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)

Worrals in the wilds 15th May 2014 10:07

That makes a little more sense. :\

Ethel the Aardvark 15th May 2014 10:56

Budget makes total sense,
If you are going to have Knights and Dames then you must have lots of serfs and peasants. Roll on the DD!

chuboy 16th May 2014 01:00

So we have Palmer and Shorten both saying bring on another election and presumably the Greens have no intention of letting the supply bill pass in its current form. Plus rebellion from state premiers over cuts to health and education.

Tricky situation for TA and in some ways the circumstances are not dissimilar to the ones that led Gillard to make those infamous concessions in order to form government...

Thoughts here on whether we could actually see a double dissolution? Or just a vastly altered budget (although it's already watered-down from what it could have been IMO).

500N 16th May 2014 01:01

Abbott is crazy to go to a DD.

I do think he has riled a few people though !

Worrals in the wilds 16th May 2014 01:31


If you are going to have Knights and Dames then you must have lots of serfs and peasants.
That's pretty funny. :ok:

I don't see them going to a DD, particularly not with their current poll figures. I think it's more likely to get thrashed out piece by piece. Some of the Liberal MPs in marginal seats must be feeling a little nervous right now, and the incoming Senate's minor parties are going to be interesting, to say the least.

Of course I could be wrong, it's happened before...:}

brickhistory 16th May 2014 02:25

Well done, Australia.

A politician, apparently, following through.

Cutting taxes and the budget.

What a brilliant concept!

chuboy 16th May 2014 02:55


Originally Posted by brickhistory (Post 8480080)
A politician, apparently, following through.

Cutting taxes and the budget.

Where have you been reading your news? Because it's only half right :E

CoodaShooda 16th May 2014 03:19

Well they propose to cut Company Tax and they have sacked a few (thousand) public servants to reduce expenditure.....:E

I think we will be moving away from the Westminster system and become more in line with the Italian system of government over the next couple of years.

No DD on the cards. Abbott and Hockey will "bravely" battle over the next 2 1/2 years to repair the damage wrought by Labor/Greens - but will blocked by an obstructionist Senate.

They'll hope to be able to pin the dysfunctionality on Labor/Greens/PUP while casting the government as Leonides and his 300 at Thermopylae and trying to keep labor's recent performance in the public's memory.

Ho hum. At least with an obstructing Senate, they won't be able to do much further damage; unlike Rudd/Gillard/Rudd and Swan.

On a lighter note, if you want to see how deep into the sewer a Parliament can slide, have a read of yesterday's Hansard for the NT Legislative Assembly.

Our breakaway bush members lined up with the opposition to smear, not only government Ministers but the Speaker and private citizens. Of course, they won't repeat the allegations of threats, bullying, conspiracy and corruption outside of cowards castle...but mud sticks. (And I don't doubt there are some nuggets of truth hidden in the dung heap.)

Not obvious from the written Hansard, is the trouble they had with pronunciation and syntax while reading from their prepared speech notes. It gave the appearance of being orchestrated by a former minder who "helped" the three to leave the CLP after his demand for a $400,000+ salary package was rejected by the government. He'd threatened at the time "to bring down the government".

bosnich71 16th May 2014 03:22

Here'a good idea,let's have Labour/Labor back in power.That'll sort out the problems with OZ.
Shortone could cancel all the inquiries into various aspects of the last "government" that would save heaps.

CoodaShooda 16th May 2014 03:28

Talking of finances. Our local ABC Drive presenter got her knickers in a twist last night over a proposal to send all remote community secondary school students to boarding school, just like the current generation of successful Aboriginal leaders.

"How expensive", she sneered. "Where will we find the money?"

Then her guest kindly pointed out that it would be met through savings from closing the secondary schools on the communities; where the cost of a student gaining a certificate level qualification is $1.4 million each compared with $86,000 per certificate in the major centres.

chuboy 16th May 2014 04:38

It's not that bad an idea either if it means their education is better as well (typically so given the inevitable disparity between remote and regional/metro teaching facilities).

Of course you'd also have to factor in the costs of providing transport and assistance and so on for these kids to board far away from families who otherwise couldn't afford it.

And running a school provides employment to locals. So there would be arguments for and against.

Worrals in the wilds 16th May 2014 05:07

Would the kids want to leave home though? It was mooted for FNQ some years ago, but IIRC research showed that many children didn't want to leave their families. Nor do I blame them; I wouldn't have wanted to either. Nor is boarding school much fun for many students; loneliness and bullying can be rife, particularly for 'different' kids, which they'd be.

Anyway, I think Palmer and the conservative micro-party mixed assortment will be Abbot's equivalent of Gillard's Greens :ouch:. In short, a millstone around his neck.

CoodaShooda 16th May 2014 05:22

At the moment, the kids on the communities are getting into trouble with the law in the hope of being sent to "jail". Its a safer and happier place than being at home with mum on the booze and dad on drugs.

Most aren't attending the schools that are provided on the communities, in any event.

The brutal reality is that land rights coupled with self determination and political correctness has effectively locked the indigenous community into their traditional, isolated lands where there are few employment opportunities and everyone relies on sit down money, government grants and/or royalties (If they're lucky).

The kids aren't bothering to go to school or learn much culture either and are then breeding a new generation even more disengaged than their parents....and the spiral continues. :(

Captain Sand Dune 16th May 2014 06:35


The brutal reality is that land rights coupled with self determination and political correctness has effectively locked the indigenous community into their traditional, isolated lands where there are few employment opportunities and everyone relies on sit down money, government grants and/or royalties (If they're lucky).
You mean they got what they wanted.

CoodaShooda 16th May 2014 06:54

Yes.......and no.

Governments and minority groups were involved, so there were unforeseen consequences. :E

Worrals in the wilds 16th May 2014 08:46


At the moment, the kids on the communities are getting into trouble with the law in the hope of being sent to "jail". Its a safer and happier place than being at home with mum on the booze and dad on drugs.
Okay, fair enough then. My comments were partly based on a Courier Mail article a while ago about kids from Cape York and Torres Strait who'd won scholarships to boarding schools in Brisbane, Townsville and Cairns. The kids did well, but there was a lot of heartache involved; both their own and their parents who were so far away. I attended a school that had borders; fortunately I only had to spend 40 hours a week there. The borders endured the bullying, sniping and general cattiness 24/7, and more than a few were pretty screwed up by the end of it.

Anecdotal stories from friends who worked for the relevant state departments seemed to back up the theory that it was better to provide good schools in the local area than ship off the high achievers, whatever the cost.

Of course Cape York/TI is not the same as NT, so the situation may be different in your neck of the woods. My impression of Cape York (only as a visitor) is that there are plenty of smart, motivated kids who just need some opportunity. I thought that Yanner had a point; after all, he lives there.

You couldn't really call me the moderating voice on anything, but here I find myself stuck in the middle between those that would lock it all up and those that want open-slather development at any cost. I am pro mining - it's a means to an end. A means to get our kids educated, to get them off welfare and into jobs and assist our people to move into a modern economy and not be left behind.
OPINION: Mining giants must be kept away from our great rivers, says Murrandoo Yanner | News.com.au

parabellum 18th May 2014 07:49


Renny Carter 53, is an old journo and one of the Liberal Party's faceless men, who has opinions on anything and everything in contemporary life.

DON'T SHOOT JOE HOCKEY

The poor bastard has inherited a mess of unprecedented proportions that is going to take a long Liberal tenure to sort out and return to some normality - if at all.

The sad reality is that Australia is made up of three types of people. Workers, bludgers and pensioners. And is desperately trying to claw every dollar they can back from this hurting system...the magnifying glass has momentarily paused above the latter category. Which is sad. We expect the pensioners to be looked after in this country. We don't want to see elderly people homeless and destitute in Australia. And unlike Italy and Japan - we don't have a culture of always looking after our senior citizens.

I have an immediate idea that could claw back quite a few millions. Means test the bloody politicians for a start! Let's take a few luminaries who really don't deserve the largesse we give them.

The wastage in this area alone is horrendous and is a massive burden on the taxpayer. Moreover, is it justified? Do we get any value for money? The latest revelation that both Rudd and Gillard get a $200,000 salary for the rest of their natural lives plus enormous travel allowances, office accommodation and staffing costs is an insult given that neither was poor to start with and both now have 'jobs'. They are young enough to work. Younger than me! If I have to keep working until I am 70 plus, why don't they?

A study in 2010 by the Daily Telegraph revealed that Mr Rudd, at 52, a young ex-prime minister, will receive well in excess of $20 million worth of allowances if he lives to 85. This is despite the fact he had served just 2 1/2 years as P.M. at that point. This of course has altered even more dramatically with his additional tenure.

Then there are a host of other benefits - the airline gold pass, which entitles ex-PMs up to 40 business class flights a year. That's almost 1 a week! If Mr Rudd takes 30 flights annually it will cost the taxpayer more than $60,000 a year. And trust me, nobody loves flying more than Kevin Rudd! Not even bloody Sea Gulls!

Once retired, he is entitled to his own office, worth about $120,000 a year in Brisbane for the rest of his life and four staff, which political insiders say will cost $240,000 a year. What? The Rudd's new multi-million home doesn't have room for a home office?
Mr Rudd would also be entitled to the lease of a car worth up to $55,000 for the rest of his life. Leasing experts say this would be worth $1000 to 1500 a month. And Mr Rudd will receive all of these benefits on top of his wife's estimated $210 million fortune!
Surely this good luck is the result of considerable 'Government' work being put her way and rules them out of any more wanton generosity from the Australian people.
Add to this, Gillard. This former communist who has now embraced the capitalist ideal with both arms and not a whimper of complaint I notice. She has already ditched the brick veneer in Altona for a swanky pool-side ponderosa in leafy Adelaide no doubt made possible by a $500,000 salary and ongoing perks.

My point is this. I have had to make cuts to my life because things change. The expensive office I used to lease in Melbourne is gone because, with the internet I can now work from home. I now use consultants rather than employ up to 10 people which today would send me broke. I now drive a ute because it is cheaper to register and insure. Cost cutting measures made to ensure I can continue to work in a country that is very much prejudiced against senior aged workers.

Mrs Renny is not happy. I have taken over a picturesque corner of our winter lounge room and in her words - I am a messer! When the drawing board comes out, which it does at least once a month, the kitchen table is also rendered unserviceable. Not to mention several square yards around it.


Why is it then that we continue to provide multiple millions to give these buggers swanky offices to run their now quite irrelevant lives from? I mean what has Hawke's or Keating's offices churned out in the past few years that justifies these silly extravagances? Books about them? Utterances from them? Both could be made from their kitchen tables surely! Does an Ex-PM really need an office that costs up to $14,000 a month? They have large homes with room for an office. None lives in a 'bed-sit'. None even knows what a 'bed-sit' is! Maybe they should become pensioners and find out.

Just so I am being even handed here - according to the 2010 figures Keating was in fact the most frugal as he keeps staffing costs low by engaging people on a part-time and ad hoc basis.


Each former PM is entitled to at least two staff, including a senior private secretary, and the annual wages bill of each is nearly $300,000. Mr Keating saves about $70,000 a year by using staff as he needs them instead of full time appointees.(Well why not this bloke was the one who opened the floodgates to Foreign Corporations swallowing up every worthwhile Australian enterprise! He now works for a Boutique Bank named Lazarus! What does he do? Heís a consultant on megabucks no doubt! He guides and advises Foreign Corporations wanting to move into Australia! In my book nothing but a treacherous Dog!)


However, new figures have come to light revealing that in the seven months after leaving office, Mr Howard spent $109,892 on limousine services, evenly split between the government Comcar service and private hire cars. Mr Howard's office rental was the highest at $13,853 a month, closely followed by former PM Malcolm Fraser, whose 101 Collins St office in Melbourne costs taxpayers $12,122 a month.

Former Labor PMs Whitlam and Hawke have offices on adjacent floors in Sydney's Potts Point at 100 William St. The monthly cost for each is $7464 and $7898 respectively. Mr Keating's office is also in Potts Point, in Manning St, and costs slightly less at $7,434 a month.

The former PMs also have their home and mobile phone bills paid by taxpayers, as well as unlimited allowances for publications, a private self-drive car, and air fares for them and their spouse. (Which really irks in the case of Therese Rein who has $210 million in the bank for Chrissakes!)


These are in addition to their pensions under the generous former Parliamentary superannuation scheme, which gives them a pension INDEXED TO CURRENT MPsí SALARIES FOR LIFE!

The payout they receive depends on their length of service in Parliament, which is accelerated in the case of prime ministers and their final salary.

Each PM can usually expect to receive about 70 per cent of the incumbent's salary, unless they chose to take a lump sum on retirement. (I thank the Daily Telegraph for doing the hard yards here with the figures and info.)

I have nothing against paying our PM a wage that reflects the importance of their job, but I have lots against them making millions from us when they a) don't really need it and b) don't really deserve it anymore.

But now, the ones facing the fiscal axe, are the poor bloody pensioners who have worked and paid tax all their bloody lives! As for the bludgers... well that's a whole separate issue.



THIS STORY MERITS AN APPEARANCE ON THE FRONT PAGE OF EVERY AUSTRALIAN NEWSPAPER

500N 18th May 2014 08:00

Very good article.

The only bit he should drop out of the whole thing is when he brings Kevin Rudd's wife's $210 million fortune into it. That is irrelevant to the whole thing. If you mention that, you might as well mention Malcolm Turnbull's fortune.

rh200 18th May 2014 08:13


The only bit he should drop out of the whole thing is when he brings Kevin Rudd's wide's $210 million fortune into it. That is irrelevant to the whole thing. If you mention that, you might as well mention Malcolm Turnbull's fortune.
Not if you put a means test on it

500N 18th May 2014 08:16

OK, not into means tests as I am not married.


But didn't she make that money before he became PM and
ran her own business separately ?


All times are GMT. The time now is 15:46.


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