2 million businesses registered under the GST, compared to less than 17,000 under the former sales tax regime." - National Tax & Accountants' Association, 15 August 2002

http://www.awu.net.au/109589607626152_5.html?H%7C19%7C109589607626152%7C1650569191203