http://www.dfat.gov.au/issues/rra-png.pdf


An absolute disaster by this Labor government

Policies - especially international policies - requires careful wordings setting out the responsibilities of each side.

This is at best a Memorandum of Understanding

A Labor farce

The devil is in the detail, none of which has been worked out yet.
This is going to blow up in KRudd's face.

chicken_lipsforme wrote on Jul 22^nd, 2013 at 7:22pm:

The devil is in the detail, none of which has been worked out yet. This is going to blow up in KRudd's face.

Do you want it to blow up in his face and see people drown at sea or have their skulls caved in on the cliffs of Christmas Island?

Huh?

Oh, do give it a rest.

We all know that if Abbott had come up with this, he's be hailed by you mob as the next Messiah.

Your mob are only opposing this because Labor came up with it first, pre-empting and neutralising
Tony in the process. No other reason.

Just go away.

2 Pages is better than Ros Kelly's Whiteboard

Kat wrote on Jul 22^nd, 2013 at 7:27pm:

Oh, do give it a rest. We all know that if Abbott had come up with this, he's be hailed by you mob as the next Messiah. Your mob are only opposing this because Labor came up with it first, pre-empting and neutralising Tony in the process. No other reason. Just go away.

Exactly.

Aussie wrote on Jul 22^nd, 2013 at 7:25pm:

chicken_lipsforme wrote on Jul 22nd, 2013 at 7:22pm: The devil is in the detail, none of which has been worked out yet. This is going to blow up in KRudd's face. Do you want it to blow up in his face and see people drown at sea or have their skulls caved in on the cliffs of Christmas Island? Huh?

Tough choice, however I like option C which is where the Coalition are elected.

Kat wrote on Jul 22^nd, 2013 at 7:27pm:

Oh, do give it a rest. We all know that if Abbott had come up with this, he's be hailed by you mob as the next Messiah. Your mob are only opposing this because Labor came up with it first, pre-empting and neutralising Tony in the process. No other reason. Just go away.

The Coalition wouldn't have come up with this one first anyway.
No-one does failed policy on the run like Labor. :)

Two pages is better than....

"Uh,uh,uh,er,um,uh.uh.uh."...T. Abbott.

:D

chicken_lipsforme wrote on Jul 22^nd, 2013 at 7:30pm:

Aussie wrote on Jul 22nd, 2013 at 7:25pm: chicken_lipsforme wrote on Jul 22nd, 2013 at 7:22pm: The devil is in the detail, none of which has been worked out yet. This is going to blow up in KRudd's face. Do you want it to blow up in his face and see people drown at sea or have their skulls caved in on the cliffs of Christmas Island? Huh? Tough choice, however I like option C which is where the Coalition are elected.

Okay, you join the baby killers who do not want to stop Achmed.  All good.  Just so you know.

LOL

Rudd making brain dead policy on the run.

In a few weeks he'll wheel out the immigration minister to explain why it all went wrong.

::)

Kat wrote on Jul 22^nd, 2013 at 7:27pm:

Oh, do give it a rest. We all know that if Abbott had come up with this, he's be hailed by you mob as the next Messiah. Your mob are only opposing this because Labor came up with it first, pre-empting and neutralising Tony in the process. No other reason. Just go away.

So when Rudd comes up with a bad policy then you guys get to use the "if Abbott came up with it...."

;D ;D ;D

Kat wrote on Jul 22^nd, 2013 at 7:27pm:

Oh, do give it a rest. We all know that if Abbott had come up with this, he's be hailed by you mob as the next Messiah. Your mob are only opposing this because Labor came up with it first, pre-empting and neutralising Tony in the process. No other reason. Just go away.

It will never even happen.  this is the biggest smokescreen in years.  Rudd has this 'amazing solution' that will not be implemented or even begun before the election. If he wins it will collapse as it is unworkable and still probably illegal. If he loses Abbott will dump it.  Either way, the PNG solution will never happen.

And you lot got sucked in yet again by another labor non-policy.

Maqqa wrote on Jul 22^nd, 2013 at 7:37pm:

Kat wrote on Jul 22nd, 2013 at 7:27pm: Oh, do give it a rest. We all know that if Abbott had come up with this, he's be hailed by you mob as the next Messiah. Your mob are only opposing this because Labor came up with it first, pre-empting and neutralising Tony in the process. No other reason. Just go away. So when Rudd comes up with a bad policy then you guys get to use the "if Abbott came up with it...." ;D ;D ;D

Turning Indonesian ships, that are Indonesian Flagged and who are crewed by Indonesians back to whence they came will do the same job as this but won’t cost a cent…

so why would abbott want this silly idea of RUDDS that's going to cost Australians more Billions?

its not rocket surgery...  :o

True Blue... wrote on Jul 22^nd, 2013 at 7:42pm:

Maqqa wrote on Jul 22nd, 2013 at 7:37pm: Kat wrote on Jul 22nd, 2013 at 7:27pm: Oh, do give it a rest. We all know that if Abbott had come up with this, he's be hailed by you mob as the next Messiah. Your mob are only opposing this because Labor came up with it first, pre-empting and neutralising Tony in the process. No other reason. Just go away. So when Rudd comes up with a bad policy then you guys get to use the "if Abbott came up with it...." ;D ;D ;D Turning Indonesian ships, that are Indonesian Flagged and who are crewed by Indonesians back to whence they came will do the same job as this but won’t cost a cent… so why would abbott want this silly idea of RUDDS that's going to cost Australians more Billions? its not rocket surgery...  :o

rocket science or brain surgery...

Aussie wrote on Jul 22^nd, 2013 at 7:25pm:

chicken_lipsforme wrote on Jul 22nd, 2013 at 7:22pm: The devil is in the detail, none of which has been worked out yet. This is going to blow up in KRudd's face. Do you want it to blow up in his face and see people drown at sea or have their skulls caved in on the cliffs of Christmas Island? Huh?

Predicting something might happen is not the same as wanting it to happen.

Datalife wrote on Jul 22^nd, 2013 at 7:50pm:

Aussie wrote on Jul 22nd, 2013 at 7:25pm: chicken_lipsforme wrote on Jul 22nd, 2013 at 7:22pm: The devil is in the detail, none of which has been worked out yet. This is going to blow up in KRudd's face. Do you want it to blow up in his face and see people drown at sea or have their skulls caved in on the cliffs of Christmas Island? Huh? Predicting something might happen is not the same as wanting it to happen.

So, you predict Rudd's unique solution will result in kids drowning or having their skulls cove in  on the cliffs of Christmas Island.  Please explain why?

Aussie wrote on Jul 22^nd, 2013 at 8:27pm:

Datalife wrote on Jul 22nd, 2013 at 7:50pm: Aussie wrote on Jul 22nd, 2013 at 7:25pm: chicken_lipsforme wrote on Jul 22nd, 2013 at 7:22pm: The devil is in the detail, none of which has been worked out yet. This is going to blow up in KRudd's face. Do you want it to blow up in his face and see people drown at sea or have their skulls caved in on the cliffs of Christmas Island? Huh? Predicting something might happen is not the same as wanting it to happen. So, you predict Rudd's unique solution will result in kids drowning or having their skulls cove in  on the cliffs of Christmas Island.  Please explain why?

LOL, English motherfvucker, do you speak it?

I aint predicting poo, I am still waiting for details on the PNG implementation.

I am pointing out that predicting something will happen is not the same as wanting it to happen. 

Its not a difficult concept to grasp but it seems it eludes you.   ::)

Datalife wrote on Jul 22^nd, 2013 at 7:50pm:

Aussie wrote on Jul 22nd, 2013 at 7:25pm: chicken_lipsforme wrote on Jul 22nd, 2013 at 7:22pm: The devil is in the detail, none of which has been worked out yet. This is going to blow up in KRudd's face. Do you want it to blow up in his face and see people drown at sea or have their skulls caved in on the cliffs of Christmas Island? Huh? Predicting something might happen is not the same as wanting it to happen.

I reckon I am typing in pretty good English.  Okay, let's go back as tad.  What is it that you were predicting?

Aussie wrote on Jul 22^nd, 2013 at 8:39pm:

Datalife wrote on Jul 22nd, 2013 at 7:50pm: Aussie wrote on Jul 22nd, 2013 at 7:25pm: chicken_lipsforme wrote on Jul 22nd, 2013 at 7:22pm: The devil is in the detail, none of which has been worked out yet. This is going to blow up in KRudd's face. Do you want it to blow up in his face and see people drown at sea or have their skulls caved in on the cliffs of Christmas Island? Huh? Predicting something might happen is not the same as wanting it to happen. I reckon I am typing in pretty good English.  Okay, let's go back as tad.  What is it that you were predicting?

Did you read the bit where I said I aint predicting poo?

And this frankly is a waste of time if you are not willing to read, and make the effort to understand what I have written.  After all, none of what I have typed is difficult to grasp.

And you like to pretend you were a lawyer?  Bugger me, hate to see you trying to decipher a contract if what I have written above is enough to confuse you. 

I read this bit.  You wrote it.......in English even:


Quote:

Predicting something might happen is not the same as wanting it to happen.

What was it you were predicting?

Maqqa wrote on Jul 22^nd, 2013 at 7:19pm:

http://www.dfat.gov.au/issues/rra-png.pdf An absolute disaster by this Labor government Policies - especially international policies - requires careful wordings setting out the responsibilities of each side. This is at best a Memorandum of Understanding A Labor farce

doesn't Abbotts 10 page white booklet contain all his policies?  ;D ;D ;D

You are correct to question the detail of this policy Macca.....Kevin Rudd needs to provide the public with the details of what deal he has done with PNG.....I have no problem with Australia helping PNG improve its education, health and justice systems even without asylum seekers being tied to the deal.....My guess is aid will still be provided even if the boats stop which is why PNG agreed to it???

:-? :-? :-?

philperth2010 wrote on Jul 22^nd, 2013 at 9:21pm:

You are correct to question the detail of this policy Macca.....Kevin Rudd needs to provide the public with the details of what deal he has done with PNG.....I have no problem with Australia helping PNG improve its education, health and justice systems even without asylum seekers being tied to the deal.....My guess is aid will still be provided even if the boats stop which is why PNG agreed to it??? :-? :-? :-?

disagree Phil ... maqqa gave up the right to ask for details when he kept making up excuses for Abbotts lack of details.

philperth2010 wrote on Jul 22^nd, 2013 at 9:21pm:

You are correct to question the detail of this policy Macca.....Kevin Rudd needs to provide the public with the details of what deal he has done with PNG.....I have no problem with Australia helping PNG improve its education, health and justice systems even without asylum seekers being tied to the deal.....My guess is aid will still be provided even if the boats stop which is why PNG agreed to it??? :-? :-? :-?

he's offered PNG, including the redevelopment and some running costs of a big hospital, reform of PNG universities, and spending on health, education and law and order .... and that's just for a start...

there's also the cost of yet another processing centre and more housing...

but in the mean time... they have to bulldoze 4000 locals out of one area and will leave them nowhere to live.. '

they are not amused...

John Smith wrote on Jul 22^nd, 2013 at 9:25pm:

philperth2010 wrote on Jul 22nd, 2013 at 9:21pm: You are correct to question the detail of this policy Macca.....Kevin Rudd needs to provide the public with the details of what deal he has done with PNG.....I have no problem with Australia helping PNG improve its education, health and justice systems even without asylum seekers being tied to the deal.....My guess is aid will still be provided even if the boats stop which is why PNG agreed to it??? :-? :-? :-? disagree Phil ... maqqa gave up the right to ask for details when he kept making up excuses for Abbotts lack of details.

You might have a point John, however I would like to know more about this policy before I start singing its praises to loudly.....Abbott has had 3 years to nut out all his policies so we can expect to see the details when the election is called which is fair enough IMO???

:) :) :)

True Blue... wrote on Jul 22^nd, 2013 at 9:32pm:

philperth2010 wrote on Jul 22nd, 2013 at 9:21pm: You are correct to question the detail of this policy Macca.....Kevin Rudd needs to provide the public with the details of what deal he has done with PNG.....I have no problem with Australia helping PNG improve its education, health and justice systems even without asylum seekers being tied to the deal.....My guess is aid will still be provided even if the boats stop which is why PNG agreed to it??? :-? :-? :-? he's offered PNG, including the redevelopment and some running costs of a big hospital, reform of PNG universities, and spending on health, education and law and order .... and that's just for a start...

Great to see Australia providing for our northern neighbours to improve there services!!!

:) :) :)

True Blue... wrote on Jul 22^nd, 2013 at 9:32pm:

philperth2010 wrote on Jul 22nd, 2013 at 9:21pm: You are correct to question the detail of this policy Macca.....Kevin Rudd needs to provide the public with the details of what deal he has done with PNG.....I have no problem with Australia helping PNG improve its education, health and justice systems even without asylum seekers being tied to the deal.....My guess is aid will still be provided even if the boats stop which is why PNG agreed to it??? :-? :-? :-? he's offered PNG, including the redevelopment and some running costs of a big hospital, reform of PNG universities, and spending on health, education and law and order .... and that's just for a start... there's also the cost of yet another processing centre and more housing... but in the mean time... they have to bulldoze 4000 locals out of one area and will leave them nowhere to live.. ' they are not amused...

For whom?

Aussie wrote on Jul 22^nd, 2013 at 8:57pm:

I read this bit.  You wrote it.......in English even: Quote: Predicting something might happen is not the same as wanting it to happen. What was it you were predicting?

Comprehension aint your strong point is it?

But keep asking by all means and demonstrating what a dill you are.

philperth2010 wrote on Jul 22^nd, 2013 at 9:33pm:

John Smith wrote on Jul 22nd, 2013 at 9:25pm: philperth2010 wrote on Jul 22nd, 2013 at 9:21pm: You are correct to question the detail of this policy Macca.....Kevin Rudd needs to provide the public with the details of what deal he has done with PNG.....I have no problem with Australia helping PNG improve its education, health and justice systems even without asylum seekers being tied to the deal.....My guess is aid will still be provided even if the boats stop which is why PNG agreed to it??? :-? :-? :-? disagree Phil ... maqqa gave up the right to ask for details when he kept making up excuses for Abbotts lack of details. You might have a point John, however I would like to know more about this policy before I start singing its praises to loudly.....Abbott has had 3 years to nut out all his policies so we can expect to see the details when the election is called which is fair enough IMO??? :) :) :)

The LIBs policy is simple - Pacific Solution IN FULL

You lefties keep asking for details and the answer is the same each time - PACIFIC SOLUTION

The Pacific Solution was in operation for 6 years so if you are now asking "for details" then you are really not interested in a policy dicussion but like jacksh1t is more interested in political point scoring

I am just giving jacksh1t his just desserts

Last but not least - you ask for details of Rudd's policy

The link provides the exact details of the policy

Once again - read it and have the guts to admit that this is all Labor has in terms of policies

in PNG if the government want you to move they basically tell you to buggeroff...

an area near their airport houses around 4000 PNGins... shanty town like...

they are just going to bulldoze it... the locals say... their words.. in times like this when others have been moved on its up to themselves to go find somewhere new to live..

True Blue... wrote on Jul 22^nd, 2013 at 9:40pm:

in PNG if the government want you to move they basically tell you to buggeroff... an area near their airport houses around 4000 PNGins... shanty town like... they are just going to bulldoze it... the locals say... their words.. in times like this when others have been moved on its up to themselves to go find somewhere new to live..

ONE local......

;)

Maqqa wrote on Jul 22^nd, 2013 at 9:38pm:

philperth2010 wrote on Jul 22nd, 2013 at 9:33pm: John Smith wrote on Jul 22nd, 2013 at 9:25pm: philperth2010 wrote on Jul 22nd, 2013 at 9:21pm: You are correct to question the detail of this policy Macca.....Kevin Rudd needs to provide the public with the details of what deal he has done with PNG.....I have no problem with Australia helping PNG improve its education, health and justice systems even without asylum seekers being tied to the deal.....My guess is aid will still be provided even if the boats stop which is why PNG agreed to it??? :-? :-? :-? disagree Phil ... maqqa gave up the right to ask for details when he kept making up excuses for Abbotts lack of details. You might have a point John, however I would like to know more about this policy before I start singing its praises to loudly.....Abbott has had 3 years to nut out all his policies so we can expect to see the details when the election is called which is fair enough IMO??? :) :) :) The LIBs policy is simple - Pacific Solution IN FULL You lefties keep asking for details and the answer is the same each time - PACIFIC SOLUTION The Pacific Solution was in operation for 6 years so if you are now asking "for details" then you are really not interested in a policy dicussion but like jacksh1t is more interested in political point scoring I am just giving jacksh1t his just desserts Last but not least - you ask for details of Rudd's policy The link provides the exact details of the policy Once again - read it and have the guts to admit that this is all Labor has in terms of policies

The link does not provide details Macca and is as worthless as Abbott's policy booklet.....Unlike you I will not support a policy I know nothing about.....If you think Tony Abbott does not need to provide the Australian public with details of his policies you are deluding yourself.....The Coalition will have to do better than three word slogans to win the election!!!

::) ::) ::)

Aussie, no one is twisting the illegals arms up their backs to make the voyage.

They roll the dice they wear the result. Country shopping is fraught with risks.

Looks like Kevvy has taken the Australia out of Country Shopping for the time being. We will see.

Life is going to get very interesting, for those who have a life on the bounding main up north.

Kat wrote on Jul 22^nd, 2013 at 7:27pm:

Oh, do give it a rest. We all know that if Abbott had come up with this, he's be hailed by you mob as the next Messiah. Your mob are only opposing this because Labor came up with it first, pre-empting and neutralising Tony in the process. No other reason. Just go away.

NOT by ME kat....I think its a shocker...

perhaps you dont know this..but we do have an Embassy in PNG.. it is in a very secure COMPOUND..guarded day and night..

the reason being it is a very dangerous country...any AUstralian from the Ambassador down is paid a large extra sum of money for going there?????????????..

this applies to all dangerous countries of course..anyone applying for PNG gets a mottza...

we also have travel warnings regarding going there......

yet we are prepared to send asylum seekers??? there..with our pretend safety guards in place.... yeah right..if that works like our border control.. well enough said already?????


we have no right at all to send boat people to a poor dsfunctional country like this...they can barely look after their own..I doubt they will be welcome..and I dont care how much rudd has promised them..

this is a desperate measure to win him an election.. disgusting....

first of all this govt changed the rules to get them into a country like Malaysia with its death penalties and public whippings...and now this....

the LIBS would never come up with deal like this anymore than they would make a CARBON TAX deal with the Greens..

IT WOULD NOT HAPPEN SO DONT KID YOURSELF>

red baron wrote on Jul 23^rd, 2013 at 7:23am:

Aussie, no one is twisting the illegals arms up their backs to make the voyage. They roll the dice they wear the result. Country shopping is fraught with risks. Looks like Kevvy has taken the Australia out of Country Shopping for the time being. We will see. Life is going to get very interesting, for those who have a life on the bounding main up north.

the people smugglers will fill the boats with women and children..then what?..hasnt anyone told mudd..oops rudd they dont give a stuff...as long as they pay.

Well, you could always support the correct solution...

On-shore processing, community detention (no 'detention centres'), GPS
ankle-bracelet monitoring, 3 months maximum to process, failures on
next plane out, no appeals.

Oh, but of course. I forgot. Humane solutions are 'leftard ideas' and
therefore anathema to the right.

Maqqa wrote on Jul 22^nd, 2013 at 7:19pm:

http://www.dfat.gov.au/issues/rra-png.pdf An absolute disaster by this Labor government Policies - especially international policies - requires careful wordings setting out the responsibilities of each side. This is at best a Memorandum of Understanding A Labor farce

And there is a very good reason it is only two pages. I was in the cubicle next to Mr Rudd as he was 'working out' the policy. He ran out of toilet paper and had just two sheets on which to record his thoughts. A bit like the NBN deal; that was written on the back of a napkin at the Canberra restaurant "Sh!t Happens".

chicken_lipsforme wrote on Jul 22^nd, 2013 at 7:30pm:

Aussie wrote on Jul 22nd, 2013 at 7:25pm: chicken_lipsforme wrote on Jul 22nd, 2013 at 7:22pm: The devil is in the detail, none of which has been worked out yet. This is going to blow up in KRudd's face. Do you want it to blow up in his face and see people drown at sea or have their skulls caved in on the cliffs of Christmas Island? Huh? Tough choice, however I like option C which is where the Coalition are elected.

So you dont like this policy because it affects Tony's chances of being elected as PM?

Aussie wrote on Jul 22^nd, 2013 at 8:27pm:

Datalife wrote on Jul 22nd, 2013 at 7:50pm: Aussie wrote on Jul 22nd, 2013 at 7:25pm: chicken_lipsforme wrote on Jul 22nd, 2013 at 7:22pm: The devil is in the detail, none of which has been worked out yet. This is going to blow up in KRudd's face. Do you want it to blow up in his face and see people drown at sea or have their skulls caved in on the cliffs of Christmas Island? Huh? Predicting something might happen is not the same as wanting it to happen. So, you predict Rudd's unique solution will result in kids drowning or having their skulls cove in  on the cliffs of Christmas Island.  Please explain why?

Because Rudd's new policy only affects single adult males.
Married men, wives and children will still come to Australia.
No more boatloads of single males as we have seen in the past.
Just more boatloads of 'families'.
Or single men pretending to be married to a female on the boat.
And who can say otherwise when identities are being disposed of.
Labor's policy is no deterrent.

Verge wrote on Jul 23^rd, 2013 at 9:54am:

chicken_lipsforme wrote on Jul 22nd, 2013 at 7:30pm: Aussie wrote on Jul 22nd, 2013 at 7:25pm: chicken_lipsforme wrote on Jul 22nd, 2013 at 7:22pm: The devil is in the detail, none of which has been worked out yet. This is going to blow up in KRudd's face. Do you want it to blow up in his face and see people drown at sea or have their skulls caved in on the cliffs of Christmas Island? Huh? Tough choice, however I like option C which is where the Coalition are elected. So you dont like this policy because it affects Tony's chances of being elected as PM?

Not at all.
I was quite happy on Friday with Rudd's grand announcement that ALL people from boats will be sent to PNG for processing and resettlement if they are deemed to be refugees.
I even raised a glass to celebrate.
However, it turns out Rudd's grand announcement was a lie.
The policy as it stands will not work as it only affects single adult males.
And I'm not interested in supporting a dud policy from any party let alone another fine example of Labors policy on the run.
Even Graham Richardson (Labor stalwart) bagged it.
This is a smoke and mirrors policy designed to hand KRudd the election, and has nothing to do with a policy to stop smugglers boats.
If anything, it will draw more women and children onto leaky boats.