The Abbott Government

[wayneL]

Well, you also seem oblivious to it, but as pointed out in response wayneL's attempt to ridicule, (which you endorsed) you are passing a considerable psychoanalysis of Abbott with your passionate endorsement of his actions and belittling of anyone who asks reasonable questions of his judgement.

It appears you have not noticed that a lot of people, including on twitter where it first broke that he was out there, questioned his judgement. That's the issue, his judgement in his capacity as CEO.

You missed that is was actually a successful ridicule as it was truly ridiculous. As for the rest of us, opinion is different to psychoanalysis.

I have actually had experience in both living in a rural residential area and continually plan for and manage fire risk, prevention and occasionally fire fighting. How about you, Julia?

Dude, duh! How about living in a rural area AND having a plan for several valuable sport horses. I come from WA, we all fairly regularly had to have a team plan to transport horses at short notice. Big deal.

As for the rest of your points...

 

[waza1960]

The thing that has me a bit curious is that if there is so much to be saved in government inefficiency, why is it going to take so long to have the reviews and implement any changes?

Because that's what a responsible government does. Do you expect them to shoot from the hip like Labor?
Imagine the uproar if the government made huge cuts without justification.

Whiskers by your comments despite your denials I would swear that your as Labor as Sydboy. You know the saying if it looks like a duck walks like a duck.................

 

[Whiskers]

Because that's what a responsible government does. Do you expect them to shoot from the hip like Labor?
Imagine the uproar if the government made huge cuts without justification.

Labor was condemned (and rightly so) for having too many inquiries... not knowing what to do themselves and blindly following the advice of stacked inquiries a-la the climate change commission. Often though, a government will totally ignore inquiry recommendations and people ask why they had it in the first place. Typically, these enquiries are stacked with preconceived results via their terms of reference (that we usually don't see) as a political ploy to delay action and or come up with an excuse to break an election promise.

The sort of things I was referring to were the size of the public service (that typically expands under Labor), futile programs like the climate change bureaucracy etc that Abbott promised to cut asap to save heaps of waste.

The Abbott government says its restructure of the public service will cut out ''confused responsibilities, duplication and waste''.

Departments and agencies have been abolished, split or ''absorbed'' as the new government moves to reshape the bureaucracy to deliver its policy priorities.

AusAID will be swallowed up by Foreign Affairs and the Department of Regional Australia, Local Government and the Arts will be axed along with the Department of Resources, Energy and Tourism.

The new Administrative Arrangements Order, signed by Governor-General Quentin Bryce on Wednesday, packs the biggest shake-up of the Commonwealth public service since 1996.

Read more: http://www.canberratimes.com.au/nat...ector-waste-20130918-2tzzn.html#ixzz2iUH9qYrb​

True, some things like defence spending requirements need longer detailed study, but it would seem there is not as much to be saved as previously thought and led to believe.

Whiskers by your comments despite your denials I would swear that your as Labor as Sydboy.

waza, you can swear all you like but you will still be just as wrong! :

You know the saying if it looks like a duck walks like a duck.................

Yeah, it probably is a... but, it's wise to psychoanalyise a bit to be sure it's not a quail or an attorney mate, a-la Dick Cheney. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dick_Cheney_hunting_incident

 

[Whiskers]

You missed that is was actually a successful ridicule as it was truly ridiculous. As for the rest of us, opinion is different to psychoanalysis.

Opinion sure is different. So from http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/opinion what is your opinion based upon?

1 a view or judgement formed about something, not necessarily based on fact or knowledge:

2 a statement of advice by an expert on a professional matter​

If the former you can understand why your 'opinion' is not respected... the later, you haven't demonstrated any significant understanding.

Dude, duh! How about living in a rural area AND having a plan for several valuable sport horses. I come from WA, we all fairly regularly had to have a team plan to transport horses at short notice. Big deal.

It's commendable that you had a plan for your 'valuable sport horses', but what about peoples valuable lives, valuable homes and possessions, valuable trade and business equipment, valuable farming equipment and livestock etc?

An exit plan is only part of a proper plan for fire (and disaster generally) management. What about the prevention and mitigation measures? That's what our political leaders should be focusing more on in these circumstances. There are thousands of people who can work on the front line, BUT there are only a few political leaders who have the power and authority to make decisions about significant mitigation issues that are still in play.

Are you suggesting there are no more mitigation measures the fed gov can take and the best use of the office of PM is to do a night shift on the fire front?

With no significant rain in the foreseeable sight and conditions worsening by the day, I'm interested in your rationale for that.

As for the rest of your points...

So you use your rapier wit to hide your inner pain.

I grew up in an environment of jokes and sarcasm and puns. I talk that way, so I write that way.
- Allan Sloan

I'm sorry about your sarcasm. I wish you well in dealing with that.

 

[Whiskers]

Another explanation for the substantial debt limit increase, in the face of falling government revenue, maybe to do with the refund of costs attributed to the carbon tax.

That's the trouble you invariable get into when you over emphasise a problem. When the solution is a simple as reversing the tax or charge increase you attributed to the carbon tax, politicians are loate to apply their same reasoning and act as quickly in reverse such as to council rates etc

When pressed by Opposition Leader Milton Dick at the Brisbane City Council meeting on Tuesday afternoon on whether ratepayers could expect a reprieve, Cr Quirk dismissed the question as "hypothetical".

In a hotly debated move, the council announced in 2012 an ongoing slug to ratepayers of 1.9 per cent per year that it attributed directly to impost of the previous federal government's carbon tax.

It equated to nearly $16 million extra in council coffers this financial year.

Prime Minister Tony Abbott described the repeal of the tax as the first order of business for his government, leading Cr Dick to question the Lord Mayor on what that meant for Brisbane ratepayers.

Read more: http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/que...ax-reprieve-20131022-2vzcq.html#ixzz2iUfit9xO​

Now, if people don't see prompt notification (or at least intention) of tax and charge decreases to match the maybe exaggerated cost of the carbon tax, they will become understandably more cynical of gov motives and policy and reasonably argue, why should the big end of town get a tax cut and not be passed down the line to us.

Abbott is facing a credibility crisis... the consequence of it's own successful exaggerating the Labor problem.

Hence his qualified support by that 1.8% of the 4.5% that swung against Labor to him... is at risk of evaporating.

Looking forward to the next polls... I'd speculate he'll maintain his lead as preferred PM over Shorten, but with a falling personal and probably two party preferred preference.

 

[McLovin]

They're really digging a deeper hole. How many people in the private sector would jump on a plane (business class of course) for "confidential" "important discussions" with a colleague 3,000km's away, take their wife with them (God knows why she'd need to be there for such a discussion) and then charge their employer and still have a job on Monday morning?

Randall needs to come clean and resign.

He added that in Mr Randall's view, the confidential conversation could not have taken place on the phone.

Asked why Mr Randall could not have used a telephone – rather than flying more than 3000 kilometres on business class flights with his wife to the same location as his investment property – the Prime Minister said some discussions were "best done face to face".

"There are certain things that just have to happen face to face and look, members of Parliament are entitled to travel to have important meetings because teleconferencing is sometimes no substitute for a face-to-face discussion," Mr Abbott said.

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...cairns-trip-20131023-2w0aw.html#ixzz2iVGyKJ1n

 

[Julia]

Just one point I'd like to address, as I'm declining to respond to the continuing provocation by one member, and that's this, directed to sydboy:

but a patronisingly sarcastic...

"I'm heartened and delighted to hear it, syd. Good for you."

Despite often disagreeing philosophically with you, syd, I have zero personal animosity toward you and appreciate that you don't allow your disagreement to run to aggressive personal attacks on anyone as far as I can see.
I doubt you would have perceived any sarcasm in my comment, as suggested above, and want to underline that none was involved.

I'm very keen on voluntary activities, for myself and anyone else who finds the same rewards in contributing to others, so am impressed and happy to know what you've been doing over a sustained period. Good on you.

 

[sydboy007]

I thought that given your passion you were a young bloke but in reality, you're not much younger than me.

Depends what you call young. My physio asked me last week with an incredulous voice if I was 41 as she noticed my birthday on my notes chart. I had to laugh and said not many months till 42. The muscles are certainly less forgiving after a big day or night out, but the mind is still active . Don't drink, don't smoke, sunscreen on my face half the year, eat fairly healthy, and enough me time to deal with the stresses of life .

 

[basilio]

Please note: Change of nomenclature.

As noted by Wayne L et el it appears to be no longer acceptable to use the phrase "Climate Change" "Global Warming " etc in any discussion on The Abbott Government thread.

This seems to apply to any discussion around the economic, social, environmental consequences of rapid changes in our climate and any comment or reference on the policies or actions of the government on this topic.

Henceforth all references to the above unacceptable phrases will cease and in its place please use the statement - "The issue that cannot be discussed"

Cheers

 

[sydboy007]

So the Abbott Government on it's crusade against waste and mismanagement believes a meeting to hold ''very important discussions'' at a cost of $5259 was money well spent. At a "good couple of hours" it seems to have been a costly meeting. More than what half the population earns in a month!

One has to wonder about the urgency of the meeting, and why they cannot at least give a some detail as to what was discussed and why the meeting had to occur at such great cost.

I know some meetings are "best done face to face", but if the difference is a few dollars phone call, or perhaps a free skype chat, to $5259, well I dare say I'd pick the far cheaper option. I also don't quite understand why Mrs Randall was required to tag along.

It feels like Abbott is trying to defend the indefensible.

 

[Whiskers]

So the Abbott Government on it's crusade against waste and mismanagement...
It feels like Abbott is trying to defend the indefensible.

While I personally think it's a problem fairly equally across all political parties, this is another issue where Abbott is facing a credibility crisis... the consequence of it's own successful exaggerating the Labor waste and taking the high moral ground to clean it up.

While he wasn't intending his rhetoric to extend to the expense and allowance scheme, that's the consequence of not feeding the chooks regularly and allowing them ample spare time to scratch around for issues. He has not covered his @r$e adequately and now has to follow up his tough talk with tough action to avoid loosing voter faith.

I've been offering all the right advice trying to get him on the right track, : but for the life of me, he is more obsessed with campaign like saviour/rescuer from disaster photo shoots with his mates than real urgent action we were led to expect to cut the waste like as in the "Climate Change" or "Global Warming" issues. [Sorry basilio, I know we're on different sides of that topic, but I couldn't help dropping that in. ]

If this survey in the Illawarra Mercury is any guide, the expense rorting issue is not going away any time soon. The first party to take proactive action will undoubtedly win over voter significant support.

I also notice, with regard to his fire fighting escapade, Abbott is saying on the abc news, he will do his best to continue to be a good citizen as well as a good PM.

Damit Tony, ease off the 'good', 'right thing' and 'cut the waste' pat-me-on-my-own-back clichés... you are just digging yourself into a deeper hole.

Com'on Tony, we need a full time dedicated PM atm... you've plenty of time be a good citizen again after you've lost the next election.

 

[Whiskers]

Just one point I'd like to address, as I'm declining to respond to one member

That would be me!

Com'on Julia, you're just starting to get the 'mongrel' in me warmed up.

 

[overhang]

So the Abbott Government on it's crusade against waste and mismanagement believes a meeting to hold ''very important discussions'' at a cost of $5259 was money well spent. At a "good couple of hours" it seems to have been a costly meeting. More than what half the population earns in a month!

One has to wonder about the urgency of the meeting, and why they cannot at least give a some detail as to what was discussed and why the meeting had to occur at such great cost.

I know some meetings are "best done face to face", but if the difference is a few dollars phone call, or perhaps a free skype chat, to $5259, well I dare say I'd pick the far cheaper option. I also don't quite understand why Mrs Randall was required to tag along.

It feels like Abbott is trying to defend the indefensible.

Yup Howard and Abbott really are like chalk and cheese, there is no way Howard would try and defend such blatant rorting of tax payer money. Just so convenient that he happens to take possession of an investment property during the trip, give me a break.

 

[wayneL]

That would be me!

Com'on Julia, you're just starting to get the 'mongrel' in me warmed up.

Mongrel?

I had a different word in mind

I guess Julia isn't much into exercises in futility.

Wise lady.

 

[Whiskers]

Mongrel?

I had a different word in mind

I guess you would, but Julia would be aware of the intended connotation from the "What are your trading objectives?" thread where she had more trouble with interpretation in the bigger picture and context of the conversation.

I guess Julia isn't much into exercises in futility.

Normally she isn't into pointless personal ridicule or deliberately misquoting out of context, but she sure seems to be off her game occasionally for some reason.

I don't know what has happened to our Julia... she seems to lose a bit of focus and got stroppy every now and then. Look forward to talking to you again soon Julia.

 

[Calliope]

Wedding gatecrashers.

 

[Garpal Gumnut]

Much has been made of the expenses rorts by both sides of Parliament.

It is impossible to defend and new measures of accountability and prosecutions if necessary need to be implemented and pursued.

This does detract though from the achievements of the Abbott Government.

The Federal Public Service are on notice that their job is to serve the people not be served.

The review of the ALP Treasury forecasts and a revision of debt.

The attention to Border Security.

The complete disintegration of a business case for people traffickers involved in Illegal entry in to Australia.

Well done the Abbott Government.

gg

 

[wayneL]

Normally she isn't into pointless personal ridicule

From where I sit, it wasn't pointless personal ridicule at all; it seemed to me more like selfless altruism, trying save you the embarrassment of spouting untenable nonsense that serves only your self-delusion of... whatever it is you think you are.

It is the same motivation as me. I am truly and genuinely concerned for you Whiskers. :

 

[IFocus]

They're really digging a deeper hole. How many people in the private sector would jump on a plane (business class of course) for "confidential" "important discussions" with a colleague 3,000km's away, take their wife with them (God knows why she'd need to be there for such a discussion) and then charge their employer and still have a job on Monday morning?

Randall needs to come clean and resign.



Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...cairns-trip-20131023-2w0aw.html#ixzz2iVGyKJ1n

Not sure why Randall hasn't been pressured into just paying up, Abbott defending is political but given Randall has been in the parliament for 15 years and never even made it to even a secretary job makes you wonder what his leverage is.

 

[sydboy007]

Much has been made of the expenses rorts by both sides of Parliament.

It is impossible to defend and new measures of accountability and prosecutions if necessary need to be implemented and pursued.

This does detract though from the achievements of the Abbott Government.

The Federal Public Service are on notice that their job is to serve the people not be served.

The review of the ALP Treasury forecasts and a revision of debt.

The attention to Border Security.

The complete disintegration of a business case for people traffickers involved in Illegal entry in to Australia.

Well done the Abbott Government.

gg

HAHAHAHA

The budget CRISIS and so far the only action being taken by the Treasure Hockey Ponzinomics is to have a 66% increase in the debt ceiling. One has to wonder why? Got any ideas GG?

Considering Tony the CRISIS Abbott and Joe Ponzinomics Hockey both agree that HIGH house prices is good for those already in the market, where restrictive zoning laws and high immigration are supportive of HIGH prices, one has to wonder if they want to leave the country permanently crippled. Sky high resi and commercial rents are making this country unable to compete.

Got any ideas as to why Malcolm "the man who practically invented the internet" Turnbull is appointing close friends and ex Telstra employees to the NBN? Jobs for the boys seems to be another great achievement of the Abbott Government. Not to mention Turnbull is already behind in his 60 day audit of the NBN by moving the goalposts from 60 days after he was sworn in to 60 days after the new CEO was installed. Abbotts also broken his election promise of not providing funding of more than $100M without a full CBA. Non core promise out the door thank you very much.

Now if the current Dear Leaders could start facing up to the age quake, get middle class welfare cut right back, cut a few thousand pages of regulations and red tape, then maybe they might have something to be proud of.

I suppose when you've got to spend a few hours in the air each way for an important meeting, it takes time to develop anything of import eh, and that was before they got their lycra clad butts onto the treasury benches.