0
   

Oz election thread #3 - Rudd's Labour

 
 
msolga
 
  1  
Reply Tue 24 Feb, 2009 12:38 am
@hingehead,
Quote:
I do think it's odd that the word 'lazy' has been batted around a bit.


Hewson suggested (strongly!) that Treasury did most of Costello's work for him. Made it very easy for him (compared to the effort Wayne Swan is putting into the job, according to Hewson.)

Who knows?

0 Replies
 
msolga
 
  1  
Reply Sat 28 Feb, 2009 05:31 pm
  http://www.theage.com.au/ffximage/2009/03/01/cartoon010209_gallery__518x400.jpg
0 Replies
 
msolga
 
  1  
Reply Fri 20 Mar, 2009 12:28 am
Quite a performance from Steve Fielding in the Senate, over the past few days, hey?
I suspect that the wheelers & dealers in the Labor Party might now be wondering about their decision about giving the ALP's preferences to him (for the 2nd time around!) over those nasty Greens. Stupid, stupid, stupid!
And now that Senator Fielding has some real power, it's clear (to me, anyway) which side of politics he is actually on. And I doubt this has much to do with what's best for "families", either. Rolling Eyes
0 Replies
 
dadpad
 
  1  
Reply Fri 20 Mar, 2009 12:41 am
I wonder if changing the senate vote to a percentage style vote would be a good thing.

eg: All senators votes from all parties add to 100%
Steve fielding got 1.75% of the national vote so therefore his vote only counts for 1.75% of the total available senate vote.

hmmm.....
0 Replies
 
msolga
 
  1  
Reply Fri 20 Mar, 2009 12:50 am
Julia Gillard strikes deal for Senate to pass industrial relations laws
March 20, 2009
The Australian


THE Rudd Government's workplace relations laws are set to pass the Senate this afternoon after a deal between the Government and Independent Senator Nick Xenophon and Family First's Steve Fielding.

Quote:
Under the deal, announced in the Senate a few minutes ago, the Government will allow for transitional arrangements on the definition of a small business captured by the Government's unfair dismissal law.

Workplace Relations Minister Julia Gillard had insisted on a definition of a small business as having a head count of 15 workers but Senator Fielding had argued for a small business definition of 15 full-time equivalent employees.

The definition was crucial because it represented the cut off at which unfair dismissal laws applied for 12 months for new employees rather than the six month probation period for larger workplaces.

Under the compromise, a small business will be defined as having 15 full-time equivalent workers until January 1, 2011. After that date the definition will revert to a simple head count of 15 workers.

"This is an historic day as we rid the nation of Work Choices against the fierce opposition of the Coalition,” said the Government's leader of Government business Joe Ludwig.

As Ms Gillard watched in the Senator chamber from the Government's advisor's box, Senator Ludwig said: ""This is a complete political humiliation of the Coalition,” he said.

But the Opposition Leader of Business Senator Eric Abetz said: β€œIt is regrettable some Senators have now allowed the deputy prime minister off the hook of her own arrogance.”

The Fair Work bill returned to the Senate this afternoon after the Government rejected six Senate amendments, including a push to make the new definition of a small business.


http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25215670-601,00.html
dlowan
 
  1  
Reply Fri 20 Mar, 2009 06:08 am
@msolga,
Phew.

msolga
 
  1  
Reply Fri 20 Mar, 2009 06:14 am
@dlowan,
You thought we might be headed for a double dissolution, Deb?
msolga
 
  1  
Reply Mon 30 Mar, 2009 02:00 am
Golly! Shocked

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/common/imagedata/0,,6552504,00.jpg
msolga
 
  1  
Reply Mon 30 Mar, 2009 04:04 am
Poll finds 51% oppose role in Afghanistan
Tony Wright
March 30, 2009/the AGE

http://images.theage.com.au/2009/03/29/440155/svAFGHANs-420x0.jpg
Australian troops on patrol in Afghanistan. Photo: Simon O'Dwyer

AUSTRALIA'S involvement in the war in Afghanistan is increasingly unpopular, despite Prime Minister Kevin Rudd backing at the weekend a larger role for military trainers in the conflict

Quote:
The latest Age/Nielsen poll has found 51 per cent of voters oppose Australia's current involvement. Two-thirds of voters oppose any increase in the number of Australian troops in Afghanistan.

The findings follow Mr Rudd's enthusiastic response in the US to President Barack Obama's revamped strategy to try to win the war.

The strategy " an integrated approach of increased military effort, training of Afghan security forces and civil aid "was described by Mr Rudd as "absolutely right".

Although he insisted there had been no direct request from the US for more Australian forces during his visit to Washington, his support for the renewed American effort was interpreted as flagging the likelihood that Australia would increase its troop commitment.

Mr Rudd admitted during a TV interview in the US last week that the war in Afghanistan did not have broad voter support in Australia.

Today's poll confirms that opposition is increasing. In February 2006, an Age/Nielsen poll found that 48 per cent of Australians opposed the war, while 45 per cent supported it. Support has now slipped to 44 per cent, and opposition is the majority position. In the wake of the 9/11 terrorist attacks in the US, a Nielsen poll in October 2001 revealed 70 per cent support for the war on terrorism, though Afghanistan was not specifically named in the question.


http://www.theage.com.au/world/poll-finds-51-oppose-role-in-afghanistan-20090329-9fk5.html

0 Replies
 
Wilso
 
  2  
Reply Mon 30 Mar, 2009 02:50 pm
I was always opposed to the Iraq deployment, and always in favour of the Afghanistan deployment. My mind hasn't changed.
dlowan
 
  1  
Reply Mon 30 Mar, 2009 03:18 pm
@msolga,
Just glad to see those ******* laws gone!!!
dlowan
 
  2  
Reply Mon 30 Mar, 2009 03:19 pm
@msolga,
So...we just changed bums, eh?
msolga
 
  1  
Reply Mon 30 Mar, 2009 05:38 pm
@Wilso,
Quote:
I was always opposed to the Iraq deployment, and always in favour of the Afghanistan deployment. My mind hasn't changed.


And you were certainly not alone in your thinking about Oz (US & other) involvement in Iraq & Afghanistan, Wilso. But I was never quite certain about the advisability of involvement in Afghanistan (though totally opposed to the Iraq invasion, like you & just about everyone I know). Trouble is, invading Afghanistan led to a humiliating defeat for the Russians (& others before them, who considered such action a good idea at the time). No one "wins" in Afghanistan. Trouble also is, if we are talking about rooting out "terrorists" in Afghanistan, it follows that we could end up fighting in Pakistan & rooting out the "terrorists" there next! (Heaven forbid!) Let's just say, that at this point in time, I have "grave concerns" about Australia's involvement in Afghanistan & am not at all supportive of increasing the number of Oz troops there (with the inevitable increase in casualties). Not least because the US's NATO allies don't appear to be exactly enthusiastic about increased involvement, either. And there is something a wee bit odd & disconcerting to me about an Oz prime minister arguing for greater involvement of reluctant NATO countries in an obviously increasingly unpopular war.
0 Replies
 
msolga
 
  1  
Reply Mon 30 Mar, 2009 05:49 pm
@dlowan,
Quote:
So...we just changed bums, eh?


Laughing

It rather feels like that, doesn't it, Deb? ("brown nosing", I believe it's called?) Why oh why do our PMs feel they must do this sort of thing?? Embarrassed

Though I much prefer Obama's bum to Bush's, I must say! Wink

dlowan
 
  2  
Reply Mon 30 Mar, 2009 05:57 pm
@msolga,
Oh yes...a better class of bum.

But...it's still a bum.

No more bums for our PMs, I say!!!
msolga
 
  1  
Reply Mon 30 Mar, 2009 06:05 pm
@dlowan,
Quote:
Just glad to see those ******* laws gone!!!


Yes, indeed.

Quite an achievement for Julia. And how interesting to see the Libs taking such a Howard attitude! I thought this was the new caring sharing Liberal party. Wink

(But, being the sceptic I am, I wanna see the fine print before I can completely exhale!)
0 Replies
 
msolga
 
  1  
Reply Mon 30 Mar, 2009 06:08 pm
@dlowan,
Quote:
No more bums for our PMs, I say!!!


I heartily endorse that sentiment, Deb!

Stop it & stop it now!
It is soooooooooo excruciating to observe!Embarrassed
0 Replies
 
msolga
 
  1  
Reply Mon 30 Mar, 2009 07:34 pm
http://www.theage.com.au/ffximage/2009/03/30/svCARTOON_MARCH31_gallery__568x400.jpg
0 Replies
 
hingehead
 
  2  
Reply Mon 30 Mar, 2009 10:14 pm
http://www.moir.com.au/images/front.jpg
msolga
 
  1  
Reply Mon 30 Mar, 2009 11:07 pm
@hingehead,
HaHa, love it, hinge!



Just a niggling, nagging thought, though .... what exactly has he done to deserve such favoured treatment, do you suppose?
 

Related Topics

Beached As Bro - Discussion by dadpad
Australian music - Discussion by Wilso
Oz Election Thread #6 - Abbott's LNP - Discussion by hingehead
AUstralian Philosophers - Discussion by dadpad
Australia voting system - Discussion by fbaezer
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.08 seconds on 11/17/2024 at 02:20:08