Having promised not to impose a carbon tax, and then doing so, Labor's credibility at rock bottom and the voters have stopped listening. Even if she gets the tax through parliament, the coalition will continue to use it to batter her in the polls.

A public vote would settle the issue. A yes would silence Abbott, and a no would be the perfect excuse to dump it without losing face. Refusing to take this to the people would damage her further.

SM,

The government has put forward a policy on carbon pollution and it is up to the parliament, the representatives of the people, to vote on the issue. A plebiscite at this stage when mass panic has been spread by the Opposition would not be productive and would cost millions of dollars ($80 mil. as reported in the media). It would not achieve anything positive it would only create further hysteria in the media.

SM, you’re such a tease.

The ALP/Coalition and its cheer squad have enough problems without you adding to their misery?

The plebiscite proposal won’t “GetUp” (pardon the pun), because it was only designed to identify for the public, the fact that the Independents and Greens are those saying to their electorates, NO you can’t have one. It’s not actually intended that it will go through, it doesn’t need to.

The Independents cannot ever be seen to be the ones bringing down the Government. They are however, looking for an exit plan which will come in the form of dissention within the ALP. At which point the Independents will pull the pin and then blame the ALP.

You are right that a plebiscite might restore some legitimacy but only in respect of her pre-election promise not to have a CO2 tax. The tax itself will remain a contentious issue and looks unlikely, in any form, to buy off enough voters to get through a plebiscite.

The rest of the unresolved contentious policies will just hang around like bad smells, the electorate is so used to these that they probably won’t even notice. For them it is just like going from China to India and remarking how nice it smells. They have switched off until retribution time when they get out their baseball bats. Just like NSW.

The cheer squad will focus on irrelevancy, fear uncertainty and doubt. If you have any doubts about this just look at the post from Lexi. “Mass panic”, a plebiscite “would cost millions of dollars ($80 mil. as reported in the media).” Completely ignoring the cost of the CO2 tax at $11 bn (not to mention $1.1 bn to the UN each year), and finally that this would “only create further hysteria in the media”.

We care about the media’s hysteria because? Well Lexi, to answer the question you never asked, we don’t but you most certainly do because that is where the cheer squad lives, hysteria.

The panic, I’m delighted to report, is palpable.

Leave them alone SM, just sit back, watch and enjoy.

In the 19th Century novel Julia in Dreamland by Lewis Carroll,
a bewildered Julia comes to a fork in the road and encounters the Cheshire cat.

“Which road do I take?” she asked.

“Where do you want to go?” responded the Cheshire cat.

“I don’t know,” Julia answered.

“Then,” said the cat, “it doesn’t matter.”

Lexi,

On this issue the ALP are not representing the people. They were elected on the uncompromising promise to the people not to impose a carbon tax. If she had promised a carbon tax, she probably would not be governing now.

John Howard at least had the decency to return to the people with a deeply unpopular GST, even though he knew that it could cost the coalition government. Julia Gillard is shamelessly breaking a compact with the people to save her job, and as a result no believes what she says any more. If she wants to represent the people, let them have their say, otherwise she is just a con artist.

The carbon tax will cost $11bn p.a. ramping up continuously, spending about 0.6% of this to determine if it is the will of the people is peanuts. Otherwise why bother with elections?

Spindoc,

This is a master stroke by TA, as refusing it would make Juliar appear desperate to force through an unpopular policy with no mandate. It effectively gives her no where to hide. We certainly have not heard the last of it.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/tony-abbotts-bid-to-force-carbon-tax-vote/story-e6frf7jo-1226078110327
Here Shadow Minster is the final report on the walking liar Tony Abbott.
He like you screams liar at Gillard.
Then says if HIS PLEBISCITE IS HELD IF AUSTRALIA SAY YES.
He will still say no!
Breathless in its intent, the man calling for the public to have a voice is saying he will be deaf to it.
Tony Abbott is daily restoring Labors reputation, thanks.

I am so pleased! ROTFL! spindoc and shadow minister.
Dancing on the OLO stage.
Each with one foot firmly in their mouths.
Lexi when Abbott falls, it may be very soon, remember these days, thread after thread stone after stone hurled in anger and every time BOOMERANGING back to the thrower, much to chuckle about gentlemen, my regards.
Tony show pony finally has shown every one just what we always knew.
He is still the very Mad Monk!

Belly,

Abbott went to the election stating that he opposed the carbon tax. Abbott has a mandate for his position and needs no further justification.

Juliar went to the polls stating that she opposed the carbon tax, the plebiscite would give her the chance to gain a mandate and legitimacy.

Dear spindoc,

On both sides of politics we won't know much about this debate until the policy is in action, implemented and working for nearly 6 months.
Voters then will be in a better position to judge whether the tax on polluters was worthwhile and whether the compensation was adequate.

Dear SM,

The plebiscite that is being proposed by the Opposition at a cost of
$80 million has no legal standing whatsoever. All it does is ask the
question "Do you want a carbon tax?," and at the cost of $80 million
will be ignored by the Opposition anyway if people answer "yes."
You can't be serious that the PM be part of such a farce.

Dear Belly,

Once the scheme is implemented the Opposition might be finding it difficult to explain how they will dismantle the scheme and take away
the tax cuts that came with it. It won't be easy persuading the electorate that they can raise taxes again, because prices will certainly have come down.

Tut tut, Shadow,
Don’t you knooow by now?
The only ones entitled to run scare campaigns are Julia and her fellow travellers at Getup!

The reaaaally responsible thing to do would be to only allow certified AGW believers airtime.After all, the proles couldn’t possibly understand the sciiiience.

If you allow them to hear contrarian views it would confuse them, cause “mass panic”, “hysteria” even.

Let then eat cake and watch the ABC.

I would observe, the lying never ends with Labor
“Your money is safe in Pyramid” (Jolly, Treasurer, Vic in the Mamma Kirner rabble government
“No child will live in poverty in 1990” (Hawke)
“Tax Cuts are law – L. A. W. – Law” (Keating)
And that is before we come to the incompetence in administration….

Every major computing “initiative” in Victoria under labor has ended in cost overruns, performance under achievement and wasted taxes and opportunities (but don’t worry – “socialists” is shorthand for a parasite which survives by sucking taxes off real people).

Labor Beazley even signed up to buy “submarines” which could not submerge…. Go figure… incompetence and indolent neglect of duty

Then we come to the present government:
Gross negligence in delivery of a defective housing insulation scheme
An array of over-priced (to suit the expectations of their union masters) and pointless/useless half built school halls.
Incompetence and mismanagement of flood funds

Wasteful profligacy at the NBN – an exercise in “nation-building” with no regard to the economic realities of life

Wasteful profligacy at the Climate Change Commission – an exercise in “nation-building” with no regard to the economic realities of life

(echo echo)

Then we come to the mishandling of refugees and the introduction of a series of chaotic malfunctions to replace the orderly handling introduced under the Howard government…

Instead of Gillard or K Rudd they should bring back Latham…
At least you knew what you were getting with Latham
The bashing bully incarnate was obvious for all to see

The present leaders lies are not



Australia does not need a plebiscite


it needs a general election and we all know the "independents" will not be around next time to support the 10 or so labor seats they will manage to retain


She got in to power by dirty deals which are falling apart....

the only thing increasing for labor is similar to the smell of dead fish...

and the longer they hang around, the worse it gets

I don't recall having a plebiscite on whether we should send troops to the Middle East or a plebiscite on whether Workchoices should be introduced - neither of which were mandated and both of which had strong public opposition.

I also fail to see the validity of the rabid opposition to something that hasn't even been properly detailed yet or debated in Parliament as legislation.

Then again it's really been about Carbon Tax per se but more about gaining immediate and easy political advantage isn't it?

I can see another couple of years of incessant whining ahead.

<< I don't recall having a plebiscite on whether we should send troops to the Middle East>>

Wow! Wobble’s is really environmentally savvy –he’s even recycling Bob Brown's old lines.

And he does have a point, I also cannot recall Howard holding a plebiscite prior to our military involvement in the Middle Eastern --but at least Howard did not explicitly rule it out.

And I do recall Julia saying very clearly: “There will be no carbon tax under the government I lead”

Here it is for those who have short memories:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Ju5OnAOq58

But, then, maybe we’re too quick to judge --she might be right!
There is every chance she may not be LEADING the government by the time the carbon tax comes in.

Dear SPQR,

You seem to have overlooked the fact that the Prime Minister has to deal with a Coalition Minority Government and unlike a Majority Government where she would be obliged to keep her election promises -
situations change where other political influences have to be considered. Had Tony Abbott won the election under the Senate control
by the Greens as of July 1st, he would have had to compromise as well
on many issues. No matter who's in power - the problems remain the same.

The Opposition is trying to confuse and intimidate the electorate for political gain. It is unusual that New Zealand has made the first steps towards an ETS whereas Australia which makes frequent critical comments of New Zealand is being left behind. Unless we pull our socks up it has been suggested in the past that we could be heading
to become a third world country.

Wobbles,

I also don't remember anyone promising not to send anyone to the middle east or promising not to introduce IR reform.

http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/ipad/abbott-takes-gamble-on-integrity-card/story-fn6bqpju-1226078142774

An interesting article on wedging the independents:

"he is betting that despite their (completely legitimate) suspicions of being politically corralled, even they will not be able to disagree with the basic proposition that this Government's mandate to introduce a carbon tax is non-existent. Some observers will want to dismiss the national referendum as a cynical stunt.

They should be careful.

While clearly it represents a danger to the Government, it potentially goes directly to an issue much closer to the hearts of the independents - their own commitment to honesty and to genuine independence."

Which is basically saying that given the independents supposed commitment to independence and integrity, their refusal to support a plebiscite will weaken their claim to independence and integrity.

Julie Gillard,

From what I heard will be the next PM after the adds they are talking about on Abbott. His so called Christine values have annoyed some very wealthy people. No if Julie makes an election promise to Ban live exports she will rock it in. She wont have to do another thing . The adds showing Tony with screaming animals while he sings in Church will make people think. What type of PM do we want. Julie who stopped it- or Tony the hypocrite. I am sure if the PM listens to the people on just that issue alone she will be re-elected by a mile.
ALP with Julie Gillard as PM & I will bet my house on it.

Lexi “You seem to have overlooked the fact that the Prime Minister has to deal with a Coalition Minority Government and unlike a Majority Government where she would be obliged to keep her election promises”

I would have thought that is as erroneous as it is simplistic

Being a”minority government – aka “governing without the support of the majority political party”, would suggest she has a greater obligation to adhere to her election promises.

And simply being a minority leader is no excuse for lying and risking the crushing (as it will certainly be) wrath of the electorate
Julia seems hell bent on pushing the labor party back to a position it held in Menzies day (in otherwords the natural party of opposition)

Anyway, the liberals will reverse any carbon tax which this woman decides to foist on an unfriendly electorate when they kick her and her “partners in contempt “(of the electorate) out of the house of reps at the next election

“The Opposition is trying to confuse and intimidate the electorate for political gain.”

The only confision sseems to be among the diminishing few who support Gillard and the swill

Actually Lexi, the strategies of a carbon tax and other “initiatives” promoted by those presenting as a poor masquerade of government, is to push this nation back into the economic realities of more akin to something resembling both 17th century France and Zimbabwe

KerryAnne – I doubt your prophecy for – the last time I looked,

"The thinking electorate" (versus the dingbat activist fringe),

have more regard for their wallet (which holds the money they will keep without a carbon tax) and their Sunday lunch, than the source of the “leather” and “steak” it comes from.

It is Winter, A time for Coffs colds and flue.
Australia has been in a political winter for 18 months.
We are inflicted with a fast spreading almost Robotic Virus.
It gets in the the very basic reality section of our mind, and is spreading to our ability to see and understand.
Poor old KerryAnne, pushing her wheel barrow, unaware it is up side down and empty.
Col being himself, snarly passing for comments.
We have forgotten, Tony Abbott his team here, unlike my self, have not once, not in one post,seen past the fraud that is Tony Abbott.
We rarely have plebiscites.
I can not ever, EVER, remember the person calling for one EVER, saying if it is not the result I require I WILL IGNORE IT!
I challenge,yet again, conservatives to post a thread finding fault in your front bench.
In your third grade leader in the wandering away from your party's roots.

@ Lexi,
<< Unless we pull our socks up it has been suggested in the past that we could be heading to become a third world country>>

You’re joking aren’t you Lexi ?

The carbon tax will effectively impose additional costs on our industries, making them less competitive with their overseas rivals, many of whom though much dirtier and more dangerous than ours --- have ( unbelievably! ) been exempted under agreements like Kyoto.

No, there is more danger of us falling to third world status from some of the other keystone capers of our present govt than not having a carbon tax.

And how genuine can the Julia sets concerns about the environment be, when they introduce a rooftop solar scheme –but when it becomes * too popular* they scaled it back!

Who is playing politics, eh?

There should be no plebiscite on this question . There is no constitutional requirement for one as the Constitution is not being amended . If this Abbott demand is conceded , there is no reason why any Opposition cannot demand a plebiscite for any future proposal with which the Opposition does not agree .

Governments are elected [ even if they are in a minority in Parliament ] to make decisions which can be supported by a majority of the Parliamentary members . It is an abdication of responsibility for a government to seek approval through a plebiscite .
In California about 20 years ago , a " proposition " to amend their constitution was passed , so that there can be no tax increases unless the proposed increase is approved by a vote of the electors . As a result , law enforcement and public services are starved of funds and California faces bankruptcy .

Any proposed tax will always be unpopular and the shock jocks will inflame fear and resentment by enough voters to prevent it being approved .

It is interesting that reactionaries , like Abbott , never demand a plebiscite before Australian troops are sent to fight foreign wars and they did not have a plebiscite when 20 year old non - voters were conscripted to serve in the armed forces at the time of the Vietman War .

I am confident that the introduction of a carbon pricing mechanism will cause less damage to the economy than Mr. Abbott's continuous negative campaign of gloom and doom.

Mr. Abbott is creating in the community the perception that things are bad and people are afraid to spend.

Talking down the economy should be condemned by all.

Belly “We have forgotten, Tony Abbott his team here, unlike my self, have not once, not in one post,seen past the fraud that is Tony Abbott.”

When anyone considers the statement above and the lying, scheming fraud, which is this Gillard charade, passing itself off as “government”

I am reminded of a biblical quotation for Belly

Matthew 7:3

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

Regarding “Col being himself, snarly passing for comments.”

I would point out, I have managed to make comment on your post without attacking you in any way.

Following on from a recent thread where some questioned my manner of response I will point out that -

You could have commented on what I posted without the gratuitous addition of words like “Col being himself, snarly passing for comments.”

But instead of maintaining some level of respect for fellow posters you immediately get “stuck in”

Trust me Belly, if you want that sort of "combative" debate I am game for it

The point I am making is

For public reference and the observation of others, If I do decide to “respond in kind” it will be acting in “response” to what you have initiated

I suggest you do your very best and try and lift your game

Jaylex “It is interesting that reactionaries, like Abbott”

As a reactionary, I would point out

there is some merit in staying put where one is, when the future as promoted by “activists” is merely some socialist nirvana dream, without substance, which exists only “out there”, in the wilderness.

If you want to find it, do feel free to leave… but do not attempt to drag me with you

Well, I have to write something in defence of Julia , Not for a reason other than to name and target a truism ; -

I would not perceive any such notion here that anyone actually thinks that Julia has the soul monopoly control of pathological lying , and singularly mastered the art of Political Ledgermain to defend the public interest and treasury , or to further the welfare of a nation other than that which exist of the Political absorption to the State and Federal Bureaucracies , of the political competition and fractured Ideological to form one Whole State conglomerate, That be Their Chimera at societies expense while we rot in hell.

Check the State and Federal Salaries Bill; The Non Productive sector is costing more than the Productive can produce.

Of course They Lie and cheat, for if the truth was to be at the forefront and social interest was the actual goal , and not this abstract Machiavellianism to preserve political power and wealth that they never have an right to claim at any expence what so ever.

Julia is only acting as a representative of the Omnipotent STATE; So give here a break.

Col Rouge,

A carbon tax, if implemented now, and if accompanied by means to help
people reduce their carbon footprint, will undoubtedly cause some
transitional difficulties, but we have coped with bigger change in our time, such as the GST. It's easy to stir up fear of change, but deffering the inevitable change is cruel.

Ian McAuley wrote in his article (I've given the link previously):
"Tony Abbott's budget reply was visionary - a vision of Australia 10 or 20 years from now, left behind by the rest of the world, as we progress from prosperity, through economic complacency and finally into the torpor of stagnation - Asia's "South America."

"The essence of Abbott's economics is to sustain and expand the Howard government's middle-class welfare - which the Gillard government has done no more than trim a little - and to achieve a budget surplus raising taxes."

"Mathematically, that means there would have to be deep cuts in all other areas of government spending - health, education, transport, security and all those other public goods which provide material benefits and strengthen our economy. If we are to compete in a tough world we need to invest in education, public health, infrastructure, environmental repair and industry adjustment - but these public investments would be sacrificed to sustain the Howard-Abbott welfare system."

According to McAuley, Mr Abbott, "presented no policies to transform the economy away from its dependence on resource extraction, no plans to share more widely the returns from mining, and no more than a token investment in broadband which would leave Australia in the technological slow lane. While other countries live off their wits and
application of technology, we would live for a few more years of our depleting natural assets, using middle-class welfare to hide our economic decline. Few countries take such a foolish path; It's not dissimilar to the path taken by Argentina under the populist Peron Government, which saw a country that once matched Australia's prosperity slide into poverty."

That is a rather Hegelian view point Lexi; you assume the State runs the Economy; wrong, the whole Idealism that the State is the power is flawed in every aspect anyone of us can imagine.
The State – Governments produce nothing, it has to by compulsion excerpt and extract from the productive sector, and that is not a voluntary transaction;
You may well use word associations to France and its collapse, just as every other State in the world and its economical demise of today ; as it was both past and the same for the future, and it has one and only one common denominator that consigns the Social fabric to Retrogression stages and always is in the Egalitarian and Collectivism so named Governments along with Hegelian Banking systems , imposter term for Despotic regimes to put it more succinctly .
It is an all out attack on Economics and Individualism and private ownership ; and without that, you have absolutely nothing but ruins , and lay witness to that on a global scale.

Col may well not be aware he is so blind, quite true, a closed mind is not going to learn or under stand much.
First, as a life time ALP voter/supporter I dislike Julia Gillard.
In post after post ,on the day she took over,I said I did not trust her.
I also got it wrong, quite WRONG said she would govern well.
She has tried, often with far better policy's often bad ones.
Now Col and to be honest AUSTRALIA have like a fish left too long on the Bait, have taken Anthony Abbott's deliberate deception, [code for LIE] down deep in the guts.
Gillard me, you, no one knew a hung Parliament would be the result.
Tiny Tony [Little man in substance]Promised the world, oh yes he did!
To gain power, he held love ins with those he describes as traitors now, carrying gifts.
He KNOWS he UNDERSTANDS if his list hits the Medea his name is MUD.
And The Mad Monk understands a GREAT PROBABILITY EXISTS, AT THE TIME SHE SPOKE.
SHE NEVER KNEW SHE WOULD BE FORCED BY EVENTS TO CHANGE HER MIND.
True I who dislike the lady her personal support team think the lie is A VERY BIG CONSTRUCTED LIE that has proved you can indeed fool most of the people most of the time.
Gillard can you asure me you will restart the meat export trade or is my party about to install Bob Brown?
POWER BROKERS do you understand? life long ALP voters want war not back downs with our country's most despised party, still the greens but you are working on it.

Lexi.

There are few mixed up concepts that you repeatedly promote to make you case work. I’ll try to point these inconsistencies out, then we can re-run your case to see if it still works.

<< we won't know much about this debate until the policy is in action, implemented and working for nearly 6 months.>>

Not a clue where you get “nearly 6 months” from but we’ll leave that for the moment. At $25 per ton we will take about $11Bn per year out of the Australian economy. 10% has to be paid to the UN each year leaving about $10Bn. All the Tax will be collected from “polluters”, who will pass on all these costs to the consumer (us), some will be given back to some polluters, some will be passed down the supply chain which will also be passed to the consumers and some of the tax revenue will be paid to some of the consumers in the form of rebates for their increased costs because not one of the polluters will ever actually pay anything, they just pass it on.

This is a major economic reform and as such needs to be viewed against the proposed redistribution of GST revenues, the September tax summit, the mining tax and the health funding reforms. It is such a large change that the majority of Australian Tax payers want to vote on it.

A basic math tells us that 20 million Australians will carry $10Bn a year in reduced GDP. That’s before disbursements. Add to that $672 per taxpayer per year to cover just the interest on our government debts and it begins to look like turn the lights out.

TA said before the Plebiscite proposal, he would remove the CO2 tax if he becomes PM. The Plebiscite proposal is a political tactic and TA knows he can’t get it through, he never intended to. You are trying to create a contradiction where none exists.

An incoming government can easily remove the CO2 tax; all they have to do is reverse the process that put it there, simple.

All – your defense of Julia….
“Of course They Lie and cheat, for if the truth was to be at the forefront and social interest was the actual goal , and not this abstract Machiavellianism to preserve political power and wealth that they never have an right to claim at any expence what so ever.

Julia is only acting as a representative of the Omnipotent STATE; So give here a break.”

With those words of defense…
I would hate to see you prosecuting her… :-)

Lexi “but deffering the inevitable change is cruel.”

Then I deserve, indeed, insist on suffering the cruelty of lower taxes

and you can go off and contemplate your navel on another continent, Lexi.

“through economic complacency and finally into the torpor of stagnation - Asia's "South America."”

Assertive government regulation and higher taxation will never deflect an economy from stagnation,
Certainly the decline of UK economy has accelerated by the socialist government of Wilson / Callaghan propping up and protecting moribund industry which starved new business of both the capital and the workforce it needed for startup.
Indeed the only effect of higher taxation is to accelerate economic decline faster than a low tax regime.
For example -
Did you ever wonder why USA remains an economic powerhouse and USSR was an economic basket case – simple… higher levels of government intervention, where bureaucrats pretended they could regulate for success… (indeed the GFC, which started in USA was a product of bad government regulation which demanded Banks to Lend on affirmative action basis or lose their banking licences)

Alternatively, you could go look at the Aral sea, if you can find it….
Or look at the hole where Chernobyl once stood….

The USA had 3 mile island, the Japanese their recent nuclear problem… yet, as capitalist economies, neither suffered the devastation of Chernobyl and neither has degraded such a significant productive area, the way the collectivist bureaucrats incompetently ordered the destruction of the Aral Sea,

Like All said: you assume the state runs the economy, which is just another of the great lies of socialism

All – your defense of Julia….
“Of course They Lie and cheat, for if the truth was to be at the forefront and social interest was the actual goal , and not this abstract Machiavellianism to preserve political power and wealth that they never have an right to claim at any expence what so ever.

Julia is only acting as a representative of the Omnipotent STATE;.”

words of “defense”?

I would hate to see you prosecuting her :-)

Lexi “but deffering the inevitable change is cruel.”

Then I insist on suffering the cruelty of lower taxes

and you can go off and contemplate your navel on another continent,

“through economic complacency and finally into the torpor of stagnation - Asia's "South America."”

Assertive government regulation and higher taxation will never deflect an economy from stagnation,
Certainly the decline of UK economy was accelerated by the socialist government of Wilson / Callaghan propping up and protecting moribund industry which starved new business of both the capital and the workforce it needed for startup.
Indeed, the only effect of higher taxation is to accelerate economic decline faster than a low tax regime.
For example -
Did you ever wonder why USA remains an economic powerhouse and USSR was an economic basket case – simple: higher levels of government intervention, where bureaucrats pretended they could regulate for success (indeed the GFC, which started in USA was a product of bad government regulation which demanded Banks to Lend on affirmative action basis or lose their banking licences)

Alternatively, you could go look at the Aral sea, if you can find it!

Or look at the hole where Chernobyl once stood….

The USA had 3 Mile Island, the Japanese their recent nuclear problem… yet, as capitalist economies, neither suffered the devastation of Chernobyl and neither has degraded such a significant once productive area, the way the collectivist bureaucrats incompetently ordered the destruction of the Aral Sea,

Like All said: “you assume the state runs the economy”,

which is just another of the great lies of socialism

Belly your mind is not “closed”, it is “absent”

Dear All-,

I beg to disagree. As Bernard Keane tells us, "...Australia is a very
different economy to the one which focuses on industries dominated by the private sector. We're a very mixed economy with a very strong role
for the public sector..."

Health, education, transport, security and all those other public goods which provide material benefits and strengthen our economy depend on public finding. As Keane points out,"By 2020, it's possible nearly a third of all workers will be directly or indirectly paid by the State..."

"...the most significant aspect of the current shape of our workforce is the rapid expansion of the health sector, (due to an aging population) what it also reveals is how the State is the dominant economic force in Australia."

The following link may clarify things for you:

http://www.crikey.com.au/2011/03/22/australias-mixed-economy-why-health-and-education-reform-matters/

Dear spindoc,

Firstly Thank You for not stooping to personal insults in your response to what I wrote. I'm not an economist and I quoted
from an article that made sense to me. In reply to the points
that you've raised - I again will direct you to another article
that makes sense to me - to keep things in balance with what
you've read on the subject.

http://newmatilda.com/2011/04/11/why-carbon-tax-wont-cost-you-800

Col put the glasses on have another look at say your last twenty posts.
If you do not come here to verbally poke and prod no one does.
Verbal body Language, like body language its self, can not be hidden.
Your last two posts say VERY CLEARLY you are a bit flustered.
My mind may well not exist.
But mate! I would not swap it for yours for another hundred years of life and all the wolds Rich's.
Abbott ,today chanted and got his puppets to do the same, these words.
Sorry can not remember the first one, it inferred all promise/action democracy was the last part.
Democracy? is it democratic to request an 80 million dollar spend, on a plebiscite.
BUT SAY I will ignore it, if the result is not one I like Democracy mate it ain't!

Dear Lexi, since we have now embarked upon the road to mutual respect, which I do feel good about, I would like to try to add some value.

Firstly, did you note from my post that I expressly excluded any “impact to household” figures? I took only the gross Tax take based on the assumption of $25 per ton.

Two reasons of this, 1) there is currently absolutely no policy to support anything else and 2) modeling “nothing” is for people who have an axe to grind and want to impress those who are, well, impressionable.

I won’t comment on the link you provided to “newamtilda”, other than to say stop going to such sites, they are doing your head in, it’s not even good enough to be junk.

I know you are very well read and have lots and lots of information about “things”. A tragedy of today’s world I’m afraid, we have information overload. What is missing from most of this “information” is the context and relevance needed to turn it into knowledge.

Such information can at best make someone sound “plausible”, good enough for many, embarrassing for most.

I look forward to our fresh approach to things.

http://blogs.theaustralian.news.com.au/jacktheinsider/index.php
The comments that are part of this link are informative.
If we look back, to the week before Gillard took Rudd's job,few of us saw it.
In my mind currently both leaders are the wrong ones.
Abbott however stands on quick sand.
Gillard is up to her chin in very deep mud.
As our two Donkeys line up for the start of a race years away.
The first team to remember the fine cotton thing, a better race horse running under another name, if we See a race horse replace the donkey ,one side will be left floundering at the start, watch this place.

If you wish to have an insight to Political interventionism and political Economy Lexi, Just read some history about Europe in the late 18th and early 19th century; then produce a dissertation for peer review. I am sure you will understand when you realise some truths.
Economics is not a mathematical calculation that is accounting; Economics is Human Action, Social interaction and peaceful, political intervention and meddling with the natural social interaction only leads to a catastrophic disaster and immense suffering. War and Carnage, Just another Monopoly structure Governments are proficient at.
Government is not omnipotent; it cannot create a society, it is its destroyer lex

Dear Spindoc and All-,

Thank you for your advice.
As I stated previously - I do a great deal
of research before posting - and I cite references
that make sense to me. I'm sorry spindoc, that
you find "New Matilda," to be "junk." I prefer to
read all sides to any issue, and as I said - then make
up my mind.

The pollution problem is an exceedingly difficult one to
solve, for sev eral reasons. First, some people see
pollution as a regrettable but inevitable by-product
of desired economic development - "Where there's smoke
there's jobs." Second, control of pollution sometimes
requires international co-ordination, for one country's
emissions or pesticides can end up in other countries'
air or food. Third, the effects of pollution may not show
up for many years, so severe environmental damage can occur
with little public awareness that it is taking place.
Fourth, preventing or correcting pollution can be costly,
technically complex, and sometimes - when the damage is
irreversible - impossible.

In general, the most industrialised nations are now actively
trying to limit the effects of pollution, but of course the
populous less developed societies are more concerned with
economic growth, and tend to see pollution as part of the
price they have to pay for it.

Anyway, I feel that I have nothing further constructive to contribute
to this discussion - so I shall see you on another thread.

I listened to parliment today and tried to write down some answers that Julia responded to, I now know what she thinks of Abbott but I think she evaded every question asked her from everyone but her own party.

If shes not evading answers shes walking out, so much for being in control or is she leading by example.

Even if she had a plebiscite she will do as she always does to the Australian public...turn her back and walk away!

Shes willing to give $800 million for schools overseas but is willing to let Australians die through lack of affordable medicine.

We need to have an NBN at $40 billion which more than likely only the rich will be able to afford. But we need it because the rest of the world will leave us behind...UMMMM last time I looked the EU is falling apart, the US is in a recession that it cant get out of but NZ is booming...congratulations cousins.

Its not only her lying but its also her attitude to the Australian small working people that are being disregarded and are being undermined by the irrational activist groups wanting to set themselves up as minor political parties with unrealistic agendas.

Another real problem is that any government that gets voted in seems to think that they have a mandate to do whatever they want.

That is a false postulate Lexi, Government monopoly dictates now, and heavily cash in on Rubbish and unethical political pollution based on those false postulates, deliberately derived to suit a specific purpose to none of which are vaguely related to environmentalism , therefore such Metaphysical postulates not drawn from Fact and will not withstand methodological dualism , so it can only be detrimental to society and social interaction ,be in the principle matter that cannot withstand ratiocination and proper examination serves only one purpose and that purpose is not what Socialism postulates; to fund the Elites , and as History has also provided with facts , it be the causality of social retrogression.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/opinion/abbotts-plebiscite-call-a-serious-misjudgment/story-e6frg6zo-1226079507595
Every now and again The Australian our National news paper lets honesty get in the way of its conservatives bias.
This link,is a must read, if you intend to be informed on this subject.
It not just highlights Abbott's problems.
But more than any thing I have EVER posted should remind us all, some things said by some conservative contributors here are at best, uniformed.
In time, not just Gillard, she may well not be the first, will fall because of politics driven by any thing other than truth balance and our country's interests.
I look forward to the more aggressive conservatives posting in this thread giving their thoughts after reading the links.

Lexi,

These articles tell you what you already think. Both have holes you could fly a jumbo jet through.

Juliar has a promised mandate not to install a carbon tax. A plebiscite could give her the moral authority to break her promise.

While the link above, from the very heart of conservatism in Australia rebuts most things said here.
Gillard needs to know, Power Brokers need to understand, the cowering fools in my team need to know too.
Those defaming me as traitor too must confront this.
Australia is not responding to Abbott.
It is deeply hurt, insulted, and can not forget or forgive.
We elected Rudd, white Mr Clean, you let him dominate.
Gillard became your horse not ours.
I understand she did not know it was to be a lie.
You took voters for granted, never explained to them why she changed her mind.
Australia, will not hear now, she is branded liar, forever.
Cute, stupid, betrayal of my party by POWER BROKERS saying Rudd should go, undermine AGAIN rank and file feelings.
My partly, like a lout leaning on a lamp post out side a milk bar is waiting for the roof to fall on Abbott, it will.
But if it is today, if we are forced by events to an election my party's stunned rabbit it is will be smashed.
Get out and educate the voters talk to them understand them but to let power brokers ignore them, is my party private property?

Shadow Minister, come on mate you came here this morning, you did read the link.
Remember how you again and again said I never post them?
Stupid as it may be no one ever took the time to tell me how to do it.
I always had the information.
But you got it right,failed to prove it.
Bet you are glad you goaded me into it.
Now Mate! in your first post here, you said.
LABOR has lost all Credibility.
Bloke if you want to save yours,before researching, looking for cover, give me your thoughts on my link.

Belly,
You knw what, all the problems that Labor has brought upon themselves is because of left/green ideology. From the massive increase in immigration that Rudd announced first off to Gillards recent"I want to make Australians think differently about how they view themselves"

With the exception of the BER, which was just incompedence, everything else has been green/left ideological rubbish. The boat people debarcle, other green stuff ups and now the capitulation to the greens about the cattle live exports.

Seems you have been partly caught up in it as well, with your support for the global warming/carbon dioxide scam. With nature supplying 97% of the CO2 in the atmosphere and humans the remaining 3% can our increasing/decreasing such a small amount have any bearing on the CO2 mix? You know that we have no influence on some things, like tides and earthquakes, so why would we have any on the whole climate of the world? You are a practical bloke so give it some thought.

If you want Labor to rebound, get rid of the lawyers and academics and get more practical blue colors back to running things.

For my money Abbott was right originally when he said AGW is a lot of crap. He should have stuck with that and forget about a vote on it.

People have woken up to the sham.

SM,

A plebiscite could give her legitimacy? You're again pushing your
Party's line - which as you well know is simply a distraction that
Mr Abbott is using merely as a ploy. Because as he's made it quite
clear - he won't accept the results if the answer is in favour of the
carbon tax.

So let's look at what you're saying:

The PM should bring on a plebiscite (that's only an opinion poll), and has no legal standing, one that will cost - $80 million, and one which your party will not accept if voters vote "yes" anyway. Seriously - come up with a better script. This one's not working.

Dear All-,

You're entitled to your opinion.

Frankly, I'm so tired of the same old party lines. We're experiencing a crisis in leadership at present. Not so much because people lack the qualities necessary for it, but because we systematically invalidate such qualities. It's hard in today's world for a person to stand up in excellence and power within the public realm. There are myriad forces marshalled against doing so, causing a massive brain drain from the realms of worldly power. We must re-think our own attitudes about leaders or at the rate we're going we will soon have none of any substance

Banjo! big money, self interest, hill Billy's and uniformed stand on such rubbish.
Science is proved, any bush person able to read and write by now sees every day man made climate change is real, get the time to Read my link know you are reading the most conservative pro Rabbit paper in the world.
and that Abbott is on borrowed time.

At this stage in the negotiations, does it matter whether the PM lied or not. That has been dealt with very extensively in the past.

Mr. Abbott has stated it is not about climate change exists, but how we deal with it.

What is important is whether the government policy put forward is necessary and is the way to deal with the problems or are Mr. Abbott's proposals better.

It is time to move on for the good of Australia.

Belly,

I did read your link, but not before I had posted.

Paul Kelly is a respected political commentator, but this time while what he says about policy development is correct, he has missed the point of TA's request. The request for a plebiscite by Abbott is to wedge labor.

Juliar knows full well that she would most likely lose the plebiscite, and given her low credibility rating, this would effectively kill the carbon tax. If she refuses, then she is hiding from the people. TA knows full well that Juliar will block this at all costs.

According to the latest polling nearly 4x as many people believe that Australia is worse off under Juliar than better off. This is the area that TA will fight the next election, and will pin it on the carbon tax.

http://www.essentialmedia.com.au/essential-report/

SM,

That's fair enough. Fight it at the next election by all means.
However, in the meantime let the government get on with its job -
then the voters can judge things for themselves. Afterall Howard
was given 10 years. This government should at least be allowed to
finish their term in office. Much as Mr Abbott may believe that
he should be the PM - the fact remains - he lost. Get over it.

http://www.smh.com.au/environment/climate-change/climate-debate-appalling-20110621-1gdms.html
Sorry Banjo yes I did get needlessly rude.
It frustrates me, that so much expert evidence exists, is ignored see link.
Know the bloke is telling the truth
Understand many, coal for one, have much to fight for.
IF we use clean energy they , in time hold products no one will want.
Arjay could have a ball here, but is unlikely to, he takes your side.
But truth is we do have a conspiracy, right here self interest has conned half the world in to thinking like you.
Consider again, do not avoid the figures humans have grown from 1750 to our massive numbers,it took all that previous time to get to a figure we now double every 50 years.
We burn fossil fuels at a rate that tells us we just have to pollute this world.
I will never except the very real conspiracy has not turned people away from truth man makes climate change.
Climate change is dangerous.

Shadow minister apart from your view of Paul Kelly's bit I agree with every word.
It like every thing Tony has done, is a wedge and it works.
A majority think man is causing climate change.
But will not back Gillard.
In question time, Abbott was wedged too.
He was quoted,yet again, from 2009 before he became leader, he said basically oppositions need not keep policy's once they are in government.
Abbott is all wedge not policy's all Hippocratic no democracy, he openly made the blunder, he said he would not need to or would he, act if he did not like the result.
IF he was a leader,he would have not been so open about his whole move being a lie.
Kelly has him down to pat.
Flo Gillard did not knowingly lie at the time she said those words.
She, afraid of telling us the greens had sway,never told us the full story.
Sorry for her my party and me and you, but she let herself be branded liar and nothing can turn that around.

Belly, I know that the PM did not knowing lie. The Opposition are also well aware of that, but it suits them to give the impression that the opposite is true.

The PM did say there would be a carbon pricing mechanism which the PM has introduced.

What I say is still true, we are past the stage where it should matter. The allegations of lying have been discussed to death.

What is important is the legalisation that is being introduced.

Belly, Flo,

A promise is a promise.

If I promise not to do something, and then go ahead and do it, I have broken a promise and my promise is now a lie irrespective of whether I intended to break the promise or not at the time I made it.

Julia Gillard lied to Australia. It became a lie the moment she announced she was to impose a carbon tax.

This lie will haunt her every time she makes a promise. This will kill Labor next election.

Lexi,

The government is implementing bad policy. Why should the coalition sit back and let it happen? If Labor fails, the coalition is a shoo in.

SM,

That's interesting. However what "bad policy" are you referring to.
And has it been implemented so that we're able to judge it correctly?
If not then all the Opposition is doing is condemnation. What are they
offering in its place that's so much better? And what makes you think they're a shoe-in - when they're not providing any better alternative.
As anybody who works in a competitive environment knows - criticism is easy - however come up with better ideas and solutions or you won't be taken seriosuly and you will simply look like a troublemaker
or worse - a loser.

Flo I agree, however you will see shadow minister is continuing Conservatives slanted views on it.
Because it has worked,so very many, ill informed if you like, are now fixed in the view Gillard lied.
Look at our achievements, they are many.
Look to at Abbott's policy's they are bound for failure.
But Flo, as bad as Abbott would be,we must understand Gillard or who ever replaces her will/must bring in these laws a carbon tax on the way to ETS.
In ten years, trust me, it may even be far less ,Conservatives will embrace man made climate change and a system no different to pay for it.
So many past events suffered conservative Henny Pennyism,this is the end stuff, that another scare on their creditability is not going to be remembered by the next generation.
NOTE SM is both praising Paul Kelly and ignoring his best editorial this year.
It is conservative policy on every issue just say no, NO,

SM, a promise is a promise. There was also a promise to bring in a carbon pricing mechanism. Now if you feel that you cannot move on to the business in hand to day, that is your problem. We cannot stay in the past forever.

What is important is what we are dealing with today. There are two options out there. A price on carbon that is beginning as fixed rate moving onto a cap and trade. The other is Mr. Abbott's so called Direct Action, that does not appear to have any support from any experts.

we are long past worrying about whether a PM lied or not. Whatever you or I say or believe, we cannot change anything.

At the end of the day, whether we like someone or not is not important. It is what they are doing now that counts. Everyone is allow to make some mistakes, as we are all humans.

Maybe you are one of those very rare specimens of human being that is perfect in everything you do

I may be mistaken but John Hewson when he was leader of the Liberal party had great difficulty explaining the workings of the GST. He lost his leadership to John Howard. Going into the election John Howard with Tony Abbott's support (both on the front bench) promised there will be no GST if he were to be elected Prime Minister.
We all believed him we know what happened. What's the problem with Julia Gillard making promises to win an election?

Aquarius in regard to the GST Howard didn't bring it in that term. He took it to the electorate as part of an election policy at a later election. A change of mind is OK for the PM if she takes it to the next election as policy.

Howard on the other hand didn't take Work Choices to the electorate. Instead seizing on an opportunity to bring in what he had always believed we needed. That worked out well for him and the long term future of Work Choices.

R0bert

Belly,
You have a right to your opinion, but I will come back to you on AGW and in the meantime if you find PROOF let me know.

Right now you are busy arguing carbon dioxide tax with others.

Just remember what I said about all Labors problems coming from their failed crazy green schemes.

"A promise is a promise".

Except maybe when it's a "Non-Core Promise".

O'Farrell has broken a couple of "promises" already and nobody's calling for plebiscites.

Name a government that hasn't broken a promise.

The only things that are different about this is the hung parliament factor plus Abbotts strategy to destroy and make government unworkable so as to force an early election that suits him. Pine even admitted it on TV tonight.

If it wasn't the Carbon Tax it would be something else.

This is a just bunch of troll-inspired semantic twaddle.

Would you like me to upload some cheese to go with your whine?

We can know with good reasoning that the Sciences now that are expounding global warming are indeed Social Science;

It well shaped scientific thinking in the eighteenth century and today, and that is Dialectical Materialism; Atheistic Intuition; - Charles Darwin is one notable person.
Here is how it is done;
\Excerpt;
The peculiar principle of Hegel’s logic is the dialectic method. Thinking
Takes a triadic way.
It proceeds from thesis to antithesis, i.e., the negation of
The thesis, and from antithesis to synthesis, i.e., the negation of the negation.
The same trinal principle of thesis, antithesis, and synthesis manifests itself
In real becoming.
For the only real thing in the universe is Gist (mind or Spirit).

Matter has its substance not in itself.
Natural things are not for themselves (für sich selber).
But Geist is for itself. What–apart from reason and divine action–is called reality is, viewed in the light of philosophy;
No compromise is possible between this Hegelian idealism and any kind of materialism.
Yet, fascinated by the prestige Hegelianism enjoyed in the
Germany of the 1840's, Marx and Engels were afraid to deviate too radically
From the only philosophical system with which they and their contemporary Countrymen were familiar.
Audio file;
http://mises.org/media/5147/7-Dialectical-Materialism
And that in a nut shell is how it is done. The mind of the Progressives and Atheism religious doctrine. The science of ridiculousness molding your lives;

Rache,

Please list the promises that O'Farrell has broken.

Flo,

there was no election promise to bring in a carbon pricing mechanism, don't try and make it up.

Belly,

Please tell me what labor's achievements are. I can't see them, and according to the essential research polling, neither can the rest of the country,

Lexi,

Labor's bad policies
1 immigration
2 BER
3 Pink batts
4 fuel watch
5 grocery watch
etc etc etc.

Reading the SMH this morning, Labor's own research says exactly what I was saying:

"Gillard is seen as cold and untrustworthy"

http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/a-year-of-frustration-for-gillard-as-voters-refuse-to-forgive-and-forget-20110622-1gfky.html

"By overthrowing Rudd, she created an emotional starting point for public assessment. This was compounded by her broken promise - "there will be no carbon tax under the government I lead" - to entrench a dominant image of dishonesty."

No one trusts Juliar any more. If she leads the ALP to the next election it will be ruined.

Shadow Minister, take my word for it it is honestly true.
Every word and every intention in those words here is my truly honestly held view,not an attempt to fire you up.
I wish, my ALP younger people, could file away every single one, of your posts here.
A couple of other could be added to that list.
Some with time, could research EVERY major change the ALP in government bought in, compare the panic,the confrontation,misleading and false comments with yours.
Your posts once on file could be used to remind, country, Modern Conservatism is not putting plans for our future, not announcing policy's.
It rumbles in rubbish tip seeking dirt, lies , any deceptive thing to hurl at labor.
We built thousands of school Library's,you gave them flag polls.
Look read again the pathetic and sad,extremely so ,reply to Kevin Rudd's sorry speech,it mirrors Modern lost Conservatism.
Tell me, prove to me, the frauds committed in pink bats and Ber did not VERY OFTEN take place in the hands of EVEN LIBERAL BRANCH secretary's.
Look at your leader ,marching around SELECTED FACTORY'S one owned by former Liberal candidates or ,and it is true , the head of Abbott's election funding group.
Julia? are you fair dinkum mate.
the head of his personal fund raising group posing as a businessman about to be sent broke by carbon tax.
ACTORS RECRUITED TO LIE!
In ten years, it will be much sooner, your posts,your claims I am blind to Labors faults could,truly believe it,become the funniest Comedy this country ever produced.
Bloke room exists,without spin,without panic,without Mr Confrontation or Doctor No, to get stuck in to labor.
But, remember your words are here, said you will support a carbon tax BUT NOT YET!
You will live contentedly forgetting your words defending who ever leads you party for dumping their policy's and adopting much of the ALP,S
Shadow Minister lets not look back to John Howard, tell me of Abbott's claim to fame.
Tell me after he is thrown out,by his own party, you will not take on my views he damages Liberalism/Conservatism.

SM, you can cherry pick as much as you like and ignore facts that do not support your view.

PM Gillard in the same interview, where she said there would not be a carbon tax, went on to say there would a carbon pricing mechanism.

The conversation was about how carbon would be priced.

It is a prudent idea to read whole paragraphs, so what is being said is seen in context.

SM, it is time to move on.

Flo,

Sorry, Not on the pre election interview I saw.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KMVc0IbtyAQ

There is no doubt what so ever as to what was promised.

Labor supporters have tried to weasel out of it since, but no one believes them, or you.

SM

Gillard was not exactly ruling out a carbon tax either.

As Flo said, you are playing semantics here. Action on carbon emission was on the agenda, the means have altered is all - nothing that Howard didn't do with his core and non-core promises.

Take of the blinkers and take a real hard look at all sides of politics - no one is perfect. You are simply making yourself look foolish given the list of the many indiscretions of your Liberal Party.

Finally, the plebiscite would simply cost a sh1t-load of money and achieve nothing. Gillard's legitimacy will be established at the next election.

All this whining on about Gillards right to do anything is pointless

She and the Independents who were bought by the Gizzard-Vision of a dull and boring Australia, regulated and regimented

as prescribed by Marx and described by Lenin "The way to crush the bourgeoisie is to grind them between the millstones of taxation and inflation."

(not a good strategy for a nation where the majority are 'bourgeoisie')

Well Krudd Immediately ramped up Public Debt, which Julia is blowing out even further, to increase crippling Inflation and a fraudulent Carbon Tax adds the other millstone.

The Result - diminishing public confidence as reflected in the collapse of retail spending and dimiinishing tax revenues.

Gizzards and the Independents and the Greens are "Dead Men (and Women) Walking"

- as they know now and as will be confirmed at the next general election.....

all I wish to say is

Bring It On

Col Rouge, now there is a man of integrity, high moral standing, a pillar of society.

If I repeated what he said the teacher would have thrown me out of the
classroom.

Ammonite,

To quote:

"There will be no carbon tax under the government I lead."

That absolutely rules out a carbon tax. Did you watch the youtube clip I linked?

Watch that and then try and justify her lie to Australia.

SM

Missing the point as usual. Gillard is not the first pollie to go back on her exact words, however she understands the need for Australia to catch up with the rest of the world regarding putting a price on carbon.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/julia-gillards-carbon-price-promise/story-fn59niix-1225907522983

And, as you can see from the link above, she never ruled out taking some form of action.

Call it a 'very big tax' if you like, we need to start somewhere.

Even Howard had an EST in readiness, only Abbott doesn't appear to get it and neither do you.

You are just going to have to wait till the next election. Meanwhile you could think of solutions to the dwindling of natural resources, uncontrolled pollution and transition to clean sustainable industries.

Make a nice change from your one-eyed view of politics.

Ammonite,

The private interview Juliar gave to Paul Kelly does not obviate the promise she and Wayne Swan made to Australia on television. If she still had an intention to introduce a price on carbon, then she knowingly lied to all of us.

also from your link:

she said of the next parliament. "I rule out a carbon tax."
and:

"While any carbon price would not be triggered until after the 2013 election, Ms Gillard would have two potential legislative partners next term - the Coalition or the Greens. She would legislate the carbon price next term if sufficient consensus existed."

I.e, no carbon tax in the 2010 -2013 term.

She lied.

Ok, Shadow Minister and who lied about WorkChoices?
It's not that long ago and you should remember. And where is the culprit now? When the party told him to go he hung on for grim life and it took the voters to throw him out. From what I've read he's costing the taxpayers an annual fortune to keep him in the style of luxury. In the end when the time comes the voters decide.

Aquarius,

What lie? I must have missed where Howard pledged not to introduce IR reform. Perhaps you could point it out.

SM,

As you well know Howard introduced WorkChoices without a mandate after
the 2004 election.

I have the idea but not the skill.
Older posters may remember green bottle,very old very funny radio program.
Made before I was born but still being replayed.
A school setting bush school, funny think about this .
Want to be truly rich? famous? create an Australian legend.
Write a green bottle story call it question time,or the lower house.
Ten years scripts are already written for two rolls just take Col and SMs post history.
Ducking and dodging reality and truth in my mind see,s them look like Ballet dancers bare foot on broken glass.

Shadow Minister, workchoices, are you challenging me.
Right - Hyde Park, noon, swords or pistols.

Oh dear, I'm sorry, I missed the turn-off on the way to
parliament. an elderly moment.

Lexi,

Howard had made it clear he intended to continue with workplace reform. It is not necessary to spell out every policy prior to the elections to have a mandate. Considering that he was re elected after previous work place reforms would indicate that the continuation was not unexpected.

Juliar pledged not to have a carbon tax. Therefore she has a clear mandate NOT to install a carbon tax.

SM

Are you in agreement with Abbott to hold a plebiscite on Carbon Tax?

If so, do you believe that Abbott would uphold the result if Australia voted in favour of a Carbon Tax?

SM,

Not true again.

As you well know WorkChoices was much, much, more than simply removing unfair dismissal laws or some mild reforms. And Mr Howard certainly needed a mandate for what he was intending to do. It's hypocritical to blame Julia Gillard for what she's attempting to do with the carbon tact - when Mr Howard did the same with WorkChoices. No matter how you try to deny that fact - in this case it's -
pot-kettle-black. No one's fooled by it. Do your research - the full story was covered by The Australian.

Looking at the ABC word cloud about our leadership it is clear Abbott is unloved too.
Poor old SM heaves the shovel as fast as he can attempting to bail out the Sydney Harbor, convince any one, John Howard told us about work choices.
Work choices even surprised his front bench.
Election night 2007 saw some of them, rightly blame him, and work choices for the loss.

How did it get from carbon Tax to work Choices; or is the rejoinder that with a carbon tax then work will not be there to choose;

It seems to be funny in some way be it a theory , that some crack pot had the Idea in the 1909 German Economy to convert electricity into currency ;
As there was an Inflationary currency crisis;- And a political economy , we know what transpired over the next 50 years ; Well then , today our priestly elites have turned electricity into a form of political currency as well as now including, exhaled air C O2 .

Utilities are no longer a provision for building and expanding a economy , it has become ,again , the new currency cash cow methodology by predatory mean , By the state to plunder the economy and Individual production.

People seem to forget that there are three tiers of Government attacking, robbing and plundering the Economy at all levels with armies of Oligarchs and minions.
How long does anyone think it will stand up with the level of Stateisms political predation and interference .

Dear All-,

This may amuse you. There's a great little booklet called,"Political Pryorities: How to get on top of Australian Politics," by Dennis Pryor. It's tongue-in-cheek and quite funny.

Anyway, here's what he dedicated to Canberra. It's designed to be equally offensive to all parties:

Dedicated to Canberra
Where bureaucrats parasytical
And parties political
And Ministers hypocritical
Steal the money of the nation
Through what they call taxation.

Stuff the plebiscite lets have a referendum?

Belly,

I never said Work choices was spelled out. I just said that governments, have a mandate to govern, especially those with an over whelming majority. The only time they don't have a mandate is when they do something they specifically promised not to.

Julia Gillard and Wayne Swan lied to Australia. I know it, Bob Hawke knows it. Get over it.

MickC? what can I say.
Shadow Minister in the art of verbal combat certain moves or words signal just as a ww1 Semaphore operator did.
They knew how to read every flash from great distances away.
Here you flashes, getting away, as fast as you can, from your badly thought out leaders mishap is a form of surrender, you sir may keep your sword.

I don’t know lexi, it is always advisable to take on board Ideas; with reasoning we can expand or explode them; but I would think to name a new dissertation titled; “The Fundamental Principles of Ethical Science dispel the Mental Fundaments’ Unethical Principles and exploitation of the academy's and sciences”.
Any Ideas ?What do you think ? hheheh

I realise some will not quit understand the title. But we can laugh

SM "The only time they don't have a mandate is when they do something they specifically promised not to."

I strongly disagree with that. We'd all be better off if it was considered that they don't have a mandate for any major actions which were not put to the electorate which does not get bi-partisan support.

It's true that sometimes circumstances will change and the government needs to be able to respond but if it's that clear cut then either the main opposition party is likely to agree or it's time to give the voters a chance.

Keeping quiet about plans is is only a shade less dishonest than denying them.

Then we get Bligh and Lucas and the changes to petrol rebates, sale of public assets etc. Apparently they were sure the economy wouldn't need any of that going into the election (GFC was already well underway) and discovered shortly afterwards that they would have to make some big changes.

R0bert

Robert,

Three years is a long time, would you like a plebiscite every time legislation is required for a new situation not anticipated at the elections?

The party's track record and core beliefs is what they stand on. Election promises are the key focus areas for the next parliamentary term.

The PM has never denied saying the words, that many accused her of lying. There is no evidence, she did not due to circumstances, she changed her mind.

The same cannot be said of the lies and misinformation that Mr. Abbott is uttering every day.

"We're going to get there through a path I didn't expect during the election campaign of a fixed price period for around three to five years," Ms Gillard said.

"So yes, the route to the objective is different.

"When I said those words in the election campaign I didn't mean to mislead anybody and I understand that people heard those words and they look at what's happening now and they perhaps say: `What's going on? What did she mean then? What does she mean now'?"

Ms Gillard said Opposition Leader Tony Abbott would say anything to scare Australians about pricing carbon......
Ms Gillard said Opposition Leader Tony Abbott would say anything to scare Australians about pricing carbon.

"Tony Abbott is out there making ridiculous claims day after day about job losses, about price increases," she said.

"He doesn't care about the truth in this debate. The claims he makes are false.

"It's part of saying to the Australian people: `Actually, you the Australian nation, you're not up to reforming. You're not up to grappling the future. You're not up to this. Be afraid. Stay with me in the past'," Ms Gillard said..."



http://news.ninemsn.com.au/national/8264932/i-didnt-mean-to-mislead-on-carbon-pm?cmp=nl_news_24june2011_9&mch=newsletter

Flo,

Watch the clip where both Juliar and Wayne Swan categorically state that there would be no carbon tax.

Swan goes even further claiming that it is a hysterical campaign by Abbott that labor is intending to put a price on carbon.

Abbott was right again.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KMVc0IbtyAQ

Dear All-,

Your dissertation would have to be more than just a title. Your hypothesis would have to have some substantive backing before it got approved and given the go ahead. Sounds a bit too complicated for my taste - but if you're prepared to do the hard work - go for it.

I thought we were a democratic community, but it seems we are only obliged to be democratic once every 4 years.

This issue is important to all of us, our palimentarians are divided and some are even gagged by party lines.
Surely this is of such importance that everyone must have a voice, but it seems that most of the people are to stupid to make up their minds and must be ruled out, nearly everybody nowdays is interested in whats going on because we have much more information at our fingertips,computers,TV,newspapers to name a few, not like a couple hundred years years ago when communication was by horse and cart.

If issues come up that are devisive then why not have a vote every time?

It seems to me that the technology of the world is advancing but the political system is still stuck in the past, it needs to move forward so that we are capable of ALL having a say without it costing millions of dollars to do it or spending millions of dollars to force feed the point of view of the government.

AHHH, I see the problem, It would also mean that the politicians would have to be more open and have freedom of information available so that free decisions would be able to be made.

Someone earlier suggested a conscience vote.

If Abbott was sincere he'd support a conscience vote on carbon tax by all parliamentarians.

Nah, $70 Million plebiscite instead - guess he learned the word 'plebiscite' at Oxford. I can dig that.

:-P

SM, surely the matter has been done to death. You cannot by any imagination say that Mr.Abbott's word can be trusted. You could go back years producing videos where he has been caught out lying.

It is up to you what you believe. Some do believe she changed her mind.

What is important is whether the proposed policy is what Australia needs.

Why you are continuing your obsession with the alleged lie, the rest of Australia has moved on.

Well, Well,
What a bunch of armchair politicians.
Just like the Media, which, incidentally, think that their opinion(s)which are usually incorrect, should be taken up by Government and other Politicians we have the misfortune of listening to nearly every day.
It is surely obvious that we have a new PM, and like all other newbies we should cut Julia (NOT JULIAR) a bit of slack.
I am sick of listening to "Show pony Tony aka Misogynist" and Christopher Pyne bleating about (and I quote) " The Liberal Party's job is to bring down the Government)....what a load of BS. The Opposition (on either side of politics, no matter which side forms Government) is there to place checks and balances.
I am glad that Tony Abbot and his cohorts are behaving like spoilt little 5 year olds, it can only serve to enhance the Gillard Government.
Surely someone 'out there' has re-neged on a proposal, Julia Gillard would certainly not be the first. EVERYBODY has the ability and right to change their mind. A carbon tax IS a good thing, and users SHOULD PAY...I live in Western Australia, which has become a mining field for big Companies (some of them from other coutries) why should they be exempt from a carbon tax.
Politicians cannot please all of the people all of the time...give the incumbent government a fair go.

Flo,

Really, where has Abbott lied, made a promise and then backtracked on delivery?

Abbott is far and away more trustworthy than Juliar. I heard her this morning claiming not to have meant to deceive anyone.

Noisy..., they used to be core and non core promises.

I still do not understand what SM is obsessed about. The PM has not denied she said it. The PM has said she still does not like a carbon tax, but it is the only way to get to a preferred carbon pricing mechanism.

This is what we now should be debating.

SM, I have come to the conclusion that you are unable to debate the climate change proposals. You are left with the only option of attacking the person.

Noisy Scrub Bird welcome, and while liking your style do no blind your self, Flo you too.
Now Gillards polling with not turn around because we want it to.
she willo not be re elected by the votes of ALP forever types like me.
Australians don't hear, have no intention of every hearing , she told no lies, she did not but such is life.
Look the other way if you wish, I do at Abbott.
No worse fool liar person ever lead his party.
MickC bloke John Winston Howard is on record saying plebiscites are unneeded.
Abbott is on record, yes he is ,saying disruptive oppositions are wrong.
I vote for a party knowing its full stated plans, its DNA its likely moves and except that.
I unlike many know the policy's and intentions of the other side.
Recently, like one third of my fellow travelers voted conservative in NSW to unseat my party,represented by slugs grubs and failures.
80 million dollars for a plebiscite are you aware it would be the same for a stand alone vote as you call for.
80 million dollars , how many times in 4 years.
80 million dollars! how much difference to aged care, or pre school care,maybe health, or we could build housing for our first people.
Housing for street people, NA, just like Tony the show pony wast it while screaming about our deficit.
Tony Rabbott must/will fall he lacks policy and substance.

OK Shadow Minister,

Here's a quick broken O'Farrell promise off the top of my head -

They promised to re-open Gulgong Hospital (without checking the facts) but then backed down after the election when it was found there was a Workcover issue which would cost a bit more money to fix.

They offered to build a multipurpose centre instead and would gladly take credit for that decision.

However, these are funded by the Federal Government.

Then there is the matter of seat belts on country school busses. Many urgent assurances given before the election but then such matters are dropped into "let's form an advisory panel" limbo afterwards where they are left to fade away and die.

Politics is "a strife of interests masquerading as a contest of principles".

It amazes me that you think that only one side is free from the same disease.

As long as they have loyal footsoldiers to out and do their dirty work for them, they will never need to change.

SM,

In answer to your question about where Tony Abbott has lied, backtracked with the truth and so on...

The following may job your memory:

http://www.crikey.com.au/2010/05/18/tony-abbotts-struggle-with-the-truth/

Pot-kettle-black.

http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/times-up-for-teardown-tony-20110624-1gjiv.html
Both sides will be both happy and unhappy with this link.
I am content,this paper is fast becoming our country's best.
And I find truth in every word for and against both party's

A mechanic said me, you’re car is heading for a catastrophic failure and you need to do something about it quickly because it is a risk to you and everyone else.

How do you know?

Because we have done some modeling and all these mechanics say it is true. And here is a list of celebrities, journalists, academics and politicians who share our view.

But what do they know about automotive engineering or computer modeling?

Well nothing really, but they do believe us.

I question the opinions of so many unqualified people on such an important matter, perhaps I should get a second opinion?

There isn’t one. 90% of credible mechanics agree. A second opinion isn’t necessary, you can believe us.

But what if you’re wrong?
We can’t be wrong, there are too many of us. You are a denier.

Hang on, all I want is a second opinion.

There are no second opinions, all the other mechanics are charlatans and radicals. All the mechanics we speak to are all “credible”. You’re a flat earther and a criminal.

What about Yellow Pages?

They are not real mechanics because they are funded by the Big Automotive Companies.

But isn’t that what mechanics do? Work for automotive companies?

Well our mechanics work for government funded research programs and political institutions. That’s what makes them so trustworthy.

So they get paid and funded by the institutions they are researching for?

Well yes.

But aren’t their conclusions just as compromised as the mechanics working for automotive industry?

Of course not silly, ours are independent mechanics and they all agree.

Why can’t we get an equal number of some of your mechanics and some of the others to thrash this out?

No there aren’t any others worth listening to; consensus says it’s going to happen.

So how many mechanics are there?

It’s 90% of the”credible” mechanics, Dummy.

But there are more than 30,000 motor mechanics who have openly challenged or written papers of dissent aren’t they all “credible”.

Of course not, otherwise they too would agree with us.

One more for a tattoo Julia.

Spindoc read the link above.
It knocks the legs from under both party leaders.
And makes a lot more sense than I can out of yours.

What is the point of a plebiscite if Tony Abbot is going to ignore it should the majority vote YES.

These Abbott political stunts are really wearing a bit thin. By all means have a plebiscite but don't waste millions of dollars in administering it if the response is going to be ignored if it voters don't tick the 'right' box.

Abbott's view about democracy is it is great when everyone agrees with me. Perhaps his minders need to take him aside after sorting out their own Liberal Party leadership problems (described by Minchin as an act of treachery re Reith,Downer & co) and explain to him what a hyprocrite is.

I would argue pelican; what is the point at all?
If it is only a consensus that it is man made Global warming that exists, and any sound Utilitarian Rationality is avoided at all costs, because Public opinion says it exists, not due to any actual rational science, but emotional charged and Statism’s monopoly over the education system to fabricate more in abundant demagogic supports through generations of Moral and ethical conditioning ; that in a democracy , that is nothing other than Public derived despotism ; and already we have some segments of society who are expounding violent action against the dissenters and Capitolist pigs ; the Heritics of such an Pan physical rehlm of Ideology.

So, even if in the near future; a Plebiscite existed to be asked of the question , on what to do , or how to liquidate , or something that already been expounded to date ; “Gas the dissenting individuals “ ;

Then you would agree that we are no longer dealing with Rational Ideas or rational minds ; But it be Public and political opinion despotism;
And that’s a great democracy?

Majority rule is a political Myth that implies a Devine Sovereignty rule over mankind ; and you can see some great holes in the argument already.

Shadow Minister great postings. Enjoy reading them. They are an excellent source for material at the Comedy Club. Some people get enjoyment out of the humour.

Aquarius

I needed that. As one does on a Monday morning.

Hi Flo,
Tony Abbott is one big lie, sorry, but he has lied about many things,
and on the odd occasion has admitted to it.
The man is not a politician, and never will be. Politics, in my view, is one big game to the so called Opposition "Leader" (and I use the term 'leader' very, very loosely.)
Good Lord, why am I writing this, my parents' always told me NEVER discuss politics and religion in public, as both subjects can incite much dissension on two very personal subjects.
NSB

The only ones worried about a carbon tax are the well to do soles, which is quite reactionary.

No Tony Abbott is one big fat skinny liar imop. I have never voted labor in my life but i am about to.
IF the PM wakes up to the fact 90% of her Ministers staff a5re useless & as well a few of the Ministers & cracks the whip I think shes going to make a better PM because shes still a better person.

The public know she did not lie & that shes dealing with the others.

Its not ALL her call.

Whatever it takes we dont want Tony. John Howard was able to at least have a feeling for the people.

Tony-- well I dont think hes got feelings for much other than himself being PM. So next elections I back Julie but hope she dumps some of the buggers working in ALP offices especially the Minister for aggs staff.

All
My post was not arguing for or against the plebiscite merely pointing out the waste if the voice of the citizens is to be ignored. It feels a bit like the two referenda on ACT self-government, each time the majority vote was NO but the plan was imposed and forced on the populace anyway.

Any plebiscite on a Carbon Tax would have to provide enough detail and options for it to have any real value. I don't agree that the question should just centre around Yes or No for Carbon Tax without any detail about how it is going to be implemented; and without providing evidence that the model will work.

Wish Carbon Tax would be called Pollution Tax - its not just about carbon.

Amonite "Wish Carbon Tax would be called Pollution Tax - its not just about carbon."

no it is about the government sticking its hand deeper into the discretionary incomes of private individuals to misdirect more resources into socialist fantasies and the artificial economic levelling where some sectors of the population will be forced to pay more tax, becuase they can be bled more, whilst others receive more "effortless" benefits, simply because they are incapable of applying productive effort for themselves...

If Gizzards is honest about it, she is simply employing the same economic philosophy that Lenin employed against the Kulaks in the early 1920s....

except Gizzards lacks the political majority (well she is a minority government, supported by "independents" and which is rapidly falling apart at the seams)
but she lacks the political majority needed to adopt some of Lenins more drastic actions

and that "despotic" risk is why she and the "watermelon" greens will be history come the next election.

There are a couple of things that are crystal clear from the polls:

1 - A carbon tax is deeply unpopular.
2 - The vast majority of people believe that Juliar promised no carbon tax and broke it.

Juliar's latest attempt to cover up her lie by claiming that it is a carbon price not a tax, in spite of previously referring to it as a carbon tax is not helping, as very few people are that stupid to swallow her revision of history.

Juliar needs to sell this tax if she wants to retain any shred of credibility. Otherwise this is simply perceived as a "bait and switch" tactic to push through a policy that the people don't want and didn't vote for.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/commentary/last-chance-for-gillard-to-earn-some-respect/story-e6frgd0x-1226090128180

Now that Juliar has successfully begged the networks to grant her some time to address the voters, lets see how she tries to justify her lie.