Federal Coalition Government 2013-?

[fatprop]

I do like how they split up the Private Health insurance rebate, Medicare, Hospitals & Pharmaceutical benefits (totalling 12% of the total budget) so "Health" doesn't appear the biggest expense

 

[boyo]

The reason why it's not being bought is that most of the people can see that it's a dud.

People don't like being conned.

The government needs to make the moral case

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-08-21/montaigne-budget/5687500

 

[fatprop]

The reason why it's not being bought is that most of the people can see that it's a dud.

People don't like being conned.

The government needs to make the moral case

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-08-21/montaigne-budget/5687500

There is quite a difference between being conned and an article suggesting they need to sell it better

 

[boyo]

I would suggest that many have been conned.

 

[fatprop]

On being conned ...........................

http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/bigideas/the-dark-art-of-political-advertising/5668724

To those in the advertising business, political parties are ‘brands’, like Coke or Pepsi. Whom you choose to vote for is akin to deciding which brand of toothpaste you’ll purchase. Dee Madigan has been in the ad game for 18 years and has worked on 5 ALP election campaigns. She reveals the tricks of the trade. How are political ad’s made? Do they really makes us to change our vote? Why are negative ad’s so effective? Are ‘spin doctors’ & focus groups poisoning the political process, or essential to it? Dee Madigan is in conversation with Paul Barclay

Interesting comment on Abbott, she suggests his biggest mistake at the last election was actually promising anything, she suggested the polls meant all he had to do was turn up.

Promise nothing, and you can't break a promise later

 

[boyo]

What they promised pre-election, and what they have delivered(or trying to deliver) post-election are very different things - a con - a classic bait and switch.

 

[fatprop]

What they promised pre-election, and what they have delivered(or trying to deliver) post-election are very different things - a con - a classic bait and switch.

Really?

It is just what I expected, not bait or switch, just cut costs (and services), try delete the taxes they flagged and battle against a senate until they learn to compromise

 

[Ruggo]

Two different concepts.

So if ALP win lower house and not the senate at next election they will have no mandate

They will have a mandate to govern in the lower house. Same as what the current government has. Nothing more, nothing less.

 

[Ruggo]

Usless they are just saying no as a ploitical tool. ALP is saying NO to items it put forward at the last election so it is political expediance and screw Australia

Cry me a fucking river. What do you think the Coalition were doing in the last four years of opposition.

 

[Gnostic]

A very good interview with Mark Latham.

http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/conversations/mark-latham/5650272

"......politicians the dog dirt on the shoe of democracy"

I must say I support his ideas on reform of the system (and would go much further) but starting with the abolition of Question Time.

 

[boyo]

 

[Pfitzy]

I must say I support his ideas on reform of the system (and would go much further) but starting with the abolition of Question Time.

I would start with the abolition of Parliament.

With only two parties plus a balance faction, politicians in NO WAY represent their electorate once their party is in charge.

For starters, when you count the votes they may not even hold 50% of the primary ballot. Therefore they're not even representing a majority. This is why preferential voting is broken.

Once they get to the big house, they toe the party line, which means they vote however the leaders tell them to. Party members with a conscience will be given short shrift and told their services are no longer required. This is why party politics is broken.

Democracy can't work in the face of any form of factionism, because it dilutes the representation of the individual. The elected member doesn't even need to be a citizen of that electorate to stand for it, except in the loosest terms.

Go and browse through this:

http://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliam...sheet_15_-_The_work_of_a_Member_of_Parliament

Here are the choice bits from the top part:

While there is no formal ‘job description’ that sets out what a backbench Member does

Most Members can thus be viewed as having three roles—that of parliamentarian, constituency representative, and party member.
-
Members must leave their electorates to attend Parliament. When Parliament is not meeting, parliamentary committees on which they serve may be conducting inquiries in different parts of the country.

Members require a broad range of skills to enable them to make an effective contribution across the breadth of their work responsibilities. Individual Members have different sets of skills, developed through education and their work

So, in order:

1) We don't know what you're supposed to do
2) There are junkets - junkets are good
3) Don't worry about the bit in bold, just do what we say. You probably haven't held a real job if you're with a big party anyway.

I find #3 particularly amusing.

 

[Gnostic]

@Pfitzy, Yu will have seen my posts from the start of this thread and others regarding preferential voting. I would also add in compulsory voting. You are preaching to the converted.

Compulsory voting give both parties an unjustified sense of legitimacy. As even Latham states there is a crisis in this very thing in Australia. I have argued after the last 3 federal elections this point saying that the system covers for these weaknesses. To my mind the number of donkey votes intentionally cast shows the level of discontent.

 

[boyo]

With only two parties plus a balance faction, politicians in NO WAY represent their electorate once their party is in charge.

For starters, when you count the votes they may not even hold 50% of the primary ballot. Therefore they're not even representing a majority. This is why preferential voting is broken.

Once they get to the big house, they toe the party line, which means they vote however the leaders tell them to. Party members with a conscience will be given short shrift and told their services are no longer required. This is why party politics is broken.

Democracy can't work in the face of any form of factionism, because it dilutes the representation of the individual. The elected member doesn't even need to be a citizen of that electorate to stand for it, except in the loosest terms.

So, in order:

1) We don't know what you're supposed to do
2) There are junkets - junkets are good
3) Don't worry about the bit in bold, just do what we say. You probably haven't held a real job if you're with a big party anyway.

I find #3 particularly amusing.

+1

 

[boyo]

 

[boyo]

https://fbcdn-sphotos-d-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-AK (Andrew Kellaway)-xpa1/t1.0-9/p526x296/10516711_10152652141935797_1741594044338687415_n.jpg

 

[Runner]

I would start with the abolition of Parliament.

With only two parties plus a balance faction, politicians in NO WAY represent their electorate once their party is in charge.

For starters, when you count the votes they may not even hold 50% of the primary ballot. Therefore they're not even representing a majority. This is why preferential voting is broken.

Once they get to the big house, they toe the party line, which means they vote however the leaders tell them to. Party members with a conscience will be given short shrift and told their services are no longer required. This is why party politics is broken.

Democracy can't work in the face of any form of factionism, because it dilutes the representation of the individual. The elected member doesn't even need to be a citizen of that electorate to stand for it, except in the loosest terms.

Go and browse through this:

http://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliam...sheet_15_-_The_work_of_a_Member_of_Parliament

Here are the choice bits from the top part:







So, in order:

1) We don't know what you're supposed to do
2) There are junkets - junkets are good
3) Don't worry about the bit in bold, just do what we say. You probably haven't held a real job if you're with a big party anyway.

I find #3 particularly amusing.

I am happy to be the friendly dictator when parliament goes. Onlt a few changes will happen

 

[Braveheart81]

 

[boyo]

They have no idea how to negotiate:-

Coalition’s budget pitch moves from charm offensive to passive aggression

http://www.theguardian.com/world/20...es-from-charm-offensive-to-passive-aggression

 

[Runner]

Negotiation takes two.
ALP are no to everything even things they wanted before. The Greens are barking mad and will always say no and are enjoying taking on the ALP as that is where there future voters will come from not the Libs.

PUP is an beast and a bully and should be stood up to