Garpal Gumnut
Ross Island Hotel
- Joined
- 2 January 2006
- Posts
- 13,840
- Reactions
- 10,677
For well over 50 years of voting I have only voted Labor once. That was the last election. I expected it to be a once off and it was designed to get rid of Howard and help in my small way.
However we ended up with a very active Labor member. The first one ever in this electorate. She has done more for this electorate than the past three or four Nationals ever did. So she will get my vote again. She is active, she gets around. You dont have much trouble talking to her as she attends most local markets on Sundays. Previously we only saw the local member if there was something official going on and certainly not on a Sunday.
Another factor that influences me is I would not vote for Abbott as I consider him a sleeze bag. His underhand treatment of Pauline Hanson is testament to that. I get goose bumps thinking about him and what he may do if he gets the reins of power.
Local member voting will have more influence next time around.
As I understand it, it's a parental allowance, so not confined to mothers.didnt he pipe up and say fathers will get it as well?
seems excessivly generous to me, even if its only for mothers.
Me too. I just don't believe that they can divorce their strong personal beliefs (e.g. Abbott's anti-abortion stance) from their policy initiatives.btw, I find it disconcerting we have two real bible-thumpers as leaders of each party
I honestly don't know. I don't have the skills or training to assess that.And Julia, what do you think would be the overall impact of that slight tax break, if you were allowed to salary sacrifice like that, if the baby bonus was scrapped altogether?
Excuse me for being blunt but..
I hate to say it but when it comes to politics were pretty much stuck up sh*t creek without a paddle.
Between Kevin and abbott we dont really have much a choice.
The better of two rotten apples!
While you might think this statement is a little vague, just think of Barack Obama - what characteristics come to mind?
Seems to me the only thing Abbott is going to do is demonstrate his skill in making "U" turns when it comes to policies. Six months paid maternity leave, I don't think so.
I agree with you. Abbott started off OK with the rejection of Rudd's ETS, but since then he has got few thing right. His maternity leave scheme is is just plain wrong.
To extend it to 12 months fully paid leave without consulting his power base is a very stupid move. It could only attract that part of the electorate that don't need it, and he already has them in his pocket.
As an election strategist Rudd runs rings around him. All Rudd's handouts have targetted "working families".
In question time yesterday Rudd made Abbott look like an amateur.
As I understand it, it's a parental allowance, so not confined to mothers.
Me too. I just don't believe that they can divorce their strong personal beliefs (e.g. Abbott's anti-abortion stance) from their policy initiatives.
Has he suggested extending it to 12 months now? I've only heard the 6 months.I agree with you. Abbott started off OK with the rejection of Rudd's ETS, but since then he has got few thing right. His maternity leave scheme is is just plain wrong.
To extend it to 12 months fully paid leave without consulting his power base is a very stupid move. It could only attract that part of the electorate that don't need it, and he already has them in his pocket.
I agree about opposition for the sake of it. e.g. I think they should have passed the means testing of private health cover. It's a logical and reasonable thing to do, and frees up funds which can be better used elsewhere.It's a little concerning the direction both parties seem to be taking. But now maternity leave is on the agenda, it will be a choice between Rudd’s or Abbotts. I have an issue currently with the liberals opposing everything in the senate as well just for the sake of it.
Exactly. It's ironic that he was elected leader essentially as a protest against Malcolm Turnbull's unilateral behaviour, and now he is doing the same thing. If the Libs once again descend into a squabbling rabble, they can forget about even being competitive.Abbott reminds me of Turnbull with his bull at the gate manner, if he keeps annoucing things without consulting his partyroom, he will run into trouble, I reckon he would have many internal enemies
I was just reading in the West Australian about Abbott's parental leave plan and it had an employer saying how this would be a disincentive to employ women of child bearing age.
Without commenting on the merits or otherwise of the plan, it seems to me that because there is a disconnect between who is employing the women and who is paying the parental leave, the disincentive is muted.
As far as I understand it, the leave is funded by a tax or levy on all businesses with taxable income in excess of $5m. So if you are such a business, you will be paying into the fund whether you employ women of child bearing age or not. Since you do not directly fund parental leave for your own female employees (or their husband's), you will not see the employing of a new female employee as becoming a direct cost to you should she fall pregnant.
On the other hand many companies today have some form of parental leave plan which directly effects those companies as they fund their own employees who avail of the plan. This is a disincentive that will be lifted from those companies.
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?