Fairly obviously to just refer to the mothers which was what the issue was all about.What would have been better for him to say ?
Sails, you're of an age when you should clearly remember the stigma attached to unmarried mothers.Very difficult to arrive here on earth without two parents...
The Greens welcomed the departure of Mr Ferguson, their long-time nemesis, saying the fossil fuel industry had never had a greater advocate in cabinet than the former minister.
“His departure offers Labor the opportunity to embrace the renewable energy age and fix the mining tax,” Greens leader Christine Milne said.
“This is Labor's chance to halt the expansion of coal ports in Queensland, the on-rush of coal seem gas and the destruction of James Price point in the Kimberley.”
Senator Milne also claimed the Greens would attempt to unseat Mr Ferguson at the next election in his Victorian seat of Batman.
You think it was OK for him to refer to 'birth parents' when the issue was all about single mothers?
Class warfare serves the Greens purposes.If Christine Milne hates Martin Ferguson, then that in my opinion is a ringing endorsement for him. Ferguson is the only ex-union official in the party who refuses to indulge in class warfare.
Really? Do you have a link that affirms that? It's not as I heard it. This is from today's "The Australian".Actually it wasn't the word 'parents' instead of 'mothers' it was the use of the decriptor 'birth' that caused offence apparently.
Which is pretty much what I commented on originally.TONY Abbott has been heckled at today's apology to victims of forced adoptions after he used the terms "birth parents" and "relinquished", which members of the audience considered offensive.
They're not a majority and it's hard not to offend anyone in the preciousness of today's society that you describe. Coal mining offends the Greens even though that was the fuel of the industrial revolution.Let's just be realistic about the preciousness of the society Labor has created. We are all, apparently, very easily offended and always ready to demand an apology. I heard earlier today that the group concerned here is now demanding an apology from Simon Crean for spoiling what should have been their day with his interruption of the leadership spill.
Yes, it's unreasonable. But these people vote. In addition to having sympathy for what these women went through fifty years ago, my main point is that surely it's better to make a speech which cannot offend anyone if you want their vote.
Really? Do you have a link that affirms that? It's not as I heard it. This is from today's "The Australian".
Yes, it's unreasonable. But these people vote. In addition to having sympathy for what these women went through fifty years ago, my main point is that surely it's better to make a speech which cannot offend anyone if you want their vote.
Judging by their reaction, I don't think these people were ever going to vote for Abbott.
I agree absolutely!...Don't you think those young mothers of fifty years ago are due some sort of apology for the inhumane way they were treated?...
The mistake Abbott made was to be a party to this ridiculous "black armband" apology. What does it achieve? Now some are complaining that they can't get "closure" because the Rudd/Gillard fiasco spoiled their day.Can anyone really believe that a Julia Gillard apology has any meaning apart from being politicaly motivated? It was probably McTernan's idea.
The mistake Abbott made was to be a party to this ridiculous "black armband" apology. What does it achieve? Now some are complaining that they can't get "closure" because the Rudd/Gillard fiasco spoiled their day.Can anyone really believe that a Julia Gillard apology has any meaning apart from being politicaly motivated? It was probably McTernan's idea.
No link, but I heard someone say it on the radio (ABC)
Coalition leader Tony Abbott's response, while personal and considered, was unfortunately controversial. He caused grievous offence by referring to ''birth parents'', a bureaucratic terminology that has the effect of denying mothers and fathers any role beyond the moment of birth.
The mistake Abbott made was to be a party to this ridiculous "black armband" apology. What does it achieve? Now some are complaining that they can't get "closure" because the Rudd/Gillard fiasco spoiled their day.Can anyone really believe that a Julia Gillard apology has any meaning apart from being politicaly motivated? It was probably McTernan's idea.
This post has hit the nail on the head, she we will do anything to stay in power.
Credit where credit is due, the Prime Minister's inner circle knows how to prop its candidate up internally. They may not be much good at running a government, but they sure can count the numbers and strategise how best to time a ballot to maximise Gillard's chances of survival.
We'll see how in awe the caucus is of these skills come September 14, when Gillard and her team go up against the most unpopular opposition leader in Australian political history, and are comprehensively demolished.
Yet, in another sense, it cannot be over. This saga will be over only when Rudd or Gillard leaves the parliament. While Rudd says there are "no circumstances" in which he will return to the leadership, he has nominated for the next election. So the broken Gillard-Rudd saga will limp into the future.
While Mr Bowen, Mr Carr and Martin Ferguson resigned yesterday, there was no statement from Mr Albanese, despite speculation from his colleagues that he would have to go because he was implicated in the attempted challenge.
Similar questions were raised about Mental Health Minister Mark Butler.
Western Sydney MP Laurie Ferguson, a Gillard supporter and Martin Ferguson's brother, posted a Facebook message yesterday calling Mr Albanese and Mr Butler "gutless" for not resigning.
Mr Albanese's office made no comment last night.
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?