Is it a "virus", or is it in the water? We have a local Sugar Mill in our town, and the upper management have caught it too!!!!
joea
The Peter Principle states that "in a hierarchy every employee tends to rise to his level of incompetence", meaning that employees tend to be promoted until they reach a position at which they cannot work competently.
The Peter Principle kicked in when Gillard was appointed Labor leader. Her level of competence was as a cabinet minister, but even there she was involved in some grave errors such as the BER.
Abbott's level of incompetence will be reached when or if he goes from Opposition Leader to PM.
The Peter Principle states that "in a hierarchy every employee tends to rise to his level of incompetence", meaning that employees tend to be promoted until they reach a position at which they cannot work competently.
The Peter Principle kicked in when Gillard was appointed Labor leader. Her level of competence was as a cabinet minister, but even there she was involved in some grave errors such as the BER.
Abbott's level of incompetence will be reached when or if he goes from Opposition Leader to PM.
Agree. Heard Hockey this morning and he really should be considered for PM.
it appears in the Labor party there are many people who are above their levels of competance.
There is something seriously wrong with their advisors to the ministers. There needs to be a real hard look at their whole system of selection for positions after they lose the next election.
Areas they lack are obviously technical (engineering) expertise (e.g.pink batts, manufacturing policy) and legal people. They are struggling in oreign affairs also which suggests no one is contacting that ministry when they make decisions.
The Prime Minister has to take the responsibility for this. She needs to use all her political capital to make change to at least turn this government around but I don't think she is the right perosn unfortunately.
Why wait Mr Wilkie, the poker machine legislation is unlikely to be tabled, let alone pass, even the Salvation Army are against it now...Mr Richardson told radio 3AW, adding that it was "too late" for Ms Gillard.
"There's no way she can turn this around. You've got to say it gets worse for her every single day. It never gets better, it just gets worse."..
Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/national/t...-richardson-20110901-1jmyr.html#ixzz1WfdsWNLC
Are they really? Why? I thought all the church groups loved it?Why wait Mr Wilkie, the poker machine legislation is unlikely to be tabled, let alone pass, even the Salvation Army are against it now.
And that's an article in the ('non-hate' media) Age!
Why wait Mr Wilkie, the poker machine legislation is unlikely to be tabled, let alone pass, even the Salvation Army are against it now.
It's not as though there is a loyalty issue for Wilkie, at the end of the day he is there for his electorate. It does them no good if he goes down with "the good ship Gillard".
I also wish Wilkie would bring the house of cards down immediately but its highly unlikely. Its about power and influence. For the moment he has some this. If he brings on an election it will not deliver another minority government for him to 'prop up' and even if he himself gets re-elected he will become an irrelevance.
Here you go Julia.Are they really? Why? I thought all the church groups loved it?
http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/ne...oker-machine-cap/story-e6freuy9-1226126864138
Salvation Army pulls its support for the Gillard government's controversial poker machine cap. Joe Hildebrand From: The Daily Telegraph September 01, 2011
1 September 2011
salvos.org.au
CLARIFICATION AND CORRECTION- THE SALVATION ARMY'S POSITION ON MANDATORY PRE COMMITMENT
The Salvation Army has not back flipped or changed its position on mandatory pre-commitment. The Salvation Army has held the same position since the beginning of the debate over mandatory pre-commitment.
At no time has The Salvation Army ”rejected" mandatory pre-commitment or criticised the motivations or positive intentions of those who support its introduction.
The Salvation Army has always been opposed to the proliferation of gambling and sought to assist those whose lives have been negatively affected by it.
The Salvation Army’s work puts us in contact with these people frequently. We support the introduction of measures that will assist those whose lives are affected by gambling, and measures that limit the unchecked growth of all types of gambling in the community.
For this reason the Salvation Army Southern Territory (Vic, TAS, SA, WA, NT) has supported the introduction of mandatory pre-commitment since its announcement.
The Salvation Army Eastern Territory (NSW, ACT, Qld) shares a similar concern for the impact of gambling, however based on consultations with its front line staff, people in its programs effected by problem gambling, and researchers, The Salvation Army Eastern Territory support further trials of mandatory precommitment before fully endorsing it.
The Salvation Army values its access to the clubs and hotels but any threat to this access was not a factor in determining the position of The Salvation Army Eastern Territory. Contact in clubs and hotels also provides opportunities with people who may need our support.
Agree entirely, Bintang. Mr Wilkie will never again be able to bathe in the limelight as he does now. He likes the power which imo is well and truly going to his head.I also wish Wilkie would bring the house of cards down immediately but its highly unlikely. Its about power and influence. For the moment he has some this. If he brings on an election it will not deliver another minority government for him to 'prop up' and even if he himself gets re-elected he will become an irrelevance.
Here you go Julia.
http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/ne...oker-machine-cap/story-e6freuy9-1226126864138
Salvation Army pulls its support for the Gillard government's controversial poker machine cap. Joe Hildebrand From: The Daily Telegraph September 01, 2011
"THE Salvation Army has pulled its support for the Gillard government's controversial pokies cap, putting Labor at odds with the nation's most iconic anti-gambling group.
The turnaround - which follows suggestions that clubs were prepared to bar Salvation Army collectors from their venues - will have major ramifications for the ALP.
Under the deal struck to form government, Prime Minister Julia Gillard must pass the reforms or lose the confidence vote of independent Andrew Wilkie.
The blow came at the hands of Louise Duff, the Salvo whose alleged verbal spray by MP Craig Thomson at a forum on the Central Coast sparked another crisis for the government.
It is understood Ms Duff asked the Salvos' Australian Eastern Territory division (NSW, Qld and ACT) for their position on the issue ahead of the forum.
They provided her with a statement that declared they did not support a blanket mandatory pre-commitment...".
Agree entirely, Bintang. Mr Wilkie will never again be able to bathe in the limelight as he does now. He likes the power which imo is well and truly going to his head.
It's totally bizarre that a single individual with an obsession about a single issue that can hardly be considered vital to the wellbeing of the country as a whole has the power to make or break the government.
Tony Windsor is also flat out defending the government, presumably in some sort of peculiar attempt to convince himself that he backed the right horse.
Tony Windsor is also flat out defending the government, presumably in some sort of peculiar attempt to convince himself that he backed the right horse.
I have a gut feeling Julia Gillard will be gone before the next siting of parliament.
Labor cannot stay with this woman and the next poll will be the crushing blow.
The main single obsessive issue for Wilkie, Windsor, Oakeshotte and Katter is their hatred of of the Liberals in Wilkie's case and of the Nationals wth the other three. They are enjoying their revenge too much to change now.
Abbott's policy to be nice to these rats in the hope they will switch is sickening hypocrisy.
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?