Australian Politics Forum - Labor's petulance on display

philperth2010 Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 20470 Perth Gender:	Re: Labor's petulance on display Reply #45 - Mar 27^th, 2014 at 6:35pm Aussie wrote on Mar 27^th, 2014 at 6:01pm: How do you get hold of those You Tube clips so quickly? Google!!!
Back to top	If knowledge can create problems, it is not through ignorance that we can solve them. Isaac Asimov (1920 - 1992) IP Logged

Bam

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 21905
Gender: male

Re: Labor's petulance on display
Reply #46 - Mar 27^th, 2014 at 6:36pm

It does not take long to find examples from the House Hansard.

March 3 2014, Shorten to Abbott, Qantas
Quote:

Mr SHORTEN (Maribyrnong—Leader of the Opposition) (14:13): My question is to the Prime Minister. The Treasurer confirmed on 13 February that Qantas had met each of the Treasurer's four preconditions for government involvement in individual enterprises. Prime Minister, if Qantas has met the Treasurer's test, why will the government not act?

Mr ABBOTT (Warringah—Prime Minister) (14:13): We are more than happy, as the Treasurer has abundantly made clear, to take the shackles off Qantas. That is what we want to do. We want to get rid of the carbon tax, which is a $100 million-plus hit on Qantas jobs, and we do want to remove from Qantas the shackles placed upon it by the Qantas Sale Act. Again I say to Leader of the Opposition: if he is fair dinkum about wanting to help the workers at Qantas, if he is fair dinkum about wanting to do the right thing by Qantas—make Qantas more competitive and more efficient in these difficult days—he should work with the government to decouple the bills in the Senate so that this very day we can free all of the airlines of this country from the carbon tax. The only thing stopping that is the Leader of the Opposition.

Mr Burke: Madam Speaker, I rise on a point of order. The question referred specifically to the Treasurer's four preconditions, and the Prime Minister is going absolutely nowhere near it.

The SPEAKER:

The Prime Minister is addressing the issue that was raised in the question, but it would be good if he would address it specifically.

Mr ABBOTT: What members opposite essentially want the government to do is provide to one airline what we would not provide to all. What this government wants to do is ensure that all airlines are given the level playing field that they deserve. Unlike members opposite who believe in chequebook government and playing favourites amongst businesses, we do not. We want to give all airlines a fair go, and that includes Qantas.

Mr Burke: Madam Speaker, I rise on a point of order.

The SPEAKER:

Manager of Opposition Business, you have already had one point of order on relevance; you cannot have two.

Mr Burke: You agreed with my ruling, Madam Speaker, and the Prime Minister defied it. If it assists the Prime Minister, I seek leave to table—

The SPEAKER:

The Prime Minister has concluded his answer. The Manager of Opposition Business will resume his seat.

Mr Burke: I just sought leave to table a document. Why can't I do that at the end of an answer?

The SPEAKER: You can. Is leave given?

Mr Pyne: No.

The SPEAKER: Leave is not given.

Mr Burke: Madam Speaker, you have not allowed me to say what the document is. I don't know if they can tell when I hold it up, but I think it is reasonable for me to explain what the document is.

The SPEAKER: Does the Leader of the House intend to give leave to this document—

Mr BURKE: Regardless of what it is?

The SPEAKER: regardless of what it is?

Mr Pyne: No.

The SPEAKER: The Leader of the House has said that, regardless of what it is, he is not giving leave. The Manager of Opposition Business will resume his seat.

Mr Burke: Is it now the case that, against all the traditions of this House, we are no longer allowed to say what the document is? Because that is an extraordinary ruling inconsistent with—

The SPEAKER: It is not a ruling.

Mr Burke: every single precedent set by people who have sat in that chair.

The SPEAKER: It is not a ruling. We will see what happens next time.

Mr Burke: If there is no ruling, I seek leave to table the four principles that were laid down by the Treasurer.

The SPEAKER: Is leave given?

Mr Pyne: No, it is not.

The SPEAKER: Leave is not given.

Back to top

You are not entitled to your opinion. You are only entitled to hold opinions that you can defend through sound, reasoned argument.

IP Logged

skippy.

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 20882
Gender: male

Re: Labor's petulance on display
Reply #47 - Mar 27^th, 2014 at 6:48pm

Armchair_Politician wrote on Mar 27^th, 2014 at 2:50pm:

skippy. wrote on Mar 27^th, 2014 at 2:43pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 27^th, 2014 at 2:37pm:

Are all these AP threads meant to distract us from the fact that AP lied about the wreckage of the lost Malaysian flight?

Undecided

I think he wants to bury the story about the basher having his worst week yet as PM that is even doing the rounds in News lmd papers.

Rudd isn't PM anymore and hasn't been in the news for a while??? Huh

Oh really dear? Oh well seeing as though you want to be a petulant little sook bag here is the link and some quotes from the news lmd report about the women basher being so on the nose, suck it up princess plenty more to come, office girl.

http://www.news.com.au/national/tony-abbott-battered-and-ridiculed-over-knightho...
Quote:

TONY Abbott is having his worst week since he became Prime Minister because he is straying from the sacred “core issues” of his party.

.

Quote:

The Prime Minister’s rash plan to change the Racial Discrimination Act and his revival of knighthoods were not treasured policies of the Liberal Party waiting for implementation.They were personal indulgences Mr Abbott shared with a bunch of blokes he occasionally had a beer with

These are just comments,FROM THE LIBERAL PARTY GAZZET Imagine what the Bi partisan papers are saying, office skirt?? Grin

Back to top

freedivers other forum- POLITICAL ANIMAL
Click onWWW below

IP Logged

Grendel

Gold Member

Offline

OzPolitic

Posts: 28080
Gender: male

Re: Labor's petulance on display
Reply #48 - Mar 27^th, 2014 at 6:51pm

Bam wrote on Mar 27^th, 2014 at 6:36pm:

It does not take long to find examples from the House Hansard.

March 3 2014, Shorten to Abbott, Qantas
Quote:

Mr SHORTEN (Maribyrnong—Leader of the Opposition) (14:13): My question is to the Prime Minister. The Treasurer confirmed on 13 February that Qantas had met each of the Treasurer's four preconditions for government involvement in individual enterprises. Prime Minister, if Qantas has met the Treasurer's test, why will the government not act?

Mr ABBOTT (Warringah—Prime Minister) (14:13): We are more than happy, as the Treasurer has abundantly made clear, to take the shackles off Qantas. That is what we want to do. We want to get rid of the carbon tax, which is a $100 million-plus hit on Qantas jobs, and we do want to remove from Qantas the shackles placed upon it by the Qantas Sale Act. Again I say to Leader of the Opposition: if he is fair dinkum about wanting to help the workers at Qantas, if he is fair dinkum about wanting to do the right thing by Qantas—make Qantas more competitive and more efficient in these difficult days—he should work with the government to decouple the bills in the Senate so that this very day we can free all of the airlines of this country from the carbon tax. The only thing stopping that is the Leader of the Opposition.

Mr Burke: Madam Speaker, I rise on a point of order. The question referred specifically to the Treasurer's four preconditions, and the Prime Minister is going absolutely nowhere near it.

The SPEAKER:

The Prime Minister is addressing the issue that was raised in the question, but it would be good if he would address it specifically.

Mr ABBOTT: What members opposite essentially want the government to do is provide to one airline what we would not provide to all. What this government wants to do is ensure that all airlines are given the level playing field that they deserve. Unlike members opposite who believe in chequebook government and playing favourites amongst businesses, we do not. We want to give all airlines a fair go, and that includes Qantas.

Mr Burke: Madam Speaker, I rise on a point of order.

The SPEAKER:

Manager of Opposition Business, you have already had one point of order on relevance; you cannot have two.

Mr Burke: You agreed with my ruling, Madam Speaker, and the Prime Minister defied it. If it assists the Prime Minister, I seek leave to table—

The SPEAKER:

The Prime Minister has concluded his answer. The Manager of Opposition Business will resume his seat.

Mr Burke: I just sought leave to table a document. Why can't I do that at the end of an answer?

The SPEAKER: You can. Is leave given?

Mr Pyne: No.

The SPEAKER: Leave is not given.

Mr Burke: Madam Speaker, you have not allowed me to say what the document is. I don't know if they can tell when I hold it up, but I think it is reasonable for me to explain what the document is.

The SPEAKER: Does the Leader of the House intend to give leave to this document—

Mr BURKE: Regardless of what it is?

The SPEAKER: regardless of what it is?

Mr Pyne: No.

The SPEAKER: The Leader of the House has said that, regardless of what it is, he is not giving leave. The Manager of Opposition Business will resume his seat.

Mr Burke: Is it now the case that, against all the traditions of this House, we are no longer allowed to say what the document is? Because that is an extraordinary ruling inconsistent with—

The SPEAKER: It is not a ruling.

Mr Burke: every single precedent set by people who have sat in that chair.

The SPEAKER: It is not a ruling. We will see what happens next time.

Mr Burke: If there is no ruling, I seek leave to table the four principles that were laid down by the Treasurer.

The SPEAKER: Is leave given?

Mr Pyne: No, it is not.

The SPEAKER: Leave is not given.

You gonna table every time Anna Burke tossed out a Coalition member and allowed questions to go unanswered? I mean to say we have to be fair about this don't we?

Back to top

IP Logged

Grendel

Gold Member

Offline

OzPolitic

Posts: 28080
Gender: male

Re: Labor's petulance on display
Reply #49 - Mar 27^th, 2014 at 6:54pm

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Mar 27^th, 2014 at 5:26pm:

Grendel wrote on Mar 27^th, 2014 at 5:17pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Mar 27^th, 2014 at 5:09pm:

Grendel wrote on Mar 27^th, 2014 at 5:00pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Mar 27^th, 2014 at 4:10pm:

Grendel wrote on Mar 27^th, 2014 at 3:20pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Mar 27^th, 2014 at 2:43pm:

Normally the speaker is biased, we know this. But for one side to actually come out and say they are the MOST biased? hmmm, tells me that she must be pretty biased. Duchess Bishop must quit.

No it tells you how biased and childish this bunch of ALP members are.
Dreyfus has deserved the boot many times and not got it under a Labor speakership.
Anna Burke was very biased and allowed the ALP to do whatever they pleased and continually fail to answer questions.
She has no credibility or right to criticise anyone.

Care to show us examples, oh dear conservative leftie?

Or are you doing your usual finger at lips and shake routine?

Perhaps you missed parliament on tv under Burke.
So why are you here debating stuff you are ignorant of.
I saw it I know how biased she was even Jenkins was biased but you didn't see the Coalition arc up the way these prats do. Slipper was probably the best of the 3 of them under Labor. Bishop is IMO not doing a good job, but then they aren't making her life easy are they.

I want examples, teaspoon. Your usual "I am going to substantiate with my own broad opinion" isn't going to work.

Like I said, Yes, they are ALL biased. Which is why when someone comes out and actually points it out like they have, surely it must mean she is absolutely disgracefully biased.

I can't help it if you are so badly served you don't know how bad Burke was. not my problem.
You can read hansard or watch youtube or buy yourself a Wayback machine...
If you are so biased you can't see what is happening then there is also the question to be asked... what's the point of telling you anything. Cheesy

So in other words you have nothing.

Have a nice day, as usual your stupidity is highlighted for everyone.

I'm guessing that's an example of the personal abuse they talk about in feedback that you are not allowed here.

Just because you have failed to recognise or have failed to see in the past evidence of political bias by the labor Speakers which was abundant BTW... doesn't make me or anyone who points it out wrong.

It just makes you ignorant of the facts or dishonest. Cheesy

Back to top

IP Logged

St George of the Garden Gold Member Offline http://tinyurl.com/n 3o8m2x Posts: 9809 Gender:	Re: Labor's petulance on display Reply #50 - Mar 27^th, 2014 at 7:10pm No Speaker has been as biased as Broomhilda.
Back to top	I want Muso as GMod. Bring back Muso! IP Logged

Bread and Butter

Senior Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 390
Gender: female

Re: Labor's petulance on display
Reply #51 - Mar 27^th, 2014 at 7:15pm

Bam wrote on Mar 27^th, 2014 at 6:18pm:

Bread and Butter wrote on Mar 27^th, 2014 at 5:17pm:

Watching Speakers in general has been a tortuous experience as they oscillate between bias and error with some disinterest and slumber to keep up the variety. Jenkins was the best of the most recent batch but hardly stellar. Slipper was an appalling person and so his speakership was tainted before he started and respect is essential to the position and he had none.

Slipper was only perceived as tainted because his own party sought to smear him. As a Speaker he was reasonable. Jenkins was also a decent Speaker.

Quote:

I like the idea of an unbiased non-political Speaker but in practice, how do you achieve that? The G-G is also not allowed to be part of a political party but did that stop Bob Hawke from appointing Bill the Policeman to the position? No, he simply resigned from the ALP the day he accepted the position.

The British Parliament has a tradition where a Speaker resigns from their party when they are appointed, and the major parties do not stand candidates in the Speaker's seat.

In the early days of Federal Parliament, the Australian Parliament followed a similar tradition. The first Speaker, was an independent who was often elected unopposed.

I think the reasons Slipper was tainted were a bit more substantial that you seem to grant. He has had criminal and civil charges filed against him and had a long and unsavoury history or rorting travel expenses. He was also tainted by the political process in which he abandoned his own party to pursue the Speakership. By any estimation he was a very tainted choice.

Back to top

IP Logged

Aussie Gold Member Offline OzPolitic Posts: 38802 Gender:	Re: Labor's petulance on display Reply #52 - Mar 27^th, 2014 at 7:19pm Quote: ..and unsavoury history or rorting travel expenses. Evidence please, and when you provide same, please distinguish Slipper's 'rorts' from............oh.............let's take......say...........Abbott's.
Back to top	IP Logged

john_g Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 1549 Gender:	Re: Labor's petulance on display Reply #53 - Mar 27^th, 2014 at 7:20pm Burke was pretty much on par with bishop. Bishop may be a bit more, but it's a close call.
Back to top	IP Logged

St George of the Garden Gold Member Offline http://tinyurl.com/n 3o8m2x Posts: 9809 Gender:	Re: Labor's petulance on display Reply #54 - Mar 27^th, 2014 at 7:20pm The simian has also rorted his travel allowance.
Back to top	I want Muso as GMod. Bring back Muso! IP Logged

Bread and Butter

Senior Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 390
Gender: female

Re: Labor's petulance on display
Reply #55 - Mar 27^th, 2014 at 7:36pm

Aussie wrote on Mar 27^th, 2014 at 7:19pm:

Quote:

..and unsavoury history or rorting travel expenses.

Evidence please, and when you provide same, please distinguish Slipper's 'rorts' from............oh.............let's take......say...........Abbott's.

So another of the bully-boy tactics by demanding proof of facts that are already in the public domain and well-known? He was required to repay significant amounts by the Department of Finance on multiple occasions.

Now if you wish to debate properly it would be helpful to stipulate to facts - however inconvenient - that are demonstrably true rather than employ the bully boy tactics of demanding 'proof' at every stage. It is beneath those debaters of substance.

Back to top

IP Logged

Bread and Butter

Senior Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 390
Gender: female

Re: Labor's petulance on display
Reply #56 - Mar 27^th, 2014 at 7:37pm

St George of the Garden wrote on Mar 27^th, 2014 at 7:20pm:

The simian has also rorted his travel allowance.

Your disparaging references demean only you. But the most important fact for you must be 'is Abbott faster than fibre optic cable'. As far as I can tell it is the one string in your very old and out-of-tune fiddle.

Back to top

IP Logged

Dnarever

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 58814
Here
Gender: male

Re: Labor's petulance on display
Reply #57 - Mar 27^th, 2014 at 7:47pm

St George of the Garden wrote on Mar 27^th, 2014 at 7:10pm:

No Speaker has been as biased as Broomhilda.

I think they miss the point that she has taken it to a whole new level by not even pretending to be a bit balanced.

Labor's petulance on display

Following the horrendous display of the Abbott opposition they have no right to complain.

In fact the only performance I have seen worse than the Abbott opposition is the Abbott Government, they seem to have turned bad behaviour into an art form...

Back to top

IP Logged

Aussie

Gold Member

Offline

OzPolitic

Posts: 38802
Gender: male

Re: Labor's petulance on display
Reply #58 - Mar 27^th, 2014 at 8:02pm

Bread and Butter wrote on Mar 27^th, 2014 at 7:36pm:

Aussie wrote on Mar 27^th, 2014 at 7:19pm:

Quote:

..and unsavoury history or rorting travel expenses.

Evidence please, and when you provide same, please distinguish Slipper's 'rorts' from............oh.............let's take......say...........Abbott's.

So another of the bully-boy tactics by demanding proof of facts that are already in the public domain and well-known? He was required to repay significant amounts by the Department of Finance on multiple occasions.

Now if you wish to debate properly it would be helpful to stipulate to facts - however inconvenient - that are demonstrably true rather than employ the bully boy tactics of demanding 'proof' at every stage. It is beneath those debaters of substance.

Soooo.....no evidence especially how you distinguish what Slipper repaid from what Abbott, Joyce, etc etc etc repaid.

Funny how you equate me asking for some evidence to support your allegations with 'bullying.' Even funnier that you would know anything about 'debaters of substance.' Do you know any in your World? Invite them here if so. Gawd knows the right Wing of the Inn is in dire need of any assistance you can muster for them.

Wink

Back to top

IP Logged

john_g Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 1549 Gender:	Re: Labor's petulance on display Reply #59 - Mar 27^th, 2014 at 8:08pm Can anyone tell me how Burke was any better/less biased?
Back to top	IP Logged