PPRuNe Forums

PPRuNe Forums (https://www.pprune.org/)
-   Jet Blast (https://www.pprune.org/jet-blast-16/)
-   -   War in Australia (any Oz Politics): the Original (https://www.pprune.org/jet-blast/477678-war-australia-any-oz-politics-original.html)

CoodaShooda 26th Feb 2018 12:42

With the trend to move to external enquiries, royal commissions, consultancies, etc, etc, etc, you have to question why we need all these public servants.

They seem to exist these days simply to find ways to avoid taking responsibility for the work we pay them to do.

WingNut60 26th Feb 2018 13:15


Originally Posted by CoodaShooda (Post 10065656)
With the trend to move to external enquiries, royal commissions, consultancies, etc, etc, etc, you have to question why we need all these public servants.

They seem to exist these days simply to find ways to avoid taking responsibility for the work we pay them to do.

Outsource the services because that's "more efficient" then keep an entire government department to manage the outsourced services.

Because, if you get rid of the government oversight the outsourced service provider can, will and does run amok; because he can.

TWT 26th Feb 2018 13:57

And then there's this Border Farce :

Australian Border Force boss Roman Quaedvlieg earns $500k on leave, fate rests with A-G - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)

His annual salary is approx. $620k. How would he be worth a third more than a deputy PM ? They've truly lost the plot...

chuboy 26th Feb 2018 22:12


Originally Posted by TWT (Post 10065717)
And then there's this Border Farce :

Australian Border Force boss Roman Quaedvlieg earns $500k on leave, fate rests with A-G - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)

His annual salary is approx. $620k. How would he be worth a third more than a deputy PM ? They've truly lost the plot...

I'm sure the department is sitting on the report because it exonerates Mr Quaedvlieg of any and all wrongdoing...

WingNut60 26th Feb 2018 22:25


Originally Posted by chuboy (Post 10066144)
I'm sure the department is sitting on the report because it exonerates Mr Quaedvlieg of any and all wrongdoing...

While they wait for him to agree to resign (out of their hair) and sign a non-disclosure agreement?

jack11111 4th Mar 2018 23:11

Barnaby Joyce, please close your pie hole. Please.

SRFred 5th Mar 2018 00:18


Originally Posted by jack11111 (Post 10072920)
Barnaby Joyce, please close your pie hole. Please.


Don't he know how to pick his media advisor! :E

TWT 5th Mar 2018 00:46

Someone needs to confiscate his shovel. He's been told to stop digging but is ignoring advice.

zzuf 5th Mar 2018 01:58

qantas and freedom of speech

https://tinyurl.com/yc84hqh3

Ascend Charlie 5th Mar 2018 20:08

Alan Joyce and Barnaby Joyce are both making bigger fools of themselves this week. They might be related, but Barnaby says there is a chance they are not.

bnt 24th Aug 2018 11:03

I came here today wondering what you all make of the new Prime Minister, but nothing? According to the Daily Mail, he made Lara Bingle famous. I'd never heard of her, but now I know she was the swimsuit model in the "where the bloody hell are you?" ads for Australian Tourism.

WingNut60 24th Aug 2018 11:50


Originally Posted by bnt (Post 10232202)
I came here today wondering what you all make of the new Prime Minister, but nothing? According to the Daily Mail, he made Lara Bingle famous. I'd never heard of her, but now I know she was the swimsuit model in the "where the bloody hell are you?" ads for Australian Tourism.

Bloody revolution normally occurs when the antics of the "ruling cadre(s)" becomes so far disassociated from the aspirations of the mortals that they decide that it's time to throw the whole deal on their bony heads.
If ever there was a country ripe for a bloody revolution it is Australia.

bnt 24th Aug 2018 11:55


Originally Posted by WingNut60 (Post 10232232)
If ever there was a country ripe for a bloody revolution it is Australia.

Before any revolution, you'd have to convince a sufficient number of revolutionaries to travel all the way out to Canberra. So, probably not, then!

Crownstay01 24th Aug 2018 14:03


Originally Posted by bnt (Post 10232202)
I came here today wondering what you all make of the new Prime Minister...

He's a bogan evangelical Christian from the Shire. Got elected as federal member for Cook after a very dodgy preselection process. I doubt he'll have the job for very long.

Captain Dart 24th Aug 2018 20:54

Morrison was instrumental in stopping the boat invasion by illegal-immigrant country-shoppers. However on one of my favourite redneck websites he is described as 'Turnbull with an abacus'.

I am not optimistic of the Libs continuing to be other than 'Labor Lite'.

KelvinD 24th Aug 2018 22:37

Have you Aussies thought about changing the name of your country to Italy? I heard on the radio today you are on PM number 30. Or was it 31?

Captain Dart 24th Aug 2018 23:12

Thirtieth since 1901. Part of the problem is compulsory voting, and a three-year Federal election cycle, causing the major parties to always focus on the next election, rather than proper government.

WingNut60 24th Aug 2018 23:33

Compulsory voting might have some effect on change of governments but not on change of PM. The recent decade or so of PM swapping, has all been down to internal party in-fighting.
Nothing to do with elections.

Three year election intervals are not ideal but from that point of view the real culprit is that they are not fixed term.
The pollies like to be able to call elections whenever it best suits their re-electability.
In effect, three year just means a maximum of three years.
In practice it can be and often is much less.
Proposals to move to a four year fixed term will never get past the pollies.
And I, and many others, will never vote for a change of the election interval unless it includes going to fixed term.

WingNut60 25th Aug 2018 00:54

Yes, I agree, So does holding your 3-year elections every 2 years.

But if you look back thirty or forty years, many (most??) of the prime ministerial changes have NOT occurred at election time.
What happens at election time is prime ministers losing and their party replacing them because of the loss.

I wasn;t talking about Turnbull-Abbott.
Nor specifically anyone or any party.
But remember Turnbull did take it to an election after replacing Abbott, ostensibly to secure popular approval, which he did.

You can take this all the way back to Bob Menzies in 1941, possibly further.
Or the appointment of Mal Fraser.or the deposing of John Gorton.
And then you get through to the Rudd-Gillard-Riudd shenanigans
Possibly a couple more along the way.

The only honorable transition amongst that lot was John Gorton's departure

And I say again, burger all to do with elections..

Ogre 25th Aug 2018 04:12


Originally Posted by bnt (Post 10232234)
Before any revolution, you'd have to convince a sufficient number of revolutionaries to travel all the way out to Canberra. So, probably not, then!

You'd never get the revolutionaries out of bed early enough to get the red-eye flight, so they'd have to get the evening flight the day before.

CoodaShooda 25th Aug 2018 07:03

WingNut

Personally, I find the oft repeated line that Turnbull ousted Abbott and then won the next election a bit of a furphy.

The Libs lost all of the massive gains achieved under Abbott at the previous election and only got to form government on the back of the Nationals picking up an extra seat. That proved to be the coalition's one seat majority.

Turnbull was responsible for one of the greatest reversals for a political party at an election. Matched only by Gillard/Rudd and Whitlam.

I'm now kinda hoping that Morrison will put Abbott on the front bench with the brief to tear down Shorten. I gather I am not alone in this.

WingNut60 25th Aug 2018 08:43


Originally Posted by CoodaShooda (Post 10232845)
The Libs lost all of the massive gains achieved under Abbott at the previous election and only got to form government on the back of the Nationals picking up an extra seat. That proved to be the coalition's one seat majority.

Alternative view - The Liberal gains at the previous election were achieved by Rudd-Gillard, not Abbott.


Originally Posted by CoodaShooda (Post 10232845)
I'm now kinda hoping that Morrison will put Abbott on the front bench with the brief to tear down Shorten. I gather I am not alone in this.

Morrison will have very little say in who is on his front bench.
Those decisions have already been made for him. But Morrison himself knows that Abbott has the appeal of a fart in a space-suit.
The Liberals will need more than Abbott on the front bench to get them past next years election.

le Pingouin 25th Aug 2018 14:10

If Abbott is the fart then Dutton is the follow-through. Dutton might play well in Queensland and to the far-right of the LIbs but that's about it. Cuddling a shark has more appeal.

layman 26th Aug 2018 01:40

CoodaaShooda

You'd like Abbott to "tear down Shorten". Hasn't he done enough 'tearing down'? Morrison should perhaps be looking for people who can build?

In Abbiott's almost 2 years as PM he allegedly never met with any Senate cross-benchers. Apparently Turnbull had Morrison / Corman meeting them within 2 days of succeeding Abbott. Corman to the stage that some cross-benchers were considering using filing cabinets to block their doors (I assume they were joking ...)

While around 85% of legislation has largely bipartisan support, if you want your more contentious pieces of legislation (policy) to succeed, you need to build relationships rather than tear them down.

parabellum 26th Aug 2018 01:54

Turnbull will have had a lot to do with Scott-Morrison standing in the first place. Turnbull was desperate to stop Dutton becoming PM for fear that Dutton might just be able to do enough to win the next election thus highlighting all of Turnbulls failures. Now, with Scott--Morrison in place, Turnbull can ride off into the sunset secure in the knowledge that Shorten, his Labour pal, will almost certainly be Australia's next PM.

le Pingouin 26th Aug 2018 07:28

Only those on the distant end of the right think Dutton is a viable PM. Nobody else does. Turnbull's failures are largely related to pandering to Dutton supporters.

Dee Vee 26th Aug 2018 08:02


Originally Posted by le Pingouin (Post 10233422)
Turnbull's failures are largely related to pandering.

Other than his miserable NBN failure, Energy price/privatisation failures, bank and superannuation failures, neighbour country relationship failures, business tax cut failures, actually, everything he's touched has been a failure.

le Pingouin 26th Aug 2018 10:03

The NBN cluster-fcuk we have is thanks to pandering to the right. Privatisation? Didn't that all largely happen years ago and wasn't it a state matter? I seem to recall Jeff Kennett revelling in it. So he responsible for the bank behaviour over many years as well? Everything he's touch has been interfered with by the right.

Takan Inchovit 26th Aug 2018 11:00


Only those on the distant end of the right think Dutton is a viable PM. Nobody else does. Turnbull's failures are largely related to pandering to Dutton supporters.
Malcolm? Is that you?

le Pingouin 26th Aug 2018 11:22

Tony? is that you? I'm just someone who doesn't listen to Alan Jones or Ray Hadley, watch Sky News or think Peter Dutton is the second coming of Abbott.

Lyneham Lad 26th Aug 2018 16:53

:D

WingNut60 26th Aug 2018 18:31

Deja Vu all over again
 
What you gender neutral persons all need to do is to go back and read the first 10 or 20 posts in this thread.
More if ze've a touch of masochist about ze.

Clare Prop 27th Aug 2018 02:29

Maybe all this will finally get the message through that we don't "vote for a prime minister", under the constitution there is no such office anyway. If people paid closer attention to their local candidates instead of all the outdated ideological party BS that spews out of Canberra from the "leaders" then we might start to have real representation there.

Eddie Dean 27th Aug 2018 03:10


Originally Posted by Clare Prop (Post 10234048)
Maybe all this will finally get the message through that we don't "vote for a prime minister", under the constitution there is no such office anyway. If people paid closer attention to their local candidates instead of all the outdated ideological party BS that spews out of Canberra from the "leaders" then we might start to have real representation there.

Spot on Clare. Interesting that both Bill Shorten and Tanya Plibersek came out with praise for Malcolm Turnbull.
I still believe that it makes no difference which of the laborials hold the treasury benches, they govern for the rich and the bankers.

In discussions I have had, most people say they are voting minor parties or independants, hopefully they put the major parties at the bottom. An education program about voting could help with this, especially as we have compulsory voting in our country.

FWIW Cheers

WingNut60 27th Aug 2018 03:38

Have you not noticed that the bulk of the "independents" are either ex-Liberals, aspiring Liberals or too far right to be allowed to openly associate with the Liberals (except with Peter Dutton in dimly lit alcoves).
I have long held that holding office is in itself a prima facie reason to hold a parliamentarian in contempt and to vote them out at the first opportunity.

le Pingouin 27th Aug 2018 05:59

From a couple of years ago but utterly appropriate:


parabellum 27th Aug 2018 08:03


Only those on the distant end of the right think Dutton is a viable PM. Nobody else does. Turnbull's failures are largely related to pandering to Dutton supporters.
As written, le Pingouin, a complete load of twaddle. Turnbull's unfailing urge to drag the LNP to the left and behaving like a big marshmallow when it gets to decision time are responsible for, as Dee Vee said, his miserable NBN failure, Energy price/privatisation failures, bank and superannuation failures, neighbour country relationship failures, business tax cut failures. When Scott-Morrison got the job the cry out side of the CBD of most major cities was, "Scott who?" Dutton was the Australian popular choice but got beaten by left leaning Turnbull supporters in the parliamentary Liberal party who are only planning their own futures, in opposition, they don't give a stuff for the future of 23 million Australians or a country called Australia.

le Pingouin 27th Aug 2018 08:34

You're clearly part of what sees itself as the Libs "base". Dutton was Australia's popular choice??? You really need to get out more and listen to a wider range of opinions. Plenty of avowed Liberal voters were horrified at the thought. Maybe you're a tinier minority than you think.... The utterly unedifying display of the last week clearly indicates who doesn't give a stuff about Australia and was only interested in their own grab for power and ideology.

Crownstay01 27th Aug 2018 13:29


Originally Posted by parabellum (Post 10234170)
Dutton was the Australian popular choice...

You're dreaming. Dutton's popularity in his own electorate is minimal. And his Newspoll PPM numbers were even lower than Morrison's.

BTW, why do you hyphenate Scott Morrison?

Hempy 27th Aug 2018 19:11

I think, as a country, we are fed up with ‘extremism’. Political or otherwise.


All times are GMT. The time now is 10:49.


Copyright 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.