So when can we expect L Plater Abbott to grow up  and do the job he was voted to do

so far

No infrastructure
No job creation
No plans for increasing revenue

The abbott government is chaotic, illogical and destructive via it's inaction in important reform.

On current inaction  Abbott does not deserve another term.

So why are the rusted on righties still backing this pathetic government?

your so right.. bring back milne... shes got all the answers.

cods wrote on Apr 3^rd, 2014 at 9:27am:

your so right.. bring back milne... shes got all the answers.

At least the Greens labor government was a highly successful and productive government.

All Abbott is good at is bringing back titles and unsuccessfully searching for foreign planes with taxpayer's cash.


The L plater is in charge

you are so right and labor could not have been so successful without the help of the greens....

we know!!

we give you so much credit... you wouldnt believe.

yep 50/50 the country owes you guys so much

Labor could have been more successful without the help of the Greens....

Frances wrote on Apr 3^rd, 2014 at 9:48am:

Labor could have been more successful without the help of the Greens....

not at all... we wouldnt have a CARBON TAX but for them... and everyone knows we need a carbon tax... give credit where its due.

who will forget that moment when  jules and booby signed the declaration...unforgettable

____ wrote on Apr 3^rd, 2014 at 9:30am:

cods wrote on Apr 3rd, 2014 at 9:27am: your so right.. bring back milne... shes got all the answers. At least the Greens labor government was a highly successful and productive government. All Abbott is good at is bringing back titles and unsuccessfully searching for foreign planes with taxpayer's cash. The L plater is in charge

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

____ wrote on Apr 3^rd, 2014 at 9:21am:

So when can we expect L Plater Abbott to grow up  and do the job he was voted to do so far No infrastructure No job creation No plans for increasing revenue The abbott government is chaotic, illogical and destructive via it's inaction in important reform. On current inaction  Abbott does not deserve another term. So why are the rusted on righties still backing this pathetic government?

He didn't deserve his first term. Not to worry,six months stuck on bad polls shows he won't be getting another term. 8-)

Frances wrote on Apr 3^rd, 2014 at 9:48am:

Labor could have been more successful without the help of the Greens....

Without the Greens' intransigence, an ETS would have been in place linked to world prices for permits, which are currently less than $10/tonne.

The Greens blocked an ETS in 2009. The Greens demanded a carbon tax in 2010. Without this sabotage from the Greens, the ALP would still be in office today.

By asking for too much, the Greens are going to get nothing. A lesson that Abbott will be learning too.

Bam wrote on Apr 3^rd, 2014 at 10:12am:

Frances wrote on Apr 3rd, 2014 at 9:48am: Labor could have been more successful without the help of the Greens.... Without the Greens' intransigence, an ETS would have been in place linked to world prices for permits, which are currently less than $10/tonne. The Greens blocked an ETS in 2009. The Greens demanded a carbon tax in 2010. Without this sabotage from the Greens, the ALP would still be in office today. By asking for too much, the Greens are going to get nothing. A lesson that Abbott will be learning too.

$4 a tonne and massive compensation to the polluters and to fix would of costed millions in taxpayer's funds. Greens did not support Labor's failure on the greatest moral issue of our generation. It would be like the democrats supporting the GST.


The only reason Abbott ran a successful scare campaign on the carbon mechanism was because of Labor's inability to understand the threat of  human caused climate change is to Australia.

Labor still doesn't understand.

____ wrote on Apr 3^rd, 2014 at 10:28am:

Bam wrote on Apr 3rd, 2014 at 10:12am: Frances wrote on Apr 3rd, 2014 at 9:48am: Labor could have been more successful without the help of the Greens.... Without the Greens' intransigence, an ETS would have been in place linked to world prices for permits, which are currently less than $10/tonne. The Greens blocked an ETS in 2009. The Greens demanded a carbon tax in 2010. Without this sabotage from the Greens, the ALP would still be in office today. By asking for too much, the Greens are going to get nothing. A lesson that Abbott will be learning too. $4 a tonne and massive compensation to the polluters and to fix would of costed millions in taxpayer's funds. Greens did not support Labor's failure on the greatest moral issue of our generation. It would be like the democrats supporting the GST. The only reason Abbott ran a successful scare campaign on the carbon mechanism was because of Labor's inability to understand the threat of  human caused climate change is to Australia. Labor still doesn't understand.

This scare campaign happened because the Greens insisted on a fixed price rather than a floating price.

The Greens voted AGAINST an ETS in 2009, and again in 2010. Why?

____ wrote on Apr 3^rd, 2014 at 9:21am:

So when can we expect L Plater Abbott to grow up  and do the job he was voted to do so far No infrastructure No job creation No plans for increasing revenue The abbott government is chaotic, illogical and destructive via it's inaction in important reform. On current inaction  Abbott does not deserve another term. So why are the rusted on righties still backing this pathetic government?

Six months with an obsolete Senate dishonouring electoral mandates.  When we get rid of this current mob of pathetic 'unrepresentitive swill' and can then repeal the taxathon and anti-enterprise policies of the previous inept Govt things will inevitably start to improve.

Until this happens you'll just have to continue hugging trees, sucking on your latte, smoking your bong or swilling your chardonnay whilst waiting for your latest Govt handout.... 

Bam wrote on Apr 3^rd, 2014 at 10:45am:

____ wrote on Apr 3rd, 2014 at 10:28am: Bam wrote on Apr 3rd, 2014 at 10:12am: Frances wrote on Apr 3rd, 2014 at 9:48am: Labor could have been more successful without the help of the Greens.... Without the Greens' intransigence, an ETS would have been in place linked to world prices for permits, which are currently less than $10/tonne. The Greens blocked an ETS in 2009. The Greens demanded a carbon tax in 2010. Without this sabotage from the Greens, the ALP would still be in office today. By asking for too much, the Greens are going to get nothing. A lesson that Abbott will be learning too. $4 a tonne and massive compensation to the polluters and to fix would of costed millions in taxpayer's funds. Greens did not support Labor's failure on the greatest moral issue of our generation. It would be like the democrats supporting the GST. The only reason Abbott ran a successful scare campaign on the carbon mechanism was because of Labor's inability to understand the threat of  human caused climate change is to Australia. Labor still doesn't understand. This scare campaign happened because the Greens insisted on a fixed price rather than a floating price. The Greens voted AGAINST an ETS in 2009, and again in 2010. Why?

Greens don't support failure just to pretend that action is being taken.

This issue is too important to get it wrong on.

A price on pollution is a mechanism to drive transformation away from the pollution. A extremely weak price with massive compensation equates to no pressure to change from the same old same old.

Swagman wrote on Apr 3^rd, 2014 at 10:55am:

Six months with an obsolete Senate dishonouring electoral mandates

There is no such thing as a mandate in Australian politics.

You are wrong.

Stop being wrong.

This government is a failure and doesn't deserve another term.

Question is: Would a Labor-led coalition be any better?

Who knows?

Swagman wrote on Apr 3^rd, 2014 at 10:55am:

____ wrote on Apr 3rd, 2014 at 9:21am: So when can we expect L Plater Abbott to grow up  and do the job he was voted to do so far No infrastructure No job creation No plans for increasing revenue The abbott government is chaotic, illogical and destructive via it's inaction in important reform. On current inaction  Abbott does not deserve another term. So why are the rusted on righties still backing this pathetic government? Six months with an obsolete Senate dishonouring electoral mandates.  When we get rid of this current mob of pathetic 'unrepresentitive swill' and can then repeal the taxathon and anti-enterprise policies of the previous inept Govt things will inevitably start to improve. Until this happens you'll just have to continue hugging trees, sucking on your latte, smoking your bong or swilling your chardonnay whilst waiting for your latest Govt handout....

So removing revenue is abbott's only agenda?

Swagman wrote on Apr 3^rd, 2014 at 10:55am:

____ wrote on Apr 3rd, 2014 at 9:21am: So when can we expect L Plater Abbott to grow up  and do the job he was voted to do so far No infrastructure No job creation No plans for increasing revenue The abbott government is chaotic, illogical and destructive via it's inaction in important reform. On current inaction  Abbott does not deserve another term. So why are the rusted on righties still backing this pathetic government? Six months with an obsolete Senate dishonouring electoral mandates.

The Coalition have been voting against mandated policies since there's been a Coalition, and Abbott never respected Labor's mandate for a GST since he became leader in 2009 - he BECAME leader of the Liberals specifically so the Liberals could dishonour a mandate.

So the ALP vote against a Coalition policy (what little policy there is), and suddenly it's a bad thing? Liberal party hypocrisy is really coming out in even greater quantities than usual today.

Mandates are a fiction, the Senate is free to vote how it wants. The Abbott-led Liberals could vote against the ETS in 2009 and 2010 because of this - and for the exact same reason (a concept that conservatives can never understand) the current Senate can do exactly the same if it wants.

Bam wrote on Apr 3^rd, 2014 at 11:22am:

and Abbott never respected Labor's mandate for a GST since he became leader in 2009

Labor want a GST now?  ;D


Bam wrote on Apr 3^rd, 2014 at 11:22am:

Mandates are a fiction, the Senate is free to vote how it wants.

Yeah yeah, they don't exist they just follow the crowd at chow time huh?  ;D

The repeal of workchoices was not opposed.  The Coalition recognised the electoral mandate Labor had.  They didn't have to, but they knew it was politically unwise not to.

The unique situation that the voters of WA have though is judging the Labor party's failure to honour the Coalition's mandate.  Will they punish Labor?  :-?

This situation where it takes 8 months to get rid of 1/2 of the obsolete senate is bizzare.

It basically takes away 16% of the Representative Government's term in office.  It has to change.

One Senator elected with a paltry percentage of the vote can entirely hold up the governance of the nation by the House of Reps......it's 'Montypythonish'....  [smiley=thumbdown.gif]

Swagman wrote on Apr 3^rd, 2014 at 11:37am:

The Coalition recognised the electoral mandate Labor had.  They didn't have to, but they knew it was politically unwise not to.

So they have a "mandate" but they "didn't have to"

You do realise it can't be both

hint, it's the second one

Swagman wrote on Apr 3^rd, 2014 at 11:37am:

Bam wrote on Apr 3rd, 2014 at 11:22am: and Abbott never respected Labor's mandate for a GST since he became leader in 2009 Labor want a GST now?  ;D

I accept your concession of this argument.


Quote:

Bam wrote on Apr 3rd, 2014 at 11:22am: Mandates are a fiction, the Senate is free to vote how it wants. Yeah yeah, they don't exist they just follow the crowd at chow time huh?  ;D The repeal of workchoices was not opposed.  The Coalition recognised the electoral mandate Labor had.  They didn't have to, but they knew it was politically unwise not to.

With Labor well ahead in the polls at the time, any attempt to oppose the repeal of the deeply unpopular Workchoices would have been met with two Senate rejections, getting hammered at a DD election (that would have seen up to half a dozen fewer Coalition Senators) and then a joint sitting of parliament to repeal it anyway.

With Abbott trailing in the opinion polls, the DD option is not realistic. If Abbott demands that his mandate be respected, the ALP and the others can laugh at him.


Quote:

The unique situation that the voters of WA have though is judging the Labor party's failure to honour the Coalition's mandate.  Will they punish Labor?  :-?

Not likely, given that the polls are pointing to a 5% swing TO Labor and Labor gaining a Senate seat.


Quote:

This situation where it takes 8 months to get rid of 1/2 of the obsolete senate is bizzare. It basically takes away 16% of the Representative Government's term in office.  It has to change.

This happened because Howard called an early election in 1998. We've been stuck ever since with a situation where there's only been a few available dates for the election to avoid the House and Senate getting out of step. The only way this will be fixed will be a DD at some time in the future.


Quote:

One Senator elected with a paltry percentage of the vote can entirely hold up the governance of the nation by the House of Reps......it's 'Montypythonish'....  [smiley=thumbdown.gif]

You won't find much disagreement here. Number as many boxes above the line as we want, and it should be a valid vote if at least six candidates are chosen. No more group tickets.

Stratos wrote on Apr 3^rd, 2014 at 11:44am:

Swagman wrote on Apr 3rd, 2014 at 11:37am: The Coalition recognised the electoral mandate Labor had.  They didn't have to, but they knew it was politically unwise not to. So they have a "mandate" but they "didn't have to" You do realise it can't be both hint, it's the second one

You do realise that it can...

Swagman wrote on Apr 3^rd, 2014 at 12:30pm:

You do realise that it can...

Oh do go on.   

We have a process in place for the people to decide on a particular policy, and it's called a referendum.

There is no such thing as a mandate in Australian politics, and never has been

Armchair_Politician wrote on Apr 3^rd, 2014 at 10:05am:

____ wrote on Apr 3rd, 2014 at 9:30am: At least the Greens labor government was a highly successful and productive government. HAHAHAHA

Laugh all you want, all it proves is that you have a simplistic understanding of politics. By any measure, the last government was one of the most productive. I know I know, thats not what you believe, but its the truth, no matter what the media tells you. The NBN, the BER, the NDIS, the price on carbon, along with more bills passed than nearly any other government.

You are wrong. Dont be wrong.

History will tell that Gillard was one of the better PMs we have ever had, any any PM in histpory would love her resume of deeds. Whats Howards legacy? What nation building exercises did he partake? Sure there was the gun buy back, which I support 100%. Other than that, what? Gillard had 4 signature policies that any other PM would be glad to have just 1 of.

donincognito wrote on Apr 3^rd, 2014 at 1:40pm:

Armchair_Politician wrote on Apr 3rd, 2014 at 10:05am: ____ wrote on Apr 3rd, 2014 at 9:30am: At least the Greens labor government was a highly successful and productive government. HAHAHAHA Laugh all you want, all it proves is that you have a simplistic understanding of politics. By any measure, the last government was one of the most productive. I know I know, thats not what you believe, but its the truth, no matter what the media tells you. The NBN, the BER, the NDIS, the price on carbon, along with more bills passed than nearly any other government. You are wrong. Dont be wrong. History will tell that Gillard was one of the better PMs we have ever had, any any PM in histpory would love her resume of deeds. Whats Howards legacy? What nation building exercises did he partake? Sure there was the gun buy back, which I support 100%. Other than that, what? Gillard had 4 signature policies that any other PM would be glad to have just 1 of.

istory will tell that Gillard was one of the better PMs we have ever had, any any PM in histpory would love her resume of deeds. Whats Howards legacy? What nation building exercises did he partake? Sure there was the gun buy back, which I support 100%. Other than that, what? Gillard had 4 signature policies that any other PM would be glad to have just 1 of.
Back to top      

Unfunded  ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

Bam wrote on Apr 3^rd, 2014 at 10:12am:

Frances wrote on Apr 3rd, 2014 at 9:48am: Labor could have been more successful without the help of the Greens.... Without the Greens' intransigence, an ETS would have been in place linked to world prices for permits, which are currently less than $10/tonne. The Greens blocked an ETS in 2009. The Greens demanded a carbon tax in 2010. Without this sabotage from the Greens, the ALP would still be in office today. By asking for too much, the Greens are going to get nothing. A lesson that Abbott will be learning too.

There was/is a lot more wrong with the ALP than just their Carbon policies.
Or have you forgotten?

Peter Freedman wrote on Apr 3^rd, 2014 at 11:18am:

This government is a failure and doesn't deserve another term.  Rubbish...  for starters it succeeded in 6 months to do what Labor undid and couldn't redo in 6 years. Question is: Would a Labor-led coalition be any better? Who knows? We do... we just had one... it was a disaster, that's why we got rid of it.

Quote:

The Coalition have been voting against mandated policies since there's been a Coalition, and Abbott never respected Labor's mandate for a GST since he became leader in 2009 - he BECAME leader of the Liberals specifically so the Liberals could dishonour a mandate.

More rubbish...  the 2007 election was about Workchoices...  the Coalition allowed Labor to have their way on it.
BTW Howard brought in the GST and took it to the people.

Grendel wrote on Apr 3^rd, 2014 at 2:05pm:

Quote: The Coalition have been voting against mandated policies since there's been a Coalition, and Abbott never respected Labor's mandate for a GST since he became leader in 2009 - he BECAME leader of the Liberals specifically so the Liberals could dishonour a mandate. More rubbish...  the 2007 election was about Workchoices...  the Coalition allowed Labor to have their way on it. BTW Howard brought in the GST and took it to the people.

Silly typo on my part. I meant to say ETS here. I had been discussing the GST in another thread.

Asserting that the 2007 was about Workchoices is simplistic. Labor had other policies as well, including the ETS. For Abbott to instruct the Liberals to vote against the ETS in 2009 not only went against Labor's mandate, but HIS OWN PARTY'S mandate as well. Not following the policies of other parties is understandable, but going against a policy that his own party took to an election is another matter.

Bam wrote on Apr 3^rd, 2014 at 2:50pm:

Grendel wrote on Apr 3rd, 2014 at 2:05pm: Quote: The Coalition have been voting against mandated policies since there's been a Coalition, and Abbott never respected Labor's mandate for a GST since he became leader in 2009 - he BECAME leader of the Liberals specifically so the Liberals could dishonour a mandate. More rubbish...  the 2007 election was about Workchoices...  the Coalition allowed Labor to have their way on it. BTW Howard brought in the GST and took it to the people. Silly typo on my part. I meant to say ETS here. I had been discussing the GST in another thread. Asserting that the 2007 was about Workchoices is simplistic. Not really... it was THE major concern/issue...  led the ads and was the major topic on many fronts Unions and various groups had it as their major issue. Labor had other policies as well, including the ETS. Which wasn't an issue between the major parties because they were both running and ETS ticket.   For Abbott to instruct the Liberals to vote against the ETS in 2009 not only went against Labor's mandate, but HIS OWN PARTY'S mandate as well. Not following the policies of other parties is understandable, but going against a policy that his own party took to an election is another matter. Claiming a mandate is stupid...  only a pleb really gives you a mandate.  But in terms of an election mandate...  usually 1 policy is the major issue and that IMO is the mandated policy for the election...  in 2007 it was WORKCHOICES and the Coalition honoured that mandate.  In fact they divorced themselves from that policy and identified it as the main issue and the issue that lost them the election it was the defining difference between the parties...  hence they acknowledged labor had a mandate to get rid of it. I think you will find that not all in the Libs was happy with an ETS, Howard admitted he brought it in because he wanted to neutralise the difference, not because he agreed with it, he was faced with a perfect storm on it...  and hence later Turnbull lost the Leadership.

____ wrote on Apr 3^rd, 2014 at 9:30am:

At least the Greens labor government was a highly successful and productive government. All Abbott is good at is bringing back titles and unsuccessfully searching for foreign planes with taxpayer's cash. The L plater is in charge

And so ends any credibility he may have had

I have confidence in the Liberals to get the deficit under control eventually, do that and a lot of the economy looks after itself.

We are however doomed to re elect labor as we have done so many times in the past.
Usually when the economy is working and the budget in the black, so Labor can piss it up against the wall again.

Grendel wrote on Apr 3^rd, 2014 at 3:10pm:

Bam wrote on Apr 3rd, 2014 at 2:50pm: Grendel wrote on Apr 3rd, 2014 at 2:05pm: Quote: The Coalition have been voting against mandated policies since there's been a Coalition, and Abbott never respected Labor's mandate for a GST since he became leader in 2009 - he BECAME leader of the Liberals specifically so the Liberals could dishonour a mandate. More rubbish...  the 2007 election was about Workchoices...  the Coalition allowed Labor to have their way on it. BTW Howard brought in the GST and took it to the people. Silly typo on my part. I meant to say ETS here. I had been discussing the GST in another thread. Asserting that the 2007 was about Workchoices is simplistic. Not really... it was THE major concern/issue...  led the ads and was the major topic on many fronts Unions and various groups had it as their major issue. Labor had other policies as well, including the ETS. Which wasn't an issue between the major parties because they were both running and ETS ticket.   For Abbott to instruct the Liberals to vote against the ETS in 2009 not only went against Labor's mandate, but HIS OWN PARTY'S mandate as well. Not following the policies of other parties is understandable, but going against a policy that his own party took to an election is another matter. Claiming a mandate is stupid...  only a pleb really gives you a mandate.  But in terms of an election mandate...  usually 1 policy is the major issue and that IMO is the mandated policy for the election...  in 2007 it was WORKCHOICES and the Coalition honoured that mandate.  In fact they divorced themselves from that policy and identified it as the main issue and the issue that lost them the election it was the defining difference between the parties...  hence they acknowledged labor had a mandate to get rid of it. I think you will find that not all in the Libs was happy with an ETS, Howard admitted he brought it in because he wanted to neutralise the difference, not because he agreed with it, he was faced with a perfect storm on it...  and hence later Turnbull lost the Leadership.

Rubbish. This is the stupidest mandate argument I have seen. Since when is a so-called "mandate" only limited to ONE policy? Which SINGLE policy is Abbott supposed to have a mandate on?