I see Jacinta Price advocates 'ears' rather than 'voice'.
A very very sensible comment.
But it doesn't go far enough.
Listening must be two way.
Minorities must be prepared to listen to, and accept, a majority view.
For it is the majority which organises our society through democratically elected governing bodies.
The majority is in control.
It is the majority which defines the borders of this country.
It is the majority which defends those borders.
And so it is the majority which keeps us safe.
Never before in its history has Australia had such comprehensive majority management.
In this modern world, where there is so much 'jostling and jockeying' by those who would be king, we need the quiet strength of a majority view to prevail.
So the minority should support the majority, and try not to hinder it with vexatious and irrelevant claims.
And by the way, 'gaps and divisions' in society are mostly caused by those who steadfastly resist compliance with the law.
It really is that simple.

Minorities "must" be prepared to listen? They quite clearly are not, and they will never be satisfied no matter how much the cowardly politicians give in to them. The majority needs to stop voting for the Labor/Liberal cowards so that we can see how many votes they get from the whiners they are pandering to.

Jacinta Price obviously has the foresight to know that the Voice would merely keep lining the pockets of the activists & bureaudroids, nothing more !

Dear Indyvidual,

How is it suppose to do that when it will not be allocating or distributing any funds itself.

And why are you so intent on making these things up when it is pretty clear your motives of 'what's mine is mine' and 'hands off' are at the fore.

You are all rather scared bunch aren't you. It really is going to be alright you know. The sky really isn't going to fall in with a small and over due change to the constitution.

SteeleRedux,
The only reason why people ask for change is because status quo isn't satisfactory. Getting the Voice will not be a change, it'll be status quo turbocharged ! Ms Price can see that !

"Minorities must be prepared to listen to, and accept, a majority view"

I disagree, minorities always have the right to peacefully argue their case for change to those things that affect them. The 'Voice' is an example of a desirable change affecting Aboriginal people. If Aboriginals had continued playing the part of the "compliant native" as they mostly did for the first 70 years following federation, it was a time of dis-empowerment for first Australians, then talk of a 'Voice' would never have arisen, the status quo of Aboriginal subservience to settler law would have remained, much to the joy of those who now oppose change.

There is not enough detail in what we are voting for, if it is merely a listening fest, no money involved, then why is not the Government listening to the proposers of the voice and indigenous members in parliament on their concerns already without a National Vote. If the proposers of the Voice can talk to Government already, why involve a Constitutional change?

Do those proposing the Voice represent remote communities and their needs or are they disgruntled city dwelling elites?

Those living in remote communities cannot expect health, education, and employment opportunities like those living in towns and cities. We cannot merely be a welfare State to support isolation living.

I have met the Price family and Jacinta knows the only hope for the indigenous isolated camps is to remove children from the camp and bring them into the town for care and education.

What will the authoirites be able to 'listen" to with the Voice, that they can't listen to now ?
All sounds like just another funding grab for hangers-on !

SR,

So will these unelected representatives provide their council for free or will they expect government salaries, travel allowances, perks etc?

What do you like about the voice? It's the gravy!!

The federal government could do what the SA government is going to do, and what I believe the Victorian government has already done, and just enact the legislation.

That would give us another ballsup like ATSIC was, able to be rescinded by a future government. A costly error, but one that could be cleaned up by a non-Socialist government.

It is the threat to enshrine it in the Constitution that is the real problem. That will give very dangerous powers to activist judges in the High Court to take everything out of the hands of of elected representatives.

All Albanese is interested in his making a big gesture; and in doing so, he will be wrecking the way Australia is governed now, and there will be no going back.

And, it won't be just the much maligned opponents of the Voice who will suffer the consequences. The ovine Left will regret it too.

Attorney General Dreyfuss has told the ABC that the Uluru Statement called for STARTING with the Voice. But there are OTHER ELEMENTS that COME NEXT, including a TREATY and TRUTH TELLING.

TRUTH TELLING
ttbn,
That'd be a good thing & definitely an improvement on truth inventing/concealing !

Indeed Steele

"The sky really isn't going to fall" for a reason you don't anticipate.

1. The increasing factional infighting and doubters amongst Aborigines on whether there should be a Voice or not, or a Treaty first, or a Truth Telling Compensation Authority first, is putting potential Yes Voters off, methinks.

2. The risk that the Voice in Parliament will be populated by exhibitionist radicals, like newly Independent Lidia Thorpe, is also putting Voters off.

3. There is none of the general political and popular Goodwill that has typified the few successful Referendums, like the 1967 one.

"The sky really isn't going to fall" because the high No-Vote in the Referendum vote will, most likely, make it fail.

Mavs

Should we expect any less from the Forums band of hard right haters, I don't think so. Dutton has already made up his mind that the Liberals will oppose the Voice, now he is looking for the flimsiest of excuses to do so. I can see a split deepening within the conservative ranks, with the moderate Bridget Archer indicating that she will be in support regardless. The Cow Cocky Party had only the one defector in Andrew Gee, the Liberals may have several.

How is it suppose to do that when it will not be allocating or distributing any funds itself.
SteeleRedux,
Its the social & financial cost that Yes & NO voters alike are concerned about.

Not as much as a whipper from the conservative ranks when the Tories wasted $5 billion on the failed French submarines. The same mob, who oppose Aboriginal recognition in any form are jumping up and down should the referendum cost $5 million, that's 1/1000th of the Morrison submarine waste.

Indyvidual

Of course truth telling has nothing to do with actual truth; it is just another way to berate white people.

We should not kid ourselves we whites are not subjected to racism throughout the Western world. The Voice is just the beginning of the discrimination against us. Yesterday I watched an interview with a glamorous black woman representing Black Lives Matter telling white people to 'get out of their (blacks) way'. This rubbish has been enabled by renegade whites.

What do we call these self-hating whites? The Socialists who call people like Jacinta Price and Warren Mundine 'Uncle Toms'. Any ideas on a suitable name for the white, Socialist trash.?

MORE GOOD NEWS FOR THE NO-VOTE

The politically Centrist Guardian reports 8th Feb 23:

"The conveners of the Greens’ First Nations advisory group say they do not support the voice to parliament or a referendum on Indigenous constitutional recognition, publicly rebuking their federal party room and instead backing the departed senator Lidia Thorpe’s opposition to the move.

Dr Tjanara Goreng Goreng, the national co-convener of the Greens’ First Nations Network, claimed other members may follow Thorpe out the door, and pushed back on the decision of federal MPs and senators to publicly campaign for the voice.

“We don’t agree to a voice in the constitution. We won’t move from that position. It has no power,” she told Guardian Australia..."

More see http://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2023/feb/08/greens-first-nations-conveners-side-with-lidia-thorpe-and-say-they-do-not-support-voice-to-parliament

Changes to laws are meant to change how people act.
A law will REQUIRE people behave in a certain way.
The proposed 'voice' does not do that.
There is no REQUIREMENT involved.
So it is a pointless exercise.

And anyway, who is asking for this absurdity?
A few persons who are predominantly european with SOME native australian heritage?
Why are they not beholden to their european ancestry too?
And they haven't been here very long anyway.
I have been here longer than most of them.
And as I have been here longer, I should have more 'rights' than they?

There is only one country here.
One parliamentary system.
One flag.
One people, all with the same rights and responsibilities..
We don't need 'recognition' or 'treaties' or other nonsense.
We just need people who comply with the law, and get on with life.

I did some more thinking.
Recently, I heard a well known journalist on Tv.
It is relevant to my comments that his bloodlines are not only european, but are also closely aligned with australia.
I cannot remember the exact words he used, but he was explaining that he did not feel comfortable in his 'own' country.
Outside the country he felt more at ease.
My immediate thought was that if he couldn't adjust to living in this country of opportunity and comfort, his thought processes must be wrong.
Which means the principles which underpin his life, the principles by which he lives, his belief system if you will, all lack some vital truth.
A lack of truth in fundamental policy has caused the downfall of many (otherwise) advanced civilisations.
A lack of truth could certainly bring down a single individual.

My next thought was that he might benefit from counselling.
But that is not a given.
It could be that his thought processes are so tangled or irregular that he cannot change.
If that is the case, he will continue to be like a square peg in a round hole: a bad fit for this society.
Which is sad, because he was born here.
He is also one of those pushing for 'change'.
I have difficulty understanding 'why'.

The racists and bigots continue to sing from the same old song sheet of denial. They speak of "truth telling" then retreat back into their delusional position of lies with "nothing to see here". The latest poll shows support for the 'Voice' at 65% in favour, and only 14% a hard no vote, with 21% undecided or wavering one way or the other. I hope Dud Dutton does demand a No vote from the electorate, just like the Cow Cocky Hicks have already done, this will demonstrate how out of touch with the mood of the general public these racially motivated reprobates actually are.

POLLING NOT SO PRO-VOICE

Hi Paul

The Guardian reported, 7th Feb 2023:

On the face of it "With 65% of respondents supporting the change, survey suggests Peter Dutton’s soft no campaign is failing to shift sentiment"

However the figures are more nuanced and far less encouraging for the YES VOTE:

"The latest fortnightly survey of [only] 1,000 respondents...asked to be explicit about the nature of their support or opposition to the concept.

Of the yes cohort, 38% of respondents characterised their position as a hard yes while 26% said they were a soft yes.

In the no camp, 21% characterised themselves as hard no and 14% as soft no.

...The data says only 31% of respondents feel well informed about what the change means and 37% say they don’t feel informed."

More see http://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2023/feb/07/guardian-essential-poll-majority-of-australians-continue-to-support-indigenous-voice

Cheers Mavs

The nutters rabbiting on about those of us against the Voice being 'racists' are too stupid to get the fact that the Voice itself is the most racist bit of crap ever presented to the Australian public.

Hi Mavs,

Dutton very much needs to be on the winning side, Labor is united in their support for a 'YES' vote, their constituency is as well, the Coalition not so. The hard right of the Liberal Party are in the negative camp, that's Dutton's factional support base within, but a significant section of progressive Liberals like Bridget Archer are defiantly 'YES' supporters, as are small 'l' Liberal voters. If Frydenberg makes a return to federal politics, and that's likely now Tudge is out, then Dutton is looking to be on very shaky ground.

p/s Albanese can't lose, if the 'YES' vote gets up then its all warm and fuzz for Albo, if the'NO' wins, then its down to all the divisive rednecked bastards and not the fault of Albo.

Hi Paul

Dutton being so rightwing makes him a poor Opposition leader because, in part, he cannot gather the moderate Libs around him. Also his cold, strange, exterior doesn't invite trust.

Time for someone else, maybe Julie Bishop, to takeover, even if the Libs can't conceive of a woman leading the Party.

Cheers Mavs

Dutton is using the proven but immensely unpopular tactic of "you have to be cruel to be kind'.
Unfortunately, he's right therefore things won't change because the parasitic Woke have become too numerous at the Ballot box !

The NO advocates are fair minded in opposing the Racist Voice Proposal. This is noting it is Australia's most famous Aborigine who opposes the Voice.

"Senator Lidia Thorpe...signalled she will continue to argue against constitutional recognition and the voice “advisory body with no power”, warning that there are “progressive nos” who oppose it “for good reason”."

More see http://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2023/feb/09/lidia-thorpe-wont-rule-out-launching-new-political-party-as-she-doubles-down-against-voice-to-parliament

MAVER'S COMMENT

Looks like Whitey who feels guilty will be the arch Robo-Voter for Voice neo-Racist Dreamtime.

Ockernese has gone from assertiveness on the Voice to pleading with the Opposition to come on board and design a voice model with him, now that polls showing support for a Yes vote is dropping beyond the level needed for a majority of voters in a majority of states.

I listened to PM Albanese say on ABC that just vote YES for the concept of the Voice, and the Parliament will legislate how it will work. So, the Labor, Greens and Teals will decide how the Voice will work and what will be involved as they hold the majority seats. There is already a loud voice in Parliament, especially from Alice Springs given by aboriginals, and it has been ignored.

First Nations

There were no first nations. There were TRIBES. It is a lie to suggest otherwise. People who study history know that " 'families' were small in number and constantly quarrelling". Even 'tribes' is often an exaggeration, because they were just family groups. Large gatherings only occurred for trading or ceremonial purposes.

Welcome to country

A modern contrivance as with 'smoking ceremonies'.

Living in harmony with the environment

Only because of their small numbers they didn't damage the environment.

Truth telling

Nothing to do with truth - just berating white people.

Voice

People need to start thinking of the Voice as a Trojan horse. If it is allowed in by gullible and unsuspecting voters, all manner of nasties will pour out of it.

Nothing to do with truth - just berating white people.
ttbn,
My experience also particularly from non-indigenous indigenous !

Maverick,

In what Universe is the Guardian "politically centrist"? The SMH is left of the centre, the Australian is right of the centre, and the Guardian is left of the SMH.

According to the PM, the Voice is just a feel-good way for Australians to show they have an “open heart” for the plight of their Indigenous brothers and sisters. But if you’re not on board to rewrite our Constitution – which is the brainchild of a small group of lefty activists and politicians – you are hateful.

If it’s about “consultation”, what’s the point when there are more than 2700 Indigenous non-profit corporations, 145 Aboriginal Community Controlled Health Organizations and 120 Aboriginal Land Councils in NSW alone?

The truth is that the Voice is ultimately about a Treaty.
Greens leader Adam Bandt said his party would support the Voice – but only after Albanese promised money to fast track a Treaty.
Labor Senator Pat Dodson said just this week that “to have a treaty, you have to have a Voice…”
1 According to the activists the Voice is a constitutional change that will lead to a treaty, which they say is “unfinished business”.
2.But what’s in a treaty?
According to George Williams – from the government’s legal advisory group – that would mean “reparations for historical injustices”
3.According to Tom Calma – who drafted the book on the Voice – that would mean “land swapping” and “compensation paid”
4.Does all this sound “modest” to you?

This is an overhaul of our democracy and Constitution.
Even though a treaty won’t be on the ballot paper when you go to vote in the Voice referendum.

The PM must tell us exactly how expensive his Voice really will be.
Because the costs won’t just be in real dollars. They’ll be in the price we pay by putting race at the heart of our parliamentary democracy.


Matthew Sheahan
Executive Director
ADVANCE
1. Quoted in The Australian, ‘Dodson: Voice needed first to advise on agreement making and truth telling’, February 6, 2023.
2. Uluru Statement website: https://ulurustatement.org/our-story/makarrata/
3. Quoted in SBS’s ‘Explainer: What is a treaty? June 22, 2916.
4. Tom Calma on the ABC’s Q+A, January 30, 2023




FIRST THE VOICE, THEN THE TREATY, THEN REPARATIONS…

Pity a few of the "learned latte sipping" group supporting the voice did not actually get out around the country, they may have a huge change of heart, listen and take notice of what Jacinta Price has to say.
Having lived with and among aboriginal people for 50+ years the only answer is a big NO NO NO. Housing?? do an audit of vacant outstation communities around the top half of Australia, some houses built and never lived in, others wrecked and abandoned. One friend (Aboriginal I may add) was quite adamant when three houses were being built for his family out bush, "We are not going to live out there mrs " They have used it from time to time as a holiday camp but live in town where the kids go to school regularly.
Do an audit of the numerous Aboriginal organisations, who runs them and what have they achieved over the years. Plenty of vehicles, computers and flash offices, family well looked after but not much else.
Cant complain too much, we have done well out of the Aboriginal industry, the NT relies on it to survive, but if we didn't someone else would have. The overall waste is unbelievable and unknown to many who have no idea of what goes on.

gi123,

By chance, you wouldn't be biased in any way, you just know its all bad. Some have a distorted view of where Aboriginal people actually live, 82% in cities and regional areas, Aboriginals living in remote or very remote communities account for 17%. The Aboriginal population in the NT is 79,000 in NSW its 297,400. The "learned latte sippers" are more likely to come across an Aboriginal down at their local cafe', than some fella wandering around the back blocks of the Northern Territory. (2022 Australian Governments AIHW Profile of Indigenous Australians)

Gota love those little anecdotal stories of "I know a bloke...." from that single instance you can extrapolate the same applies to a million other cases, every case in fact, they'll all bad!

gj123, a friend of mine who works with aboriginals in Katherine NT says they tell him they do not want houses with rooms as it allows for abuse. They just want a large A-frame roof to the ground with a fireplace in the middle of the room and a shower toilet block attached.

Oh,

Proud Boy Jose', has another one of those "I know a bloke" stories, in this case its, "a friend of mine", always bad . For the forums 'Usual Suspects' like the Trump lover Josephus, there's always someone at the ready to feed him a disparaging story about Aboriginal people. Surprising what one learns down at Proud Boy HQ. Unfortunately when I asked Josephus how many paedophiles were in his church, he didn't want to tell me, surely one of those mates of yours must have whispered a number in your ear. What is it Jose', 47,000?

Hi Paul

I recall you, Foxy and Albo accused people, who sought more information about YES and NO arguments for the Voice Referendum, as being simply Negative and simply Racist.

I note my comment of 15 January, at http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=10020&page=0#343148

"Thanks Foxy for replying.

However you are evading my main point!

That is Albanese following the Referendum Convention requiring his government provide each voter/"elector" with two 2000 WORD ARGUMENTS on the YES and NO CASES concercening the Voice Proposal(s)"

+++++++++++++++

Well Albo has been forced to do the honest thing: http://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2023/feb/08/labor-official-information-pamphlet-indigenous-voice-to-parliament-referendum-mailout

TITLE: "Labor reverses course on mailing out official pamphlet on Indigenous voice referendum"

BODY: "Government agrees to send out brochure laying out both arguments for voice to parliament after first claiming it was outdated in the internet age."

"Australian voters will receive an official information pamphlet laying out the cases for the yes and no campaigns of the Indigenous voice to parliament referendum, the Labor government has decided, changing tack after both sides raised concerns about plans to scrap the brochure."

Now Albo, is realising his Aboriginal Voice approach has been mistaken, even undemocratic.

Albo is learning he needs to respond to non-Aboriginal Voices as well.

In any case Aunty Lidia is destroying the Voice Campaign more than any other Australian, of any colour.

Regards Mavs

Hi Maverick,

Still shyte-stirring I see.

Achieving much?

As long as you're happy.

Hi Foxy

That is out of character language for you.

Did the truth that Albo knows he can no longer uphold a RACIST "Voice" policy touch a nerve with you? Instead there is rising opposition from Lidia and others, who don't want to lose their sovereignty to a Canberra Voice of sellouts to white control.

As Albo expects the "Plan A" RACE based Voice will fail, Albo has fallen back on Plan B. That is $100s of extra millions on Aboriginal spending to "Close the Gap" announced today http://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2023/feb/13/closing-the-gap-more-than-420m-to-be-spent-on-water-housing-and-food-security

Cheers Mavs

What a sorry bunch these Liberals are, with Redneck Dutton making an "I'm an idiot" speech with an insincere apology for his failure to front up for the Keven Rudd apology to the Stolen Generation 15 years ago. Yesterday the redneck was a no show at the breakfast, which 400 attended, to commemorate the Rudd apology.These rednecks and Uncle Toms expect Australians to vote for them, Haaaaaaaaaaaaa!

What a bunch of fwits these Laborites and gangreens are. These morons think that they can fix racism by introducing a different form of racism.

I suppose they are too stupid to recognize the irony.

too stupid to recognize the irony.
shadowminister,
They've been forced to learn to write & not to think & now we get bombarded with their nonsensical dreaming !
Irrational hangers-on competing at the trough they never helped to fill !

Hi Mavs,

A good post, it indicates a bloke who is thinking on the subject. I have no objection with those like you who have genuine concerns. But when I see ardent racists on the forum trumpeting racism as their excuse to oppose, I have to be sceptical. I believe this referendum if successful, and there's no guarantee of that, wont cause the sky to fall in. I believe Constitutional recognition of Indigenous Australia is way overdue. I don't support a treaty, at this time as I don't see the benefits for black or white Australia.

By the way, if there's a better way, I'm prepared to listen, but as yet no one has proposed as what I see as a better way, do nothing is not a long term option. The Voice it is!

The Voice is not a "simple request", as the Ocker claims: it is a dangerous demand; a threat to our democracy that would vandalise our Constitution.

The Greens have demanded that the government pursue a Treaty and give aboriginal identifiers sovereignty, and the government has agreed.

The Ocker can no longer say that there is not now a firm, if unofficial, Green Labor Coalition working towards wrecking Australia.

I see that horrible ratbag, Rudd, is gibbering about what 'the world' would think of us if we don't endorse racism via the Voice. If 'the world' ever gives a thought to Australia at all, it would be in tears of laughter that we tolerate such grubs as Rudd have a bunch of vicious commos in government, who got only 32.6% of the primary vote.

Paul,

We are worried about ardent racists such as yourself.

SM,

Who are "we" you and the rest of your far right mob.

Hi Paul,

Don't worry. It will be the Australian people who will
decide on whether to have a Voice to Parliament for
our Indigenous people or not. It will be interesting
to see what they decide. Doom and gloom was declared
with same-sex marriage. Yet it passed. I suspect this
will as well. Don't be frustrated what nay sayers say
or pay any attention to their attempted insults.

It says more about them than you.

shadowminister,

What do you think of James Paterson and Keith Wolahan?
Two young Liberals - making an impact already.

Foxy,

I know little to nothing about them.

Paul,

We the centrist conservatives are worried about you and your far-left whinge racists.

shadowminister,

James Paterson has been a Senator for Victoria since 2016
representing the Liberal Party. He was appointed to Peter
Dutton's shadow ministry following the Coalition defeat in
2022 federal election. We exchange e-mails regularly.
I was so impressed with him when I first saw him on Q and A
ages ago. A highly intelligent and impressive individual.
We need more like him.

Keith Wolahan is a Member of Parliament for the seat of
Menzies (my electorate) He replaced Kevin Andrews at the 2022
federal election. Another impressive politician.

Look them both up if you have the time.

I think they're both worth watching. I predict they both have
bright futures in politics.

both have bright futures in politics.
Foxy,
It'd preferable for their constituents for them to be bright in politics !

indyvidual,

Most people would prefer those in i power who make
decisions to have intelligence. Of course it would take
intelligence to vote them in, in the first place. So
you're half way right.

Foxy,
They all have enough intelligence to pass multiple choice questions to pass through University.
They don't have sufficient intelligence to grasp the need for common sense.
I mean, paying those who produce nothing, more than those who do, is not very intelligent.
Until we get a Govt packed with ministers who show the bureaudroids the door, not much will improve.

idyvidual,

We have a mixture of politicians in parliament - some are
party hacks, seat-warmers, out for what they can get. However
we also have those who enter politics to make a difference.
By their actions we eventually get to know them.
They are the ones we need to keep on electing.

Of course many voters used to just vote for the party (like a
football club). But the last federal election gave us hope -
people paid attention - and decided to not reward a party
that did nothing. Lets hope that this trend continues.

Voters are beginning to expect more from their politicians.

Foxy, I know little to nothing.....
Posted by shadowminister, Thursday, 16 February 2023 1:32:40 PM

I'll second that shadowminister.

Voters are beginning to expect more from their politicians.
Foxy,
That's meaningless unless it goes both ways ! That's the really tough part !

indyvidual,

That's not meaningless - as the last federal election showed.
It's the voters who have to be won over or the politicians
lose their jobs and get kicked out - as many have done.

as the last federal election showed.
Foxy,
changing Govt for the sake of changing Govt is the easy part, changing the mentality of selfish voters is harder.
Read today that the racist bleating industry costs us $100 million/day, you think that's true ?
The remote communities probably get a pittance of that, the rest is for bureaudroids of all complexions !

indyvidual,

Don't believe the myths and misinformation and fear-
mongering and blaming the disadvantaged unless we're
also willing to judge every rich member of society
as to how productive they are. Taken individual by
individual It's likely that there's more idleness and
abuse of government favours among the privileged than
among the ranks of the disadvantaged.

It's likely that there's more idleness and abuse of government favours among the privileged than
among the ranks of the disadvantaged.
Foxy,
Finally you're catching on. I have seen these bureaudroids with my own eyes & heard them with my own ears.
I have witnessed the corruption & incompetence of that Public Service Union protected elite.

indyvidual,

I didn't realize that the elite needed to or belonged
to unions. They have their own "boy's club", or so
I thought.

They have their own "boy's club", or so
I thought.
Foxy,
Yes, all they require is their Public Service Union membership card & presto, they're immune to accountability !

indyvidual,

I'm afraid I don't understand your consistent
negative references to the public service.
Where would we be without it?

Hi Foxy,

It may have something to do with Indy being sacked from the Public Service due to incompetence. He once claimed he worked for the PS for a short time about the Whitlam government era. Then it was onto social welfare ever since. Most likely unemployable.

Hi Paul,

Well, I guess that's understandable under the circumstances.

I'm afraid I don't understand your consistent
negative references to the public service.
Where would we be without it?
Foxy,
When did I ever complain about the Public Service ? My gripes is with the many Public Servants who aren't doing what they get very well paid for !
Where would we be without them ? In less debt for sure !

So Indy, what have we being paying you to do for all these years, sit on your arse!

indyvidual,

Those who aren't doing what they're paid to do -
usually don't last very long or get promoted.
Not all public servants are bad. There's good
and bad in any work place.

Foxy,
I never stated that they were all bad, it's just that the decent & conscientious ones are a minority.
The not so good ones usually have to get promoted as that is the only way to move them on.
It's indeed a sad show that poorly performing bureaucrats can't be moved sideways or even down & that's the cause of so much unfair treatment of decent folk by these selfish droids !
If all bureacrats were as good as you'd have us believe Current Affairs & 7.30 report, 4 Corners etc couldn't exist !

I thought these documentaries focused on the
exceptions not the rules of what was happening
in our societies in order to draw attention and
try to correct the behaviour of people. You may
not have said that all public servants are bad -
you also did not make it clear that there are some
excellent ones. In any case I am glad to hear
that you're not condemning them all.
Good to know.

Hi Foxy,

In the past Indy, has called for the sacking of 95% of public servants. Maybe he'll want to deny that now.

And Paul you have advocated the cutting of aged pension by 25%.

Nah SM,

Not 25%, small beer, 95% is the magic number, I got that from good old Indy, he's an expert on aged welfare.... he's had enough of it for the last century. Once the Seniors National Service, is up and running, you and the rest of the forum lads of the conservative ilk will be volunteering for the OLO Platoon. BTW; What are you like on a pick and shovel? Your talents will be utilised as part of the 'Pot Hole Repair Gang'.

Paul,

Pity that you are too useless even for that.