The Gillard Government

[sails]

Not sure what boats would ply the waters between here and NZ.

What total rubbish. Try to find anything to support that. You'll be looking for a long time.
New Zealanders arriving in Australia are not eligible for social security benefits.

Maybe instead of continuing to post complete nonsense, spend a bit of time learning how to spell.

+1

That's what I thought - NZ arrivals have to support themselves. Shame these wealthy boat people are not required to do the same and leave our available resources to help the REAL refugees.

"arnt aloud" - still laughing... This from a guy who thinks he is an authority on everything...

 

[noco]

"arnt aloud" You are certainly hitting the slops tonight.

"ARNT ALOUD" that sounds kiddie txt chat.

 

[Calliope]

"ARNT ALOUD" that sounds kiddie txt chat.

It just shows how young he is - a product of a school system which ignores spelling and grammar.

 

[noco]

+1

That's what I thought - NZ arrivals have to support themselves. Shame these wealthy boat people are not required to do the same and leave our available resources to help the REAL refugees.

"arnt aloud" - still laughing... This from a guy who thinks he is an authority on everything...

Sails, I cannot help repeating myself that the influx of boat people are muslim majority and they are exploting Rudd/Gillard's relaxation of the Pacific solution.

I stiil maintain it is a world wide plot to infiltrate the Western world in order to be the dominant religious group with intentions to rule the world. It is anticipated we will see a muslim USA President in the future.

It is already a major problem in Brittain and Europe.

 

[sails]

Sails, I cannot help repeating myself that the influx of boat people are muslim majority and they are exploting Rudd/Gillard's relaxation of the Pacific solution.

I stiil maintain it is a world wide plot to infiltrate the Western world in order to be the dominant religious group with intentions to rule the world. It is anticipated we will see a muslim USA President in the future.

It is already a major problem in Brittain and Europe.

Yes, I find this a worry too. Especially in our political system where minority parties can rule with balance of power. We have seen it all too clearly and I worry about the Australia of the future in which my grandkids will live.

I would like to see a recall referrendum option - especially in the case of minority governments which would put more power back into the hands of the people when minority legislation is at risk of being passed against the will of the majority. Carbon tax is one such example a recall option would have been useful.

 

[Julia]

I would like to see a recall referrendum option - especially in the case of minority governments which would put more power back into the hands of the people when minority legislation is at risk of being passed against the will of the majority. Carbon tax is one such example a recall option would have been useful.

I haven't heard of this, Sails. How does it work?

 

[sptrawler]

What I keep coming back to is, if Abbott is so bad and the Gillard government has done so well. Why don't they go to an election to be able to govern in their own right.
Can IFocus, So-Cynical, numbercruncher and the rest answer that?
I mean Abbott can't get worse press than he allready does, the government are throwing money around like lunatics again, why not call an election?
It's weird it leaves you with the impression they are just trying to hang on as long as possible for their own ends. Sad

 

[sails]

I haven't heard of this, Sails. How does it work?

I don't know a lot about it, but I heard about it when NSW were considering this legislation. Here are some links and an excerpt on how it works in Wisconsin in the States:

Wisconsin is one of 18 states that has a system of recall petitions. This system allows voters to sign a petition demanding the removal of their legislator or of the governor. If a high threshold is met, an election is held in that district. If a majority vote to remove the sitting representative, then the result of the new election kicks in.

http://www.crikey.com.au/2011/06/27/total-recall-wisconsin-nsw-targets-public-sector-wages/


and

NSW Premier Barry O'Farrell has appointed an expert panel to examine the introduction of recall elections so voters can dump "corrupt, incompetent governments".

NSW panel to look at recall elections


There are more links - I googled "nsw recall election" - more to be found there

 

[sptrawler]

It would appear the labor party are back to the future. They got rid of Rudd because he became a one pony show, now they have the same problem with Gillard. Just shows a government that hopes that the leader does the right thing, because the rest haven't got a clue.

http://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/a/-/national/14058195/pass-asylum-seeker-bill-pm-tells-senators/

Have a read of Albanese in the last paragraph.LOL

 

[Julia]

I don't know a lot about it, but I heard about it when NSW were considering this legislation. Here are some links and an excerpt on how it works in Wisconsin in the States:
http://www.crikey.com.au/2011/06/27/total-recall-wisconsin-nsw-targets-public-sector-wages/
and
NSW panel to look at recall elections
There are more links - I googled "nsw recall election" - more to be found there

Thanks, sails. It would be a pretty brave (or confident) government that would institute that.
Hardly like to happen here, more is the pity.

 

[joea]

Have a read of Albanese in the last paragraph.LOL

sp

I think he is a bloody joke! (and I may say he is not alone).

NASA can send rockets into space, have space stations in orbit, build a battery that has little gadgets running around on planets.

I just wonder if in their planning, "say we will give it a go", it might work!!

I think federal politicians have lost their "job descriptions". I have said before, "someone has doctored the water
in Canberra)
joe

 

[dutchie]

One would have to ask why the Government did not put to the vote in the Lower house their legislation which has been sitting on the books for six months or so and which is very similar to Oakeshott's Bill.

The reason they did not is that they knew that even though it would get through the Lower House it would not get through the Upper House because of the Greens.

So how despicable and hypocritical can this Government be to put forward Oakeshotts Bill yesterday knowing full well that despite it getting through the Lower House it will not get through the Upper House because of the Greens again.

What a waste of a lot of emotional speeches and the economic cost of our parliament sitting all day and debating something that would not change things one iota.

One must come to the conclusion that Gillard is interested in only one thing above all others - self preservation of power.

No doubt she will transfer the utter failure of yesterdays charade onto Tony Abbott (and won't say a thing about the Greens). But the Australian public is getting sick of this tactic and they are getting utterly sick of her - I know I am!

 

[DB008]

Just saw the Greens on ABC TV Live. Wow. Stay away from those guys. They basically want to open the gate to anyone who wants to come here.

 

[joea]

Just saw the Greens on ABC TV Live. Wow. Stay away from those guys. They basically want to open the gate to anyone who wants to come here.

+1, +2, +3.
joea

 

[drsmith]

On Insiders today, Julia Gillard wouldn't confirm if Peter Slipper would be restored to a speakership if he was cleared by the court of sexual harassment.

 

[IFocus]

On Insiders today, Julia Gillard wouldn't confirm if Peter Slipper would be restored to a speakership if he was cleared by the court of sexual harassment.

It was an interesting show all round some good analysis by the panel.

 

[sails]

It was an interesting show all round some good analysis by the panel.

Must have been another minority labor love-in ...

 

[drsmith]

It was an interesting show all round some good analysis by the panel.

Cheers IF.

Thanks for confirming my own views of today's show.

 

[StumpyPhantom]

One would have to ask why the Government did not put to the vote in the Lower house their legislation which has been sitting on the books for six months or so and which is very similar to Oakeshott's Bill.

The reason they did not is that they knew that even though it would get through the Lower House it would not get through the Upper House because of the Greens.

So how despicable and hypocritical can this Government be to put forward Oakeshotts Bill yesterday knowing full well that despite it getting through the Lower House it will not get through the Upper House because of the Greens again.

What a waste of a lot of emotional speeches and the economic cost of our parliament sitting all day and debating something that would not change things one iota.

One must come to the conclusion that Gillard is interested in only one thing above all others - self preservation of power.

No doubt she will transfer the utter failure of yesterdays charade onto Tony Abbott (and won't say a thing about the Greens). But the Australian public is getting sick of this tactic and they are getting utterly sick of her - I know I am!

Self preservation! Absoutely self-preservation!

If the Government of the day loses one of their own bills in the lower house, which they are supposed to control, that's a 'no confidence' vote that requires them to call an election. That's the unwritten rule or 'convention' of the Westminster system.

The written rule relating to 'no confidence' is to do with the supply bills:

http://australianpolitics.com/conventions

2.The Westminster system requires that the ministry must command the support – “confidence” – of the lower house, the House of Representatives. This convention is reinforced by the requirement of Section 53 that all appropriation bills must originate in the House of Representatives. Without the ability to secure “supply” from the House of Representatives, a ministry is obliged to resign or call an election. This last occurred in 1941 when the House of Representatives voted to reduce the size of the government’s budget by one pound. The then Prime Minister, Arthur Fadden, resigned and the ALP’s John Curtin was commissioned to form a government.
So the Australian Constitution has the written code about 'supply', but it is the underlying 'confidence' issue which attaches to every other failed bill which is the unwritten convention.

This unwritten 'convention' requires one to act honourably and resign of one's own volition. Or the Governor-General has to step in and use her reserve powers to sack you.

 

[Julia]

Must have been another minority labor love-in ...

Indeed it was.