Initial media reaction to Peter Slipper's ascent to speaker was favourable, suggesting that Julia Gillard had pulled-off a real coup. Chris Kenny, writing for The Australian was a dissenter http://blogs.theaustralian.news.com.au/goodlyfabric/index.php/theaustralian/comments/sinking_the_slipper/, but Annabel Crabb was enthusiastic http://www.abc.net.au/news/2011-11-24/crabb-jenkins-resigns-slipper-in-spotlight/3691904.

So where do readers of OLO sit?

its just too clever by half
what events has this event 'hiden',from the news cycle

sure it makes sense if that unionist that gets free booze and hookers gets charged and jailed for fraud...[so there is a certainty..in that which might*..nullify events while parl;ement sleeps

[and the parlementarians globe trot
all over the globe with their elite mates on the corperate credit card]

im still thinking its a plan
deliberated..and destractive

clearly the speaker didnt want to go
[draws his finger accross his own throat]
that alone speaks volumes

so whats being hidden?

Ask arjay he will have a story about that.

I find the whole thing quite delicious.

Scrumptious.

The funniest thing is watching the Lib supporters throwing a tanty, when everyone knows if Abbott pulled it off it would be hailed as political genius.

Glad to see Wilke put back in his box now.

Hope to see the independents and Juliar have a rockier relationship now that Juliar has had one of her arms untied.

Happy to see my prediction about Juliar making a comeback of sorts starting to eventuate. The momentum is really turning here. Pst, things are getting done, that chick is really starting to show some balls too. Sure she's scratched around, looked terrible, and nicked about 100 balls through slips, but she's really building an innings now. I call this her first boundary, breaking the shackles.

It's starting to look like Julair is the tortoise and Mr Rabbit is in fact the hare.

Who needs Home and Away. We have national politics.

Faceless men Shmaceless men, I want all you lib supporters to tip your hat, you would've done so if it was The Rodent or Mr Rabbit pulling this off. Come on, not even a grudging admiration?

In summary, I'm not totally convinced yet, but I cant help admire the heat she's absorbed and she's still there and she's getting things through in a minority government. Some of the things she's getting through cause a bit of concern though. eek!

It's a long time to the next election, and I know Mr Rabbit is an iron man and all, but his No's are really starting to have less umph.

One can only hope he actually does have a plan B. Plan A has been good so far, effective, necessary in the conditions, but the pitch is drying out, the skies are clearing, and the batsman is starting to find a bit of form.

It is a symptom of the moral standards of politicians that they would elevate 'Slippery Pete' as I heard a Coalition member refer to him as, to such a position.

Credibility and integrity were words that might be applied to Jenkins but they are a tight fit on Slipper, if indeed he can pull them past accusations of the usual politicians travel rorts claims.

However, as others have already said in other media outlets, Mal Colston was Howard's Bitch too, so it is wrong to single Gillard out as being somehow more corrupt than Howard.

That said, I did enjoy, relish even, the indignation-writ-large on the face of Abbott as this unfolded.

It couldn't have happened to a more deserving person.

And again, I did laugh at Albanese's interview on Lateline last night, as he rubbed salt into Abbott's self-inflicted wounds.

Funny how Craig Thompson's alleged rorting, prior to coming to 'this place' is seen as a massive moral crime by Abbott and Co but they are happy to accuse Slipper of rorting within his time in 'this place' and make no move to rid themselves of him, or did make no move until he had already dumped them.

Crocodile tears are to be seen here from Abbott.

Apparently the Coalition getting the dirt file out on Slipper.Labor are putting on one of the Coalition's rejected slippers.It may be comfortable for a while,but does not handle the mud too well when exposed to the dirty track of politices.

So Labor will have a slipper on one foot and the Jack Boot of the CO2 tax on the other.You either wear two slippers or two Jack Boots.When the slipper fails,it will take the Jack Boot with it.

Dear Graham,

I can't understand why all the fuss.

Isn't it accepted procedure in politics and business and even
sport that when the Captain steps down, the Deputy steps up -
unless he chooses not to. It's very disconcerting for Mr Abbott
the leader of the Opposition to express such vehemence when
the same concerns could have been expressed in a civilised and
diplomatic manner. We fully understand the effect that this
situation has had on the Opposition - but after all it is the
individual's choice in a democratic society.

I believe that Mr Slipper has resigned from the Liberal Party.
And, at least until the next election he can contribute to the
functioning of the Parliament albeit at a higher salary. (Which
could have been an incentive for accepting the job. Perhaps he
needs the financial benefit).

What has happened should not have come as a surprise to anyone -
the exiting Speaker could have resigned for a variety of
reasons - such as health, family, or whatever. Accepting the
position of Deputy Mr Slipper was always going to be
the main contendor for the post of Speaker. Afterall it's only
until the next election in two years time. Knowing Mr Abbott's
record to date, he will use every weapon at his disposal to
undermine Mr Slipper's position - no matter what damage it could
cause to the Liberal Party.

We've become accustomed to news-as-entertainment, now we are getting politics-as-entertainment.

Of course it is a low, devious and deliberate move by Ms. Gillard to shore up her numbers in the House. So what? The days when our political class acted with principle and integrity are long past - if of course they ever existed at all.

As with everything political, though, it is a two-edged sword.

Managing a cobbled-together majority with hostiles - Green and Independent - was never going to be an easy task. It was a position unique in Australian parliamentary history, and I don't think Ms Gillard has ever really come to grips with it. Now, however, the consensus is that Slippergate has somehow given her more "freedom" to get policies implemented, and she will now be judged on how well she takes that opportunity.

In reality, she is still entirely beholden to the Greens. And until she finds the courage to face them down, and nip their lunacies in the bud, she has no more genuine "freedom" of policymaking than she did before.

As I said yesterday on Hasbeen's Climategate 2.0 thread, so much depends upon the asking of the right question, doesn't it? And OUG has, perhaps, asked it with this:

"its just too clever by half
what events has this event 'hiden',
from the news cycle[?]"

Harry Jenkins was a respected expert in, and acknowledged admirer of, Parliament as an institution and its proper functioning. It is the ongoing supremacy of Parliament that our Constitution delimits and establishes, not the supremacy of ephemeral governments. In the chair as Speaker Harry Jenkins could play an active role in ensuring such proper functioning of the institution. Now he is no longer there.

With respect to Parliamentary procedure, several matters involving possible contempts of the Parliament presently hang unresolved over the leader of the government, the PM. One is a possible contempt of a Senate Committee, that of the Legislative and Constitutional Affairs References Committee for the carpeting of, and effective forcing of the resignation of, the Commonwealth Ombudsman, Allan Asher, in breach of the privilege his testimony before that Committee should have enjoyed. http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=4792#127862

A second possible contempt relates to that of a Joint Select Committee of the Parliament, the Joint Select Committee of Inquiry into Australia's Immigration Detention Network, which possible contempt is constituted by the forcing of the Ombudsman's resignation having deprived that Committee of two important witnesses: the (forced out) Ombudsman, and the erstwhile permanent head of DIAC sent on extended leave. It is this latter possible contempt that may involve procedural questions relating to the House of Representatives, and thus possibly involve rulings by the Speaker during any privileges debate that may yet arise. http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=4792#128634

Any such rulings will no longer be made by the respected Harry Jenkins.

What nobody knows yet is how Peter Slipper will perform as Speaker. All we know is that he doesn't have the respect Harry Jenkins enjoyed. As a consequence, what may come to be seen as very important future rulings may not enjoy the same respect, to the nation's detriment.

So, Opposition, to be truly loyal, STFU!

I must add, that it's also classic watching the lefties condone all this when there would be outrage writ large if The Rodent or Mr Rabbit had done the same. Exhibit A Lexi.

I expect to hear no more talk about the negative cynical MrRabbit bringing down the righteous morally superior ALP after this little episode.

Even if she's still Bob Browns B..., she does have one monkey in Wilke off her back Pericles.

Bling Bling, bling bling.

Houellebecq... Mal Colston.

In your pipe and smoke it.

Just had a thought.

Jenkins is well regarded by all in 'this place' (to be read in reverential tones every time).

He is now 'back' in parliament.

When Rudd goes bonkers over xmas and challenges Gillard, Jenkins, the clean skin respected member, will throw in his hat as a contender.

This will split Rudd's vote and secure Gillard the respectable win she so desperately needs with both 'the public' and 'the media'.

But hang on!

What if it goes horribly right (for us) and Jenkins beats them both?

Oh gosh! A person with scruples in The Lodge?

Are Australians ready for that yet?

As i see it, the move makes it easier in the House but does not alter the Senate. So the government is still beholden to the greens to get bills passed.

It can ignore wilkies threat about the pokies, which is a big plus, but on border control the greens will not budge.

Then there is the Thomson matter. Interesting what happens next May with Wilkie.

Could damage the governments credibility further, with the electorate, if that is possible.

Hope Mal Brough takes Slippers place after next election, I thought he was a compedent bloke and genuine in his efforts to stop the abuse of aboriginal children. The electors in his old seat must now regret their vote in 2007.

Banjo

Brough has the mind and attitude of an Army corporal, as can be seen in his invasion plans for the NT.

His removal was well deserved.

We done good.

Houely, just who the hell do you think you are? You have no right to introduce the wholesome game of cricket into anything to do with the horrible Julia.

I will never be able to watch cricket again. Your suggestion of her snicking balls through to the keeper, & not being given out, & chucked off the field, will forever colour the honorable game for me.

Please, a little less colourful language in your future posts.

TBC,

Did you mention the word "scruples" in connection with politicians?

I would imagine that the two terms are mutually exclusive.

...anyway, hee, hee...all very cunning and disingenuous. A wonderful expose of the machinations of the people who preside over our lawmaking process.

My question is how anyone can exalt one side over the other? And why do we settle for such craphouse ethics consistently demonstrated by our elected representatives? Is this the best that civilisation can offer? Apparently so.....

Thanks Graham for the thread.
Knew some one would put it up, and waited, thanks for the chance to comment.
Far from the first time the basics of politics numbers, has over ruled what some think is the right way.
First congratulations to Gillard, it will not save you, but may save the government.
Congrats too to a very good man who stepped down.
He knows well Slipper was to fill the roll at the start of this government but was unwilling at the time.
To the QLD Lib/Nats, what more than learn from your blunder, in taking the Axe to Slipper you aimed at your own feet.
I thank you but advise more thought next time.
Abbott, would he in government have done any different?
Informed poster will know of the replacement of Vince Gare, by old brown paper bag Joe.
It was against every convention and it was far worse than the rather contemptible fantasy Abbott is spreading.
Turnbull takes a step closer to returning to his old job.
Katter? looking better every day as the recent amalgamation in the north looks more a failure than ever

Belly, Katter's crew of nongs will self-implode at the Qld election. A bigger bunch of no-hopers could not be gathered up anywhere else but Qld- remember Hanson and her 12 high intellect MPs who briefly graced the Qld parliament?

Should Gillard have tried to poach Katter for the Speakers role?

What fun we'd all have then!

Do we know/heard/care who the deputy speaker is to be?

Peter Slipper has for the past year been becoming a serious issue for the LNP, with his rorting of the MP's allowances becoming a compliance issue. Whilst the hung parliament made it difficult to publicly move against him, the LNP had made it clear that PS was not going to get any future electoral endorsement, or position within the party.

Juliar Gillard's triumph of dumping Jennings and putting Slipper in as Speaker whilst insulating her against Wilkie's threat, has giving the coalition the chance to rid itself of a member slightly less odious than Craig Thomson, who was up until now protected from both sides for obvious reasons.

The negatives for Gillard are clear, the Labor brand is tarnished, and importing another scandal is not going to help. The ongoing slow baking of Thomson as the police net closes around him and Williamson is not going to be helped with the drip feeding to the press of the details of the inquest into the finances of Labor's new speaker.

Shadow Minister

If Abbott and his goons have any information to back up their claims that Slippery Pete was/is a rorter then they had, and still have, an obligation to report them to the police, or whatever internal authority within parliament that looks into rort claims before passing them on to the Rozzers.

To sit on such information, is a (potential) crime.

If anything adverse now comes out against Slipper, it will reflect very poorly on Abbott, very poorly indeed.

As, I might add, it would too on anyone within the ALP who had protected the alleged credit card crimes of the ALP chap.

Isn't it odd that, now slipper has jumped ranks, former supposed crimes are now the responsibility of labor. That is very selective by non other than SM. Such supposed crimes were hidden from view while he was an active member of the NLP. Now where do you think the blame should be held accountable to.

579,

The unethical rorting of public funds are the responsibility of Peter Slipper, but whilst these actions are getting him disciplined and excluded from the ranks of the Coalition, it would appear that they make him the ideal candidate for the party of crooks and pedophiles.

Juliar Gillard and other Labor MPs have been singing his praises, just as they did for Craig Thomson who happily pilfered the union dues paid by HSU members.

Slipper by comparison is suited for one of the highest offices that Labor can offer. Jenkins by comparison is far too straight and got the customary knock on the door.

Perhaps it's just one step closer to the return of Rud.

At least now if rud comes back and wilki gets the cold shoulder, his threat to withdraw his support won't matter as much.

If wilki does not get his reforms, that would be a good thing, as punishing everyone because of a few is not the right way to go.

579, SM is just a bitter and twisted person, who has a selective memory.

None of us should tolerate crime, or unethical behaviour, or even encourage 'letting the side down' in these areas of political and public life but when it does happen, it's foolish, even churlish, to start pointing the bone.

Someone mentioned the ex furniture making unionist Joh elevated and destroyed a convention in doing so, but I'd wager that SM thought that was OK cos it saw the end of Whitlam.

Bloodymindedness works all ways SM.

Best not to be distracted by the sideshows of life, as this event is, and concentrate on the main game, which Abbott seems incapable of doing.

Gillard, bless her little Baptist roots, is at least attempting to do 'something', whereas Abbott is actually doing 'nothing'.

Who knows, Slippers might yet do a good job with both these mobs, since he will never get back in and owes neither anything at all.

Whatever the means by which he got there, which do appear to be legal at least, let's all give him a go in the job.

His position is worth us all upholding, even if he might not be liked by some, or trusted by others.

It's a bit late for the No-alition to be taking the high moral ground now, considering their history of ignoring convention (when it suits) and their part in other cover-ups.

The Slipper rorts date way back beyond his last pre-selection and were well known among his colleagues. He's been in the LNP since 1993 (after a short stint between 1984-87).

They were happy to keep him around for 18 years while these things were going on but now they suddenly claim to have decided he was a problem.

Even I remarked about them 3 months ago and was wondering why they hadn't surfaced in the general media.
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=4658#122155

I assumed Labor would use it against him personally when the time was right but failed to consider that when it comes to fear-and-loathing and smear, nobody can beat the LNP. Now they're doing it to one of their own.

However, this time they were beat at their own game and were apparently caught by surprise. Abbott seems to be always burning bridges somewhere.

I for one am enjoying the sideshow.

There seems to be more than a few poppets here who appear to be more informed about these matters above and beyond that which is broadcast on the media alone. Interesting ...

..

For me, I know virtually nothing about him other than what I have read here and seen in recent news snippets.

..

But, let's see .. on his first day he wore a big GREEN tie. Mmmmm .. that's one tick.

Then secondly, a very deft and professional dispensation of his duties straight off the bat. WACK!

" ... The Member is Warned! .. will remove HimSelf from the Chamber! ... 94A! ... You're Out! .. 94A! .. You're Out! .."

HaHaHa

..

Posted by Houellebecq, Friday, 25 November 2011 7:52:39 AM

" ... The funniest thing is watching the Lib supporters throwing a tanty, ... "

HaHaHa

Posted by The Blue Cross, Friday, 25 November 2011 8:08:43 AM

" ... That said, I did enjoy, relish even, the indignation-writ-large on the face of Abbott as this unfolded. ... "

HaHaHa

..

Posted by Shadow Minister, Friday, 25 November 2011 11:42:47 AM

" ... The ongoing slow baking of Thomson as the police net closes around him and Williamson is not going to be helped with the drip feeding to the press of the details of the inquest into the finances of Labor's new speaker. ... "

I remain displeased with the ALP as a consequence of Juliar's claims that she does not have the imprisoned Indonesian children's legal documents. Having created all these document's myself and being aware of what is required, and if we are for a moment to assume that she is being truthful, then I can but assume that she simply does not care to know. .. Fire at Will commander! ;-)

The funniest thing for me was seeing Peter Reith (of phone-card rort fame) calling Slipper a "Liberal Rat".

One didn't need to be Einstein to see something like this coming.

It was all spelled out here, for one thing, as early as 3 September 2011: http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/state-politics/lnp-mp-peter-slipper-threatens-revolt-as-win-looms-for-mal-brough/story-e6frgczx-1226128495557 The then looming 'win' referred to was that of the party organisational position of chair of the Fisher federal divisional council: a launch pad for endorsement.

A bit more background here: http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/lnp-has-no-idea-says-brough-20100622-yu0j.html . If I understand it correctly, Mal Brough was not a member of the LNP when nominations for pre-selection for the seat of Longman were called in 2010, but upon Wyatt Roy's winning thereof Brough was widely attributed with having the view that that pre-selection should have been set aside, he (Brough) in the meantime having decided to join the LNP and become eligible to have thrown his hat in the ring for endorsement in Longman. Note how he answered the question about the fitness of a 20-year-old candidate to be a representative.

So much for Mal Brough's political judgment in that respect.

For all that Peter Slipper may have been allegedly self-indulgent with respect to his parliamentary allowances and entitlements, he was, and is, the sitting member for the Division of Fisher. If he is all that unpopular, short of some actual provable criminality, it is the electors of Fisher who have the ultimate right to see him on his way out of the Parliament.

I find it just a little strange that despite the long-ago issued judgement-call of Mal Brough that Slipper should be on his way due to unpopularity within his local LNP organisation, it is only just now that new members claimed to be favouring Brough are fulfilling their 12-month-membership requirements that will allow them to vote organisationally. Branch stacking the way to victory, by any chance?

Real team play from Brough, eh what? Couldn't have his own way!

Step right up Wyatt Roy. This is ALL YOUR FAULT!

One facet to this that the media hasn’t yet mentioned is the threat from the member of the seat in which I live, Graham Perrett, to resign if there’s a leadership challenge. This move provides a buffer for anyone thinking about challenging Gillard - especially since Wilkie was promised today that the pokies proposal won’t be dumped.

Yes Perrit the ferret is one Andrew Wilkie another.
But I do Honestly, get pure joy! at Shadow Ministers discomfort.
Like Abbott, blowing air in to a balloon and telling us it is an blimp truth gets left behind.
12 months ago Slipper go his 9th nomination for his seat.
Given the whimpering about a man not yet convicted of anything.
Given past events like Labor senator Harradeen from Tasmania leaving the ALP and voting with the Liberals? what fun!
Now Shadow My mate, if Slipper was so bad and given your dislike of him was your side covering up for him,
Excuse me broke in to a giggle.
A storm in a tainted tea cup, I however support the nomination of the Childlike Pyne, it would at least shut the fool up.
Labor got its nomination for deputy up TBC.

The one thing that never fails to amuse me is just how all these labor puppets get a kick out of anything that may hamper anyone getting into office to try to salvage what little we have left.

Don't worry about our failed manufacturing, or our failing tourism and aguculture industries, or even our floundering retail sector.

All that you lot, and you know who you are, care about is winning the battle, not fighting for whats best fo our nation.

May ia suggest you remove your rose colored glasses, take a good look around and smell the roses.

Talk to the people, the tradies who are now waiting for the phone to ring and not sure where they will be in the next year or two, or the retail worker struggling with their part time wages.

Labor puppets, through and through.

The character of Slipper shows he probably belongs with the Greens Government. Strange Houellebecq that you find being shameless, lying an d deceit traits something to be admired. You just like seeing how low someone will go to cling to power. No doubt you admire those using union funds for prostitutes and refusing to blush also.

runner,

"You just like seeing how low someone will go to cling to power."

No doubt you remember the Dr Haneef affair in the dying days of the Howard government....now there was desperation.

The upshot is that we are dealing here with politicians and it's what they do (unfortunately).

Poirot,

You have to be totally desperate to compare John Howard with Julia Gillard. Only hatred could blind a person of the differences in integrity.

Posted by runner, Friday, 25 November 2011 5:16:52 PM

" ... Only hatred could blind a person of the differences in integrity. ... "

And you don't seem to be able to get past your HomoPhobia to realise that what both howard and geelar share in common is locking up children.

..

You have in *GreenBrowny* a good person who will of his own accord stop this, as opposed to the other mobs who need to be dragged kicking and screaming.

The political church needs to have a good long think about that one *Runner*

..

*RehTub* re manufacturing, why not instead of or in adjunct to the mining rent tax, have the miners tithe at cost to a materials stock pile for the benefit of Australian manufacturers. It's very simple really, but as long as you remain beguiled by the mainstream, who say one thing and hide another, you will remain bound to them, and they care not what happens to our steel and other industries, though I acknowledge that there are members on both side who would support something like this.

..

I would have our allies share knowledge with us, of special materials, for advanced manufacturing. We have much of the raw materials that we need. Thus, the mining boom would be for the profit of the companies and their shareholders, and the public good and also local Australian industry.

..

As for the mainstream, they just treat the resources boom like a dead, bloated and gas filled whale carcass to be fed off by international white noahs, which is perhaps not surprising given both Geelar and Abbott are wanna be poms.

..

And that's a problem for all True Blue Ozzies i.m.o.

Dear runner,

Very amusing.

And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?

runner,

Don't run your "hatred" line on me. What a load of bilge you often preach from your lofty narrow(minded) perch.

I seem to be running quite a good line in Gandhi quotes at the moment - and this one suits you down to the ground:

"I like your Christ. I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ."

....ain't that the truth (in some cases)

On yers Poirot, good one.

But, hang on!

I know the mind of runner and you get him wrong.

What he was inferring is that Howard was a shocking git, and although Gillard is a no-good sham, she is not a shocking git.

So, odd though it might sound, runner was actually being supportive.

On yers runner!

Next, you might wake up.

Reading the response to my last post I rest my case.

Which case is that, runner?

The one that urges you to regularly and freely spit venom at anyone who holds a different political view?

You consistently ascribe all sorts of diabolical vices to people who hold opposing views to yourself. What gives you the right to ascribe "hatred" to me because I highlighted the fact that politicians are cunning and duplicitous?

Appalling!

Houelle's cricket analogy post, is a yorker on the stumps for mine.

Runner, John Howard was so burdened with integrity that he lost his own seat from the sitting PM's position. It currently remains unclear that Gillard will emanate/repeat this feat.

As for my own opinion GrahamY "the Slipper matter" changes the ball game.

The very fabric or premise of the LNP bellowing for election, is the claimed inability of the Gov't (due to it's minority status), to govern. Claiming that tail is wagging the dog. Abbott himself would have no hesitation but do the very same thing, given the very same set of circumstances and claim victory. Sadly such outcomes are beyond his capabilities.

The elephant in the room is "How will Peter Slipper perform in his new role as Speaker".

It seems he has already provided indication with the expelling of 4 LNP members without warning as pre-warned during the final sitting of the House before Christmas break.

This politic needs to be handled carefully by the Gov't. Should Slipper appear as speaker to be abusing his power and gagging the Opposition, this may work against the Govt. Anything that would give the LNP led by Abbott any credibility whatsoever on anything, would unhelpful to our countries future at this point.

I hope a loose cannon like Slipper will not assist in the un-doing of the good work done by the Labor Party, the Greens and the Independents. This is all I really fear.

After all the LNP has a history of inserting "ring in's" into the Australian Parliament. Senator Neville Field's of Qld in the 70's was the worst case of political doppelganger or fraud in the history of Australian politics. Directly causing of change in the balance of power, and achieving this un-democractically. Not an election in sight.

And finally the theory of Harry Jenkins standing against Gillard and Rudd for leadership is the funniest conspiracy theory I have heard for a while.

More plausible, is Abbott's team sending an agent provocateur like Slipper into the Govt's ranks to cause disruption and mayhem, on a mission.

Thinker2,
Yeah people seem to have forgotten that Tony Abbott was once the LNP Attack Dog/Black Ops man, a post he seems to have handed on to Cory Bernardi...who votes for these people?. Bernardi and Christopher Pyne...jeez Louise, South Australians need to lift their game

Thinker, if ever I loose my car keys, I'll call you.

Anyone who can find anything good done by the bunch of ratbags currently in the government benches in Canberra, would be able to find the fabled needle in a hay stack, or my car keys if I lost them.

http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/abbotts-positively-negative-20111125-1nz5j.html
I recommend this link.
It does not come from the toilet paper press.
It does not come from a pro Labor press.
A true look will find within the link and its pages, this paper any day, unbiased comment.
It is as likely to take to the ALP, LEAD IN DOING SO, IN NSW.
I remind those, who took as a fish does, the Abbott negativity ,right down in the gullet.
As a pain reliever for the failures of Gillard, Tony Abbott is well described here.
Yes Gillard too, but remember, see clearly, both are unloved.
How long before one side understands, thinks of after an election, of the benefits of both dumping failure and its policy's.
Blaming, mostly quite honestly, the lost leadership, and haveing again a leader people like not loath.
My constant warnings Abbott will not lead till the next election, that Gillard to will go, is again hight lighted by this thread.

Rechtub, so I am a puppet, funny man.
Bloke are you happy to be judged on your inability to understand much at all.
Like my mate runner, Christian? leaps on the head of almost every one .
Cricket love the game.
If runner and Rechtub shared the opening ball, two overs of bouncers who be the result.
Unfortunately taking out the square leg umpire and the scorers table with the two balls closest to the stumps.
9 times Slipper was sent by his side to Canberra.
If he is a criminal, why did they not tell us?

Given the political tactic of seducing a known-to-be-disaffected member of the opposition with the Speakership had been so publicly spelled out in virtually every detail no later than 3 September 2011, one has to ask why it took so long to actually happen?

The Chris Kenny article linked to in GrahamY's opening post poses this question:

"Mr Slipper is very close to Mr Rudd.
What will the former prime minister
gain by helping to woo him?"

The answer could well be the negation of the potential effectiveness of a threat by one member of the present government to bring it down by crossing the floor in the event of Kevin Rudd being returned to the leadership. Such a threat, with what degree of credibility I know not, has, I understand, already been made, but the implementation of such would be rendered pointless with the new buffer obtained by the seduction of Slipper into the Speaker's role.

Many, I suspect, within the Labor Party suspect that Labor cannot win the next election, whenever it is held, with Gillard as leader. I suspect that there has been a quiet desperation to effect a change, with that change being back to Rudd. 'Putting the Slipper in' looks like having been a necessary pre-condition to enabling that change. Which would explain, with the Opposition having failed to identify and focus upon Gillard's having usurped prerogatives of the Parliament in relation to the forcing out of the Ombudsman, and thus embarrassing Gillard perhaps to the point of resignation, why this move has been delayed so long.

The Opposition having been of no help in doing the 'dirty work' of precipitating, and within Labor ranks, justifying, a Labor leadership spill, the effluxion of time and the polls over the Parliamentary recess will now have to be depended upon to save the day. The view of the public seems to have hardened against Labor led by Gillard. Only something big might be thought able to change that view.

Will automatic enrollment save their bacon, or burn it to a crisp?

Belly, anyone who draws comfort from this event is simp,y a brain washed labor puppet.

Blind Freddie knows this is the worst government ever and to jump for joy, simply because their point of balance has been stabilized, clearly shows the mentality of win at any cost, regardless of what's best for the country.

We also know what's best for the country is to give the people a chance to elect a majority government, but labor and thier puppets simply won't accept this because they know they would get flogged.

Whats best for the country, now that is a turnaround. Abbott is the no man a any cost, now you whinge because the govt; has a majority.
It was never going to be easy to govern with a hung parliament. But your mate Toni made every step of the way that much harder.
As for the next election there's nothing to stop another hung parliament, as happens overseas.

What is the matter with you lot ?
Can't you see that it is all about Craig Thompson ?
There have been reports of late that the police have a good case so far.
They probably cannot go any further yet unless he is cautioned.
If he has to leave parliament there will be a by election and Julia
needed that extra vote.

It is as simple as that, survival !

Is that based on intelligence or fantasy. The coalition rats have sold the labor a camp an alleged criminal. Why did they do nothing about this, if this is a fact.

On this we agree Jay of Melbourne . And Bernardi and Pyne scare the pants off me in their extremism. It's hard to imagine what these people would get up too in Govt.

Don't know 579; just a report on Sky.
Stands to reason though, it could be a just in case move by the govt.
From the govt pov it is a reasonable stunt.

579, about the only thing this government can achieve with any majority, is more pain, more waste and more miss management.

2013 can't come fast enough!

I just hope there something lef to salvage.

Scare campaigners get nowhere, I think a move against abbott is in order. He has failed to put the govt; down, which was his only agenda. Now he is lost, he will have to talk economics, against Julia, which he will not enjoy. He has promises written in blood, which will not go down well with the coalition. There is only one course of action.

When all's said and done - this is a reflection on
the weakness of Tony Abbott in relation to his own
party machine that he's been unable to prevent
what's obviously a setback for the Coalition,
and a great boost to the Gillard Government in
consolidating its numbers on the floor of the House.
It shall be interesting to see what course of action
in next on the agenda.

Rechtub I am afraid your post telling us ALP supporters are brainless puppets is ofensive and, well no point going further it would be too hard for you to understand.
Movie lots, gave us a saying still in use.
A front, referring to the front of a big building with nothing behind it.
Tony Abbott is such, a front, supported by not much nothing behind just a front.
Tony offered ,his words any thing but that, yes we know what that is.
But said he would even consider that, to gain government.
Had he made it.
The more attentive of us, know, he would have acted little different than Labor.
Deals with the greens, independents, and jumps with enthusiasm, to except any Labor ship jumper.
Have no doubt, the soon to be out going leader of the Libs would make Peter Slipper the Chair.
He would take arms open, Labors ex union head in so much trouble, and infer sainthood on him.
Such is politics, Forrest Gumpp you are on to some thing Rudd's return sees Abbott's departure.

Wobbles,

Isn't it interesting that the media had the goods on Slipper for months but didn't use it until it could be somehow used against the ALP.

I wonder if the details would ever have come out otherwise.

It says a lot about the media doesn't it?

Everyone is forgetting that Labor's primary vote is 30% and 2pp is 43%.

This move might help labor until the next election, but is not going to help them past 2013.

579, there is one course of action, and that's to let the people decide.

Let them decide if they, not the government, want a carbon tax now.

Let them decide if they, not the government want to introduce a minng tax now. Also, give them the option of an increase in royalties.

Call an election before these prices of legislation get through the parliament. Include them in the form of a referendum if needed.

Is that not how a democracy works.

rehctub

dear boy, you forget, 'we the people' DID decide the shape of our government at the last election.

So disillusioned were 'we the people' that no political party ended up with a majority.

You are smarting, because that richard head Abbott is not the PM.

I am feeling pain because that richard head Gillard is the PM.

(Graham, what a silly censorship you have. No D ick Head allowed. Why such prudery?).

But the truth is, that is what the election created.

If Abbott had managed to garner the votes of the independents, we would be no better off.

Belly (as an example) would be sounding like you, complaining about a Tory minority govt.

Just get-with-it and understand that Gillard is not to blame for her situation.

It was 'we the people' who done it, and no one else.

You shouldn't have voted Green rehctub.

It's all your fault!

rehctub

The "people didn't get to decide" on whether they wanted to get involved in two unwinnable wars or introduce legislation to take away workers award conditions or sign up to a Free Trade Agreement that will cripple parts of our economy in years to come even pay a levy to buy guns off owners either - that's what governments do from time-to-time as they deem suitable.

Do you really expect them to announce everything they intend to do in the following three years and do absolutely nothing else?

If they get it wrong then they pay the price at the following election and that's how it's always been and always will be.

Maybe your knight in shining hard-hat and reflective vest will come along one day and dismantle everything on your behalf but until then there's not much you can do.

Having read every post it is clear most understand the hypocrisy of the squealing.
Most seem aware its an Abbott rant.
And, in truth not spite those who take the other views in my mind are wandering around with a bag over their heads.
Some? born with it and no intention of taking it off

http://www.smh.com.au/national/speaker-deal-spooks-labor-mps-20111126-1o0ay.html

"LABOR MPs are concerned the appointment of Peter Slipper to the Speaker's role could backfire if allegations of misuse of travel allowances continue to be made."

And this is not from the Murdock press.

Well, I can't argue with much of what has been said in the last few posts. After all, I won't argue for the sake f arguing.

Just a few points.

I was and still am opposed to the un winnable wars, but there simply must be more to it than we can see.

I hated the baby bonus, or more so, the way it, along with most welfare, is allowed to be pissed away.

As for work.choices, it was obviously a bad policy, however, I am still opposed to low skilled wages be the highest around and, it is one of the drivers behind our national skill shortage. Government knows this, but they won't do anything about it.

Government should be supporting the needy, not businesses.

As for the latest move from madam PM, I think she will spend the rest of her term looking over her shoulder, much like she has for the first part.

I still think it's labor paving the way for rudds return.

Finally, as long as my bum hole points to the ground I will never vote green.

A delusional panic. The SM appears when there is some dirt to sweep up. Live with the election result. If the coalition took butch's advice they would never win anything. Yo do not say them things out loud. Toni has had a wiping, and the pain is felt far and wide. Industry is in favor of the mining tax and the carbon price. It is a mater of knowing what is ahead, so planning can be put in place. The only ones apposed are the sensationalists, even when no legislation has been enacted. The coalition campaigners somehow think they know everything, before anything has happened. It resembles walking backward pushing a one wheel barrow.

I agree Rechtub with most of what you said.
And know, it is not heartlessness but lack of understanding,that drives tour view on wages.
Minimum wages, far lower than you think, are set.
But those you target are not on minimum wages.
Even those casuals, the lolly pop men and women.
I am sure you know, we have created many millionaires.
Who body hire these folk out.
Those millions, billions in fact once went in to the hands of both employees and those paying to hire them.
The middle man/woman gets it now.
A casual, if like us all, wants a solid job, full time.
Gets as a casual no sick pay.
Parental leave
Holidays
the list is long
However he/she gets a loading, not enough to cover but enough to look big.
Any day that casual may find a Job, full time, or be sacked on an hours notice.
I remain unsure,why a businessman, can not get his/her head around supply and demand.
Employers all over Australia pay More, by their own will, retain workers.
A bridge carpenter, once only semi skilled is now government enterprise has been sold,in very short supply, is offered a lot more than award,so too laborers.
SM yes ABC is a Greens front
Tell me, this awful bloke? why are his sins only headlines AFTER HE LEFT YOUR CAMP?
Show me your concerns about him in print here from before his actions, after all you jump to kick any one else.
UNLESS IT IS ONE OF YOURS mate.

Did anyone watch - "The Insiders," this morning?
Interesting take on so many things with so much
speculation from all sides. Is Rudd coming back?
Yes, No, Maybe. Ferocious time in the last Parliamentary
Session - and worse to come when Parliament resumes -
undoubtedly. But why the fuss over Peter Slipper by
the Coalition? Good Question. The time to get rid of
him was surely prior to his being appointed as Deputy
Speaker - seems a bit late whinging about it now.
As for what he did in the past? No one really seems to
give a toss - it's on his future actions that he'll be
judged.

Yes, interesting times ahead!

Belly, his own party had already disendorsed him as a candidate. The ALP put him in control of the Parliament.

No second prizes given, If they knew about alleged misappropriation, and said nothing while he was on their side, toni has got to take the blame, and dismiss himself. The penalty for knowing and not doing anything about it, should be jail. That has probably affected parliamentary voting business. That is fraud.

579,

Abbott moved to exclude Slipper and initiated proceedings against him for allowances abuse

So Juliar covered up Craig Thomson's fraud and expressed "full confidence" even though his crimes were in the newspapers. By your Logic Juliar should be Jailia.

All to late mate. Not one word to the media. Toni only moved when the rumors were confirmed, and he lost a vote. If it weren't for the shift he would still be there, right. Toni was not about to dispense with a vote and give Julia a majority. Only a rat-bag would think otherwise.
So lets hear it for Toni, and SM of course.

Yes belly, this profiteering from wages is a real problem, and one that seems to fly under the radar.

It happens in councils, as well as state and federal governments.

So much for privatization hey

It also happens in the mines, I know a guy who pays his 20odd electricians $85 per hour, yet charges them to the mines at $110.

As for casuals, well, they actually cost more than perm workers.

As for wages, well I will agree to disagree.

Welfare is governments responsibility, not businesses,especially when they to are doing it tough.

Most small busimesses make less today than they did ten years ago.

Rechtub let me tell you some true human trash work in Labour hire
Running or owning it, NSW gives evidence Government officers take bribes to give some the work.
Former union officials, government employees own them.
Another time another thread.
SM I think you are quite inventive.
Abbott's bilge pumping on slipper in truth began after he jumped ship.
So unskilled, politically unwise, is Doctor No he let QLD cost him a number.
Support him as much as you like but watch his members sitting beside or behind him cringe as he steps up to question box.

I think the general public will see this as a labor stunt.

Cast your minds back a few years when labor had that huge majority and passed all thier hair brain schemes.

About the only thing that has seen a reduction is labor's waste and miss management on new schemes is the fact that they have not had the free will to do as they like because many of thier ideas have not been passed through the parliament.

How many more scuff ups would have occurred if they had been allowed to continue un checked.

butch sure you haven't got things out of proportion there. An electrician on $ 85 / hr. thats $ 3500 / wk. What would an electrician want with a labor hire mob. ' A stunt' I would have called it a good move. Who was it that won the unwinable election. [Paul keating i think]

I know I ended my last post in this thread (on Saturday, 26 November 2011 at 6:56:25 AM) with a seeming non-sequitur, given that the post dealt with speculation as to the possible return of Kevin Rudd to the Labor leadership, when I asked:

"Will automatic enrollment save [Labor's] bacon, or burn it to a crisp?"

What should a matter involving the mechanics of the maintenance of the electoral rolls (For Pete's sake!) have to do with a possible leadership spill within the government that may lead to the return of Rudd, the giving of him room to 'slip in', as it were, many may well ask? My answer is "perhaps nothing directly, but it may have had an awful lot to do with his removal in unbelievable, and to this day, unexplained, circumstances in the first place". Of course, many of those taken as being the more erudite in public debate (to the extent that it really occurs at all) may well go one further and say "well, stupid, what could automatic enrollment possibly have to do with anything as it hasn't even been legislated yet!".

The problem is that automatic enrollment had already been introduced in NSW in December 2009, and the reason it is a problem is that, as admitted by the NSW Electoral Commissioner, its introduction amounted to a defacto abandonment by NSW of the Joint Roll Agreement with the Commonwealth, but search as I may, I have not been able to find any gazettal of the giving of 12 months notice of intent to withdraw from the agreement, such noticification requirement having been a term of the original agreement.

In early 2010 DPMC (under Rudd) called for submissions in an Electoral Reform Green Paper. http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=3212&page=0 . What if that exercise in some way was seen as threatening an already planned (by the faceless faction lords?) introduction of automatic enrollment for the Commonwealth, or if indeed planned official introduction of automatic enrollment threatened some already emplaced clandestine equivalent thereof?

Would such, perhaps, have been enough to provoke the unexplained deposition of Rudd?

579, mimes are renowned for employing this way, as the alternative, that being the engaging of multiple contractors is just to hard for them.

This guy, a mate of mine, fought for years in his home town to run a local electrical business.

Finally, he though, if you can't beat them (the mines), best he join them, the result now being that his entire business comes from a few mines in the area.

And yes, $85 per hour is right. This is what he has to pay to compete with the mines and, domestic work just can't sustain these wages.

I also know a young guy who is an electrician for QGC. He is an employee on $186,000 per year, working on the construction of the gas pipeline.

This value adding of wages just increases our cost of living.

I remember when councils used to be a major employer in towns, well, they still are, except the staff are provided through an agency and it is these agencies who ar making a killing.

Why can't councils employ directly and save the tax payer this additional cost.

Rehctub I also doubt those figures, he's probably charging them out at more than that. If they are right, expect your mate to go broke very soon.

By the time an employer has payed for public holidays, sick leave, holiday pay, workers compensation insurance, payroll tax, superannuation levy, & made provision for long service leave, & overheads, he requires at least a 55% mark up on the wage he pays, just to break even. This assumes he is able to charge out at least 95% of his employees time, often not achievable in real life.

One of the main reasons young businesses go broke is that they underestimate the number of add on costs an employer has. In a charge out labor hire situation, it becomes obvious rather quickly.

About 30 years ago A young electrician working for me went out to the mines. He hated it, but was so well payed he stayed for his family's sake.

He was a very hard worker, always finding something that needed doing. At the mine he was on night shift. They were there for safety, & were not allowed, [union rule] to do any maintenance, or instillation work, that was day shift territory. They spent all night doing nothing.

He reckoned some of them lost most of their pay playing poker all night, every night.

'Enemies wherever the PM looks'

http://twitpic.com/7ktsh6/full

Worth a look, even if only for the artwork on the wall.

The painting is captioned 'Still life with fluffy slippers and dummy'.

This whole episode is akin to being forced to watch an episode of Big Brother and wondering who is going to be kicked out of the House first.

There are no heroes in this on either side of politics just more buffoonery, faux protestations and the usual high moral outrage. More proof that it doesn't matter what is said or done but WHO says it and DOES it.

While one might try to see this as just another aspect of a new style of governing, possibly as managing the limited tools available within a minority parliament, it is a shame that 'success' is marked in terms of political strategy than good representation, good policy or ideology.

The media is writing this up as a victory. But a victory to what end?

We have already seen a dismal watering down of the MRRT, to the point of some 'experts' putting forward the view it is revenue neutral - so what is the Point Exactly? Every thing else is just a diversion.

Pelican, it's not only been about the taxes, but also about whether or not labor had what knowhow to implement them without stuffing them up.

Legs face it, if their track record is anything to go by, boy, are we in trouble!

The only comfort we have is that when they keep getting thing so wrong they are in fact edging closer to a win.

If only running the country was as simple as choosing red or black. Hey!

Has been,I would suggest these rates are all up rates. But I must find out.

Butch you change horses mid stream, two bob each way. Some of your comments are archaic. I do not think you know which way is up.

Sorry 579, not sure what you mean.

I've just said on another thread that I tend to use OLO as a journal of record, http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=4851#129342 , and because of that I must now make a correction to my post of Monday 28 November 2011 at 7:15:02 AM.

In that post I said that:

"In early 2010 DPMC (under Rudd)
called for submissions in an
Electoral Reform Green Paper."

`

If I had re-read my own posts in the thread that was the target of the link I supplied I would have seen my mistake. This post clearly identifies 23 September 2009 as the date that announcement of an intent to call for submissions on the Electoral Reform Green Paper was made. http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=3212#76075 . That post also clearly identifies the very-short-fused DPMC online forum as opening on Monday 9 November 2009 and initially closing on Friday 14 November 2009.

The NSW introduction of automatic electoral enrollment that I referred to in my post of Monday 28 November 2011 was assented to on 14 December 2009 (but not proclaimed as coming into effect until 22 September 2010 to commence on 24 September 2010). http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=11834#205311

Its just that it may become perhaps important that the dates be presented in their correct order*.

`

I'm glad I posted the twitpic of that cartoon in my post of Monday, 28 November 2011 1:49:16 PM. A legitimate exercise of free speech in public debate. As for this, http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/sydney-nsw/rats-now-peter-slippers-serjeant-at-arms-is-trying-to-ban-the-tele/story-e6freuzi-1226208572849 , its a straight out contempt of Parliament. I hope Slipper without hesitation puts the boot into The Telegraph.

`

*The long weekend Monday of 5 October 2009 was the date I posted the first comment to then Deputy PM Julia Gillard's OLO personal epiphanies themed article 'Driven by indignation at injustice', thereby placing it upon the OLO index page. It was a challenging post subsequently complained of (by a faceless faction lord minder?) as being off-topic, and it was subsequently taken down. http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=3050#73310 A fact perhaps now interesting in hindsight. Was a plan in place even then?

its about bying silence
baffle em with bull
if you cant ban censore them

or make the no homer club
those with exclusive licence only need apply
[no black guards]

not sure if anyone is watching
the other climate gate topic
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=12844&page=0

anyhow im refuting the many lies of science
beginning with evolution

but the format permiting two posts gets awquard..
so i post the complete reply here
http://forum.worldfreemansociety.org/viewtopic.php?f=68&t=12018&p=91859#p91859

in time i will try to join the dots to this one
conducted in the bad ol days when it was only 2 posts
to reply an avalanche of attack
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=2305&page=0

yep its far easier to believe
have faith in science fraud

than try to correct it

and still the blind lead the blinded over into impossability to see
dont the words of thge emails them, selves refute the theory

if not the theory then the law..and actions done via that lie
if its not the right thing to do
its not the right thing to do

a wall of lies
gets taken down one lie at a time

we trust science peers
we trust religeous peers

but what if they got feet of clay
the blooming lot of em

whats in it..for them?
exclusive franchise
exclusive control..over past posted info?

respect

power?
money?

who knows
who cares

GrahamY's post this morning to his blog, Ambit Gambit, http://www.ambitgambit.com/2011/11/29/slippery-slopes-of-church-and-state/?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter , only intensifies my feeling that the appointment of Peter Slipper to the office of Speaker may be the beginning of what may turn into a 'Beckett' scenario for the present PM, Julia Gillard. He may somewhat literally be able to come to be seen by her as a 'troublesome priest'.

After the issue of invasion of Senate privilege on the part of the PM was first raised in relation to the forcing of the resignation of the Ombudsman, Allan Asher, http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=4792#127476 , suddenly every man and his dog has become claimedly concerned as to Parliamentary privilege, or claimed breach in one respect or another thereof. Smokescreens? Diversions? Or 'Window' (the WW2 dropping of multiple targets of aluminium foil to confuse anti-aircraft radar)?

Whatever, it is good that there should be some zeal for the privileges and immunities of OUR Houses. A focus long overdue.

With that focus now perhaps able to be seen to be related to the prospect of the suspected 'quietly desperately desired' reversion to Rudd's leadership (with Rudd's alleged 'closeness' to Slipper), it is perhaps an appropriate time to bring up some apparent inconsistencies in electoral enrollment accountancy that emerged shortly before the 2010 Federal elections.

This post to Professor George Williams' article 'Electoral roll makes a mockery of the election' published on 20 July 2010, http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=10712#178530 , highlights some statistical anomalies in relation to changes in 17-year-old provisional elector numbers in the run-up to the 2010 Federal elections.

What I am questioning is whether, despite the assurances to the contrary that have or will be doubtless offerred as to the impossibility thereof, the mechanics of automatic enrollment already legislated although not proclaimed within NSW in fact resulted in the transfer to the Commonwealth rolls of thousands of names over which hangs a cloud of statistical questionability?

Electoral mechanical preparations for the factionistas 'last stand'?

I agree, as I said Forrest Gumpp in a post earlier, the outcome of "the Slipper Experiment" depends entirely upon the behaviour of Slipper himself.

Three possibilities. (a) gov't lackey, (b) ring in, (inserted opposition saboteur), or (c) loose cannon.

If the choice is (a), the Gov't will have a hard time selling this.

If (b) the Gov't has a problem.

If (c) the Gov't has a problem.

Only Slipper continuing the good work of former Speaker Harry Jenkins, and popularising/ giving credibility to the role of Speaker will satisfy the Australian public thirsty for credibility in a now credibility free zone with the exit of Jenkins.

It is a worry that the Abbott Opposition could have any credible platform within the parliament to affect its agenda of destruction for powers sake.

Slipper himself could well be the subject of blackmail over the christmas break with the Australian newspaper first in in line for the Slipper video (or else) from his former confidants, prior too the opening of the Houses in the new year.

Dear Thinker 2,

I think that the only person that could discredit
Peter Slipper is Peter Slipper. I believe him when
he stated in his acceptance speech in Parliament
that he was going to follow the high example set by
Jenkins - to be totally fair and impartial (he's
resigned from his political affiliations for that reason).
He said that he intends to take his duties and responsibilities
as Speaker seriously and whatever mistakes he's made in
the past - will stay in the past. He intends to maintain
a good and honest approach to his job. So despite what the
Opposition tries to do - they will end up looking foolish.
And I don't doubt for one moment that Slipper will succeed,
despite their efforts to harm him. I for one wish him well.

Once again the schizophrenic QLD conservatives have rained on the parade. Think Joh for Canberra which set back Howard's plans for a decade. Or Pauline Hanson.

Brough running around stacking branches to undermine Slipper. Abbot unable to stop that white anting is now being white anted himself.

The coalition reneging on a deal to pair the speaker and deputy speaker when it didn't win the minority government battle. The very stuff of integrity. And irony.

Two minor parties forming a major coalition can't decide if they are Liberal or National.

Chuck in Katter and QLD is the gift that keeps on giving to the socialists.

It's not quite troppo season yet but you could be forgiven for thinking otherwise.

What is Cockroach Credlin going to do now?

Ever had one of those tooth acres?
I have had two days of hell.
No dentist can remove mine.
Abbott and Hockey Joyce and a few others.
Are my tooth acre.
Murry Darling/end year financial statement.
Both have seen a torrent of lies deliberate lies heaped on the government.
I know the government is far from perfect.
And I know flocks of NO supporters will dive bomb me.
But the lies, ten deep klms wide litter this country's politics.
70 BILLION DOLLARS unfunded, promises unfunded, history will hold Abbott accountable.
Who will put an alternative plan, for the Murray for our financial future for boat people on the table.
Please Mr Abbott Mr NO NO NO think about this country not your lies.

Peter Slipper sold out his party for money and perks.

I'm sure that he will follow the high standards of living set by the previous speaker, and Craig Thomson.

SM. You are being silly if you accuse the previous Speaker of dodgy deals.

Put up your evidence or withdraw your defamation.

Belly, when you write 'tooth acre' it flashes a horrible image of Peter Beattie's teeth in front of my eyeballs.

Do please adjust to 'tooth ache'.

oh come on blue cross
belly flamed him

with his toothache..
redirection

tooth acres...is measured in hectairs now mr bell
its located in hell..[and all the acres of teeth..are from dentists only]

it think its because the eye4eye
tooth4tooth law

if it shouldnt have been taken out
well 7 get taken [as karmic balance]

and in heaven they regrow...as soon as the puller who pulls them forgets he pulled them....[so he pulls them, agasin as son as he forgets]

its not a thing to joke about
its hell..and look at the immediate
karmic comeback..to the hellish joke

it was clever though
and did allow me to explain..where
the image you got in/put..
in/to..your mind..

just where it came from
to witt hell

if its not all good
its not from heaven

to give up hate
brings its own peace

Dear Belly,

Here's something that may cheer you up. It did me.
It's what another poster wrote on the web:

"Labor has done very well in the face of the most
aggressive opposition I have ever seen, serious
financial problems, and a close to hung parliament
dominated by Independents and Greens. The idiocy
around climate change and the Aussie Tea Party type
antics of a vocal and ignorant minority have
been a constant diversion from policy and effectiveness.

If Labor can drive through an effective Murray Darling plan,
adopt a policy that accepts gay marriage and devise an
acceptable and humane onshore processing system I will be
both amazed and gratified.

For all those that castigate Gillard, and I disagree often
with her politics, can anyone really imagine that Abbott
could have so successfully negotiated through such a
difficult year?"

I think that sums it up nicely!

TBC,

I accused Jenkins of a high standard of living. The Speaker's offices, private dining room with chef, extra $100k per year + other perks is second only to the PM, hence the high standard of living. Craig Thomson's came from fraud and corruption. As did Ian McDonald of NSW labor etc.

Being a Labor MP is not quite enough to accuse one of being corrupt, although one would be in good company.

Slipper was being pushed out of the LNP for dipping his snout too far. Juliar offered him a bigger trough.

SM,

Kindly provide us with evidence otherwise you're
simply partaking in turdification that posters
who suffer from coccydynia are prone to do.

cont'd ...

BTW: Didn't the Abbott offer the Independents anything
they wanted just to put the Abbott into the Abbey?
And how many of the frontbenchers have their snouts
in the Abbott trough simply to keep their jobs?
Pot - kettle - black!

I see SM.

Caught out, so now you pretend about your offence towards Jenkins eh?

I hardly think the pay rate for the role of Speaker is decided by the person in it, do you?

The job has conditions, and whoever sits in that role gets that.

It might be 'too much', or 'just right' or 'not enough' but I doubt anyone who has ever done that job has done it for either money or glory.

Who knows of previous Speakers?

Lost in history's bin along with the vast majority of politicians reputations and achievments, good, bad or indifferent.

I hold no brief for the Speaker, nor the criminals amongst any parliament, and I am just as happy to denigrate any politician as anyone else here, but really, having a go at the role of Speaker, and particularly the previous one, is not only 'slim' but also stupid.

Adding him into the creep who buys prostitutes (allegedly) on his members money is pathetic and unwarranted, and should be denounced though.

TBC,

I see I need to use small words with you.

Perhaps you could use your skills in the English language to point out where I defamed Jenkins, or admit that it is a figment of your delusion.

The job of speaker with perks is worth nearly twice that of a back bench MP's package. The point I was making, for those with literacy issues, is that the position of speaker is normally awarded to a respected senior statesman, here it has been used as the proverbial 30 pieces of silver.

Craig Thomson lived the high life the traditional way by embezzling union dues.

The tories get their noses out of joint when they should be pleased.

Imitation is the finest form of flattery.

The slip is a play straight out of Howard's Ministerial Code of Conduct handbook.

That the socialists pulled it off should have them beaming with pride. But no, only they are allowed to be mean and tricky. Spoilt brats deprived of their birthright.

To pot, kettle and black I would add skillet, wok and tar.

There are lots of interesting people in politics.
And it definitely isn't cheap to have all these
politicians. They get paid for domestic and overseas
travel, chauffeur-driven and self-drive vehicles,
electorate allowances and staff. The bill for this
in 2010 was no less than $373 million and if you divide
that by 226 Federal politicians - that works out at approx.
$1.6 million each.

But they do manage to keep Australia fairly democratic.

There is no knowing what you 'meant' SM.

This is what you 'said':

"I'm sure that he will follow the high standards of living set by the previous speaker, and Craig Thomson."

Your analysis does not survive a basic scrutiny. It is an offensive assault on the previous Speaker, as is your later comment an offensive assault on the broader union movement.

"Craig Thomson lived the high life the traditional way by embezzling union dues."

I do not believe either comment deserves to remain on OLO.

You infer with that last comment that Belly also had his hand in the till, as a 'traditional activity' of union officials.

Thomson is not charged with any crime, and certainly not been found guilty of one either.

That may change, and I really am not concerned if it does but you are sailing close to the wind with your accusations.

You should remove them, and rephrase what you wrote into something that does not offend so.

TBC,

It is a pity that your English skills do not survive basic scrutiny either. I asked you whether you could explain exactly what the insult was against the previous speaker, and you cannot. I can only assume that you prefer to maintain a Faux outrage, or are intellectually inadequate.

The insults against Slipper, Thomson and the unions are intended and well justified.

I like it when these Red vs Blue squabbles break out. It makes the

*Greens*

look better.

<snicker, snicker>

..

*Neutral*

Instead of " ... schizophrenic <snip> conservatives ..." consider trying a different and more accurate insult, if that is what you are trying to achieve.

I really don't think that their behavior can be attributed to a fundamentally altered state of consciousness. They are just bent, perverted and perverting, and when they go too far, a normal prison is their just deserts, as opposed to a psych hospital.

I too Lexi, have hopes and fingers crossed about Peter Slipper.

cheers T2

thinker 2, you say in your post of Tuesday, 29 November 2011 at 6:51:08 PM, that:

"Slipper himself could well be the subject
of blackmail over the christmas break with
the Australian newspaper first in in line
for the Slipper video (or else) from his
former confidants, prior too the opening
of the Houses in the new year."

It is a concern that such might be attempted, given that the allegation of one sort of sexual misconduct or other is seemingly such a commonly used tool these days in attempts at the manipulation of public opinion where the standing of persons prominent in matters of public significance is sought to be undermined by one interest or another. Think Polanski (extradition), think Howes (extradition), think Strauss-Khan (opportunistic political smearing, entrapment in a hostile foreign jurisdiction), think Assange (extradition, entrapment in a hostile foreign jurisdiction).

It is equally important to recognise that claims as to the very existence of some allegedly compromising video in relation to the former Deputy-Speaker, now Speaker, is, up to this point, pure inuendo.

At this point, should any claimed evidence of allegedly 'inappropriate behaviour' on the part of the Speaker on some earlier occasion in the context of a private parliamentary or electorate office celebration now conveniently emerge, it would have to be assumed that the sole intent behind such emergence would be one of deliberate damage to the reputation of the person and/or office. It is to be hoped, and I would expect with some degree of confidence that there would be support by a majority in the House, that the publishing of any such purported video would be treated as a deliberate contempt of the Parliament.

What goes around, comes around, as they say. Seemingly no significant timely zeal existed in either major party for the upholding of Parliamentary privilege in relation to immunity for testimony to a Committee by Allan Asher a month ago. Now members of both parties are going to have to learn all about privilege and immunities, in many cases perhaps for the first time.

Karma.

The link in my post of Tuesday 29 November 2011 at 11:57:39 AM, http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=10712#178530 , that revealed from official AEC records the statistically improbable (impossible?) number of 47,579 17-year-old provisionally enrolled persons seemingly turning 18 during the 22 days between 30June 2010 and 22 July 2010, may just have afforded us a window on a possible reason for Julia Gillard's pre-election duplicitous promise of 'there will be no carbon tax under a government I lead', followed by its post-election reversal.

With automatic electoral enrollment already legislated in NSW from 14 December 2009 but not proclaimed until 22 September 2010, whilst simultaneously there had been no gazettal of 12 months notice of NSW' intent to withdraw from the Joint Roll Agreement, there is every indication that there existed a tacit understanding that the Commonwealth, too, in the near future would be adopting automatic enrollment. That intent would now seem to be confirmed by the introduction in recent days of a Bill to that effect into the Commonwealth Parliament. http://twitter.com/#!/mumbletwits/status/139204858132709376

It could just as easily be that the non-statistical move of 47,579 names out of the 17-year-old roll cohort into the 18-year-old roll cohort in just 22 days constitutes tip-of-the-iceberg evidence as to a pre-existing clandestine variant of 'automatic enrollment' having subsisted unidentified within the Commonwealth rolls, one that, with the imminent introduction of official (and hopefully transparently accountable) automatic enrollment would have been seen as having a very limited shelf-life. What is there to say that such a clandestine scheme would have been confined to the 17-year-old roll cohort?

Perhaps it was seen in some quarters that Federal elections held in 2010 might be the last that could be influenced by what looks like just such a clandestine enrollment manipulation system. The last chance for ramming a carbon tax down the Australian's throats, perhaps?

Is that the underlying explanation for the desperation move of 'putting in the slipper' in holding power?

The astute political tactic of offerring the Speaker's office to an Opposition member under threat of losing pre-selection is seen by many as a potentially double-edged sword.

It is equally the case that changes to electoral law can be two-edged, as, I suggest may well be the case with respect to the proposed introduction of Commonwealth-wide automatic enrollment. There would be those who, having read my preceeding post, have taken it as infering that the Labor party, or some faction or other element within it, is being suggested as having operated a clandestine equivalent of automatic enrollment, the days of which may now be numbered. They would be in error.

What I find disturbing is the language used in the [Wiki]leaked US diplomatic cables that referred to Senator Mark Arbib as a 'protected source', and to conversations with Senator Don Farrell revealing Julia Gillard as moving to depose Kevin Rudd from the primeministership as early as June 2009, before Copenhagen, and before any decline in Labor's performance in the polls had occurred. This is a post in which I drew those strands together: http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=11370#193134 . Bear in mind that the writer being quoted in the leaked cable is a US diplomat, when it says:

"Don Farrell, the right-wing union powerbroker
from South Australia, told us Gillard is
'campaigning for the leadership' and at this
point is the frontrunner to succeed Rudd,
conceding that the Right did not yet have an
alternative,"

The words "CONCEDING that the right did not YET have an alternative" conveys an impression of there having been discussions taking place between US diplomatic officials and ALP insiders such as Farrell over an extended period that had as a pre-determined objective the replacement of Rudd as PM.

Could it not be that a suspected clandestine equivalent of automatic enrollment could have been being operated with a view to influencing Australian electoral outcomes both across the political spectrum and several decades, as an ace up the sleeve, so to speak, of which players like Arbib and Farrell knew nothing directly?