Garpal Gumnut
Ross Island Hotel
- Joined
- 2 January 2006
- Posts
- 13,827
- Reactions
- 10,653
Albo believes he has done a good job.
gg
gg
Mr Albanese said any question of stepping aside was one for Mr Slipper to decide.
‘‘There aren’t allegations against anyone in the government,’’ he said.
He believed Mr Slipper had done ‘‘a very good job’’ as Speaker.
Read more: http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/opi...ng-albanese-20120421-1xdcy.html#ixzz1sevrtlPh
It's closing in on them, but I suspect that Wilkie just sees this just as an opportunity to deal hemself back onto the table to progress his pokie reforms.
Wilkie won't do anything that brings this government down. Neither will Oakshott or Windsor. They have all chained themselves to it for what's left of the rest of its miserable political life.
It's closing in on them, but I suspect that Wilkie just sees this just as an opportunity to deal hemself back onto the table to progress his pokie reforms.
Wilkie won't do anything that brings this government down. Neither will Oakshott or Windsor. They have all chained themselves to it for what's left of the rest of its miserable political life.
They could take the view that if they dump a very unpopular Govt they may retain their seats.
I'd take that chance rather then be associated with them any longer.
I would think they have completely blown it with their electorates, not only by supporting labor's minority government, but also so glibly helping to pass legislation that has not been wanted by the majority of Aussie voters - such as carbon tax and opening our borders for starters.
I think they know they are finished so why would they bring their time of fame to an end prematurely in their eyes?
Well........if they brought this Govt down they might get a lot of thank you votes...
Windsor, Oakeshott, Thomson, Slipper, Wilkie and Gillard will have to be dragged away kicking and screaming. A few centuries ago it would have been to the gallows.
Exactly right. They were there 9 years ago; Gillard should act in the same way as Howard at the time.There is nothing new in these revelations.
Exactly right. They were there 9 years ago; Gillard should act in the same way as Howard at the time.
They are going to court.
That is a big difference.
Gillard won't have the bottle to do anything until it is too late, and when she does she will be replaced by Rudd.
gg
So, why didn't it go to court 9 years ago?They are going to court.
That is a big difference.
So, why didn't it go to court 9 years ago?
Just a practical point re the published text messages: can these be proven? i.e. can the phone records be presented to demonstrate that Slippery did indeed send those salacious messages?
FWIW, the complainant hardly comes out of it looking as pure as the driven snow.
i don't know anything about flirting between homosexuals, but he seems to have subtly participated, at least at the beginning.
I'd have to wonder, even, if he was from the start setting up Slippery?
Just a practical point re the published text messages: can these be proven? i.e. can the phone records be presented to demonstrate that Slippery did indeed send those salacious messages?
FWIW, the complainant hardly comes out of it looking as pure as the driven snow.
i don't know anything about flirting between homosexuals, but he seems to have subtly participated, at least at the beginning.
I'd have to wonder, even, if he was from the start setting up Slippery?
An interesting theory.Just a practical point re the published text messages: can these be proven? i.e. can the phone records be presented to demonstrate that Slippery did indeed send those salacious messages?
FWIW, the complainant hardly comes out of it looking as pure as the driven snow.
i don't know anything about flirting between homosexuals, but he seems to have subtly participated, at least at the beginning.
I'd have to wonder, even, if he was from the start setting up Slippery?
If they came from his phone I can't imagine Slippery Pete being dumb enough to deny they did in the context of a court case. He's a barrister and presumably knows it's not very smart to put things in affidavits etc. that later turn out to be proven to be false.
With that, aren't you simply acknowledging a case of double standards?Who cares that was then this is now.
With that, aren't you simply acknowledging a case of double standards?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?