The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > General Discussion > The weasel pops up again, and other Labor skulduggery

The weasel pops up again, and other Labor skulduggery

  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. All
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/national/disgraced-peter-slippers-back-in-the-jet-set/story-fndo317g-1226508717871

PETER Slipper can keep his passport current after being nominated by the government for the prestigious parliamentary foreign affairs committee. Robert McClelland, who was dumped from the ministry earlier this year, was stood aside to make way for Mr Slipper. MPs on the foreign affairs committee can expect to travel in delegations overseas. Slippery Pete is not beyond selling his vote.

Next Whine Swan rushed out the interim bludget before the mining tax returns and with some creative accounting, to present a dodgy surplus. The latest estimates show a nearly $5bn deficit.

Then to cover up the latest broken promise, Whine gets treasury to cherry pick a few opposition policies, do an estimate on incomplete information and then get them published.
Posted by Shadow Minister, Wednesday, 7 November 2012 1:19:30 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Slipper is guilty of nothing.
Budget savings of 20 billion $ has been found without one job lost.
Treasury costings has always been the case and govt; can release or not the figures.
Posted by 579, Thursday, 8 November 2012 6:06:57 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The Coalition's tax policies will cost Australian businesses $4.57 billion in their first full year of operation, according to the Commonwealth Treasury.

Prepared as Treasury attempts to come to grips with a suite of Coalition policies yet to be announced, the analysis includes only those to which it has publicly committed. Excluded are policies with a negative but uncertain impact on business, such as winding back the recent increase in the employee tax-free threshold from $6000 to $18,200.

The three policies identified by Treasury are the Coalition's commitment to impose a 1.5 per cent tax levy on big firms to fund paid parental leave, its decision to axe instant asset writeoff and other tax breaks for small business funded from the carbon tax, and its decision to axe the ability for businesses to "carry back" losses and obtain refunds for tax already paid funded from the mining tax.

The analysis excludes the benefit to some businesses from axing the carbon and mining taxes.
Advertisement

Treasury finds that businesses would lose $4.57 billion in the first full year the Coalition's three commitments were operational, accumulating to $17.2 billion over four years.

Its calculations suggest manufacturers would pay an extra $1.34 billion a year, retailers an extra $930 million and the construction sector an extra $860 million a year.
Posted by 579, Thursday, 8 November 2012 6:29:57 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
579,

Is Slipper guilty of sending sexist and vile texts? Absolutely.
Is he guilty of rorting his entitlements? absolutely.
Did the government have to pay Ashby for Slipper's sexual harassment? Absolutely.

Is Labor giving him a plum committee position to elicit his vote? there is no doubt. His vote is not cheap.

Is Labor going to meet its budget surplus? Not a snowball's chance in hell.

Did Labor produce budget "savings" of $18bn? Absolutely not, only about $1bn was reduced spending, the rest were mostly tax increases and accounting trickery.

Is the government allowed to use treasury to produce estimates of opposition policies using unfavourable terms of reference and publish them? Absolutely. However, they cannot do this and then retain any credibility for costing election policies.
Posted by Shadow Minister, Thursday, 8 November 2012 7:08:10 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
SM, do you think that it is possible that 579 is a labour party troll ?
He rigidly follows the party line.
Hardly ever answers criticism of labour and turns everything into an attack on Tony Abbott.
Posted by Bazz, Thursday, 8 November 2012 8:39:54 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Bazz,

Wash your mouth out with soap!

Could someone who posts unattributed spin so stylistically inconsistent with a brief, assertive and dogmatic posting style possibly be a troll?

You (or anyone else needing practise with the little twin inverted commas) can quote me on this.
Posted by Forrest Gumpp, Thursday, 8 November 2012 10:23:49 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy