This is a mobile optimized page that loads fast, if you want to load the real page, click this text.

Tony Abbott for PM

Jump to new
Joe Hockey said yesterday that the police investigation into the leak is ongoing.
I really don't know whether the Libs do have some shonky figures they are trying to hide, or whether it's a genuine stand on principle. If the latter, it's probably a bit over the top if they really want to win government at this stage.

I'm more inclined to think they have decided either (a) government right now with the mish-mash of people to be pleased, especially when they're of the ilk of Katter, is the archetypal poison chalice, and they're happy to see Labor try to cope with it, thus probably rendering them failures for a lengthy period, or (b) they are deliberately trying to force a new election.


I also think it is good to see one leader standing up for what they believe is right as opposed to the grovelling that appears to be going on in the other camp.

Click to expand...
Agree that the obsequious grovelling is decidedly unbecoming.
 
One possibility is that Tony Abbott had decided that the National independents were allready leaning towards the ALP and so decided there was nothing to lose to fight this point.

Wayne Swan bowing down to Bob Katter yesterday was an awful look.
 
Lateline last night,

http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2010/s2993569.htm

It's a pity the media have not picked up on this. As for business, all they want is certainty.
 
Julia said:
Agree that the obsequious grovelling is decidedly unbecoming.
Click to expand...

Well what about the apology that Tony Abott gave to Andrew Wilkie for the way he was treated by Howard's Government? I think that falls into the category of obsequious as well. If the Coalition already had 76 seats or more would Abbott have apologised to Wilkie? Irrespective of the number of seats the Coalition had won would Abbott have apologised if Wilkie had not won the seat of Denison?
 

Julia, probably all conjecture at this stage, but it would seem strange that Abbott would play funny games now for little reason. He has fought extremely hard and has surprised many of us with how close he has come in this election. A few months ago, I thought the Coalition had no hope of winning government for some time to come.

If they had something to hide, I doubt they would be letting any costings go to the independents. They have agreed for them to see their independent costings.

Suppose the Coalition genuinely have reasons to believe that treasury (or prominent person/people in treasury) is biased and potentially able to hurt them, this action of refusing to use treasury until the police investigation is complete may be a risk they are willing to take.


drsmith said:
One possibility is that Tony Abbott had decided that the National independents were allready leaning towards the ALP and so decided there was nothing to lose to fight this point.

Wayne Swan bowing down to Bob Katter yesterday was an awful look.
Click to expand...

Drsmith, I agree that Abbott most likely has little to lose at this stage. Labor desperately needs to win and hence this awful grovelling.
 
Abbott will never know if he could have actually won the election by having more backbone and coming up with some bolder policies instead of keeping under the radar. He should have dropped the extravagant maternity handout and offered employers some hope that he would amend the nasty anti-employer bits in "Fair Work Australia".

In my opinion he has no chance of getting the opportunist gang of three on side, so he could get more respect by just telling them to get stuffed.

Everyone says he has done a great job to get where he is. He could have done better. I have said all along that he is not "foreman material." He has done nothing to change my mind.
 

He actually won the primary vote by over 500 thousand votes Calliope. In my opinion I believe he won the authority to govern this nation.

I concur ... who needs the lunatic fringe? Tell Katter and his jerkoffs to tell their story walking .... LUNATICS ! IMO. Block everything in the senate and let them bleed. Labor will be worst off for it.

Wel done Tony Abbott to get this far. :iagree:
 
Calliope said:
In my opinion he has no chance of getting the opportunist gang of three on side, so he could get more respect by just telling them to get stuffed.
.
Click to expand...
If they escalate their grandstanding much more, it won't be just Mr Abbott who will feel like telling them to get stuffed. Already there are rumblings amongst the exhausted electorate that these three are suffering delusions of grandeur, the voluble Mr Katter most particularly.
 

The costings are not the problem and Abbott is well aware of this its the assumptions that make up the costings what he is running away from.

What Treasury would do is test the assumptions which all most certainly would blow out the costings.

The private so called independent audit didn't test the assumptions but accepted those presented the whole thing was a joke and Abbott's current position on treasury a fraud.

The request from the independents really is common sense.
 
Calliope said:
Yes because of the swing away from Labor. But most of this swing went to the Greens.

I agree, but he could have done better.
Click to expand...

The figures I quoted were primary votes and did not include the Greens preferences.

I am not sure as to how he could have done better Calliope? I am veritably impressed he made it thus far.

The issue as I see it is the close proximity of the infighting to form government which has never been a Tony Abbott strong point. This is more of a Labor trend to suck the teat of democracy to get what you want rather than standing up for your ideals.
 
I think it's politically and tactically savvy of the Coalition to refuse the costings to Treasury. It plays well to me. Taking a stand on principle, and calling the independents' bluff. Let the indeps rant and rave, they are the ones who will look silly (sillier by the day), while the Coalition will look strong and principled.

Also it keeps the issue of Treasury leaks, under Labor, before the Australian public.

Let the indeps run to Labor if that's their choice, they'll be flat out getting re-elected next time, especially once country folks see their new electricity bills.

Calliope I have to agree with you that the Coalition maternity leave offer was ridiculously over the top.

Another election so soon? Might just be an expensive waste of time - give folks a chance to re-evaluate. Better to wait for 18 months at least. Even if it means an unholy alliance of Labor and country independents in the meantime.
 
And further today:

 
An interesting article by Sinclair Davidson who is a professor in the school of economics, finance and marketing at RMIT University and a senior fellow at the Institute of Public Affairs.


These are large numbers to be throwing around and the differences suggest the government and Treasury were just making it up as they went along.
Click to expand...

Full article from the Australian:
Replace this partisan treasury with an independent budget office
 
"Abbott doesn't want to reach a deal, he wants another election"

Lenore Taylor on Abbott's position on costings

It was with an eye to the possibility of another election that Abbott refused to submit his costings to the Treasury - a reasonable request from the independents who will be asked to guarantee supply. Abbott's excuses were not convincing.
Click to expand...

Good to see the real Tony is back alive and well

On Wednesday he said it was because the Treasury was incapable of costing opposition policies - even though it would presumably have been capable of costing them if that opposition had become a government
Click to expand...

Then this how did we forget


So its really about

The Coalition is really worried that Treasury will come up with a different - bigger - answer to what its policies will cost, which would be a big disadvantage when it came to re-running the ''debt and deficit'' argument in another election campaign.
Click to expand...

http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/polit...ection-20100826-13u9p.html?rand=1282830768196
 

This would make sense only if the Treasury and the SMH were impartial. But it became clear through Labor's term that the Treasury under Ken Henry was clearly biased toward Labor. The impartial Henry was often critical of the Opposition.
 
Calliope said:
This would make sense only if the Treasury and the SMH were impartial. But it became clear through Labor's term that the Treasury under Ken Henry was clearly biased toward Labor. The impartial Henry was often critical of the Opposition.
Click to expand...

Wasn,t Godwin Grech from Treasury,short memories
 
The same public servants who would have been entrusted to implement the coalitions policies had it won a majority at Saturdays election.
Try reading more papers than the Australian
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more...