Well...here are some 'TRUTHS' which might interest voters!

When given the opportunity, along with all major parties, to respond to 24 questions from the ACL, here is the outcome. (just some questions)

1/ Would your party protect the right of Religious Organizations to employ Staff who share their ethos?

GREENS DELCINED (but they were most happy in Vic to have political parties exempted from the new anti disccrimination laws which would otherwise have prevented them from exCLUDing non 'Green' thinking employees.

2/ Prayer in Parliament ok? GREENS DECLINED to answer.

3/ WHAT would your party do to support vulnerable people groups overseas re specific instances of religious or ethnic persecution?

GREENS DELCINED TO ANSWER!

4/ WOULD your party support the retention of FBT concessions for Churches and faith based charities?

GREENS DECLINED TO ANSWER!

5/ WILL your party reject any moves to legalize Euthanasia?

GREENS DECLINED TO ANSWER!

6/ WOULD your party support a conscience vote on medicare funding for Abortions?

GREENS DELCINED TO ANSWER!

6/ WHAT will your party do to obtain more accurate information about Abortion rates?

GREENS DECLINED TO ANSWER!

7/ Funding of faith based chaplaincy?

GREENS DECLINED TO ANSWER !

8/ YOUTH UNEMPLOYMENT what would your party do to encourage young Australians to engage in active employment?

GREENS DECLINED TO ANSWER!

9/ MARRIAGE-man and woman. Would your party support this definition ?

GREENS DECLINED TO ANSWER!

10/ SEXUALIZATION OF CHILDREN . Would your party commit to a comprehensive review of Australia's media regulatory environment ?

GREENS DECLINED TO ANSWER!

I think you missed one, Boaz.

11/ Have you stopped beating your wife?

GREENS DECLINED TO ANSWER!

Honestly, how can anyone take this questionnaire seriously?

I did liked the responses provided by the Australian Sex party, though.

http://australiavotes.org/policies/index.php?election_id=5&topic_ids=all&party_ids=65

I wonder if they have a candidate in my constituency?

Hmmm. I also wonder how the press manage to avoid the phrase "standing" for parliament? And how do the candidates steer around the concept of "taking a position" on an issue?

Must be tough.

Incidentally, Arjay. I know that you never do any fact-checking (presumably it is against your religion or something), but...

>>Most of the money was made by the likes of Leightons a British company<<

Where on earth did you get the impression that Leightons were not a true-blue Aussie company?

They are about as British as the stump-jump plough.

Sorry but Leighton's are not British or Australian, every big construction firm is owned by two big players.
Think Thiess is part of the same stable as Leighton's.
Boazy must you over use caps?
Yes I do for highlighting but your miss use only serves to annoy.
And it gains you not one extra believer.

Pericles,whether Leightons is pommy or not ,does not make my argument any less valid.I was told in a conversation recently that it was.

Nit picking will not improve your own arguments.I said at the time the the stimulus was unnecessary and you argued to the contrary.Now many of the pundits are saying that that stimulus was a waste of money.

The RBA should be creating all the money that equals our GDP and inflation,since GDP belongs to all people of this country.08/09 the RBA gave a dividend of just $5.9 billion to the Aust Govt,while the money supply due to GDP/inflation increases was $78 billion.$72 billion was created as debt by our banking system.It was not theirs to create.It belongs to all Australians.

While I'm not "arguing" about the actions that were taken, just pointing out where I think we are today compared to so many other countries who not only have huge debts, their unemployment level means that without bouyancy & tax gathering off wage & salary earners, thier hole is so much deeper.

I don't think you use comparitive monetary standards when an economy is in crisis & it's controlled by external forces.
We can't turn it around. We just have to ride it out.

rickda,

Good on you for saying these things. only problem is that they are very out of fashion. Tony Abbott has proved if you just formulate a negative argument and continuously yell everyone down over it the media will eventually fall into line and believe the rubbish. He of course had the ever ignorant shock jocks of sydney to help the argument with their rude and undemocratic methods of pushing a negative that suits them without allowing recourse to the argument and never an apology when they are wrong.

Labor have only themselves to blame though as they could have gone to war on these points instead of fighting each other and having an unnecessary leadership change. Poor administrative leadership and inability to cover up or even turn it to their own advantage like Howard did with children overboard may yet cost them government.