What is it with the Labor and Liberal party on this issue. They can not work together and thus fight who has more testorone than the other.

As Labor has said from the start we ill tear up AWA's.

Now it is very indepth and must walk carefully and that is why we have a 3 year transition.

My question is

If Labor was just going to tear these up, they must have been incompetent to the issue and it was an exercise to generate membership, for not only Labor but the unions as well.

On the other hand Labor is just lying and has full intention of keeping AWA's.

So what are your veiws and thoughts.

I would like to mix a few facts with my thoughts Tapp, I recommend it as a worthwhile start to posting.
AWAs they exist in many forms , the higher skilled and more needed employees are doing quite well under AWAs.
It is unlikely no matter what pre election talk takes place that they will not continue to do so even if the document has another name.
At the other end of the scale are the children and wives of these and other workers.
Taken into offices and told to sign it now or no job.
Doubt it? you must not it is quite true, so very many have been sacked for not signing a document they had no part in drawing up.
AWAs have some future for some in whatever name they are given.
I hope and believe it is Labors intention to scrap forced AWAs.
Another impact ,not the only one but a big one is the extra work and extra hours at work bought about by AWAs.
The ACTU tactic of highlighting very real damage to our family time is fact.
Country fire brigades can no longer get a crew at fires and road rescue teams are not always finding full crews.
Kids can not join sports unsure if mum or dad can be there for transport.
AWAs are a factor in undermining family life.
You overlook the fact this campaign about workchoices is a community one not just unions or Labor.
If you are an Australian peoples party you should consider including fair go mate policy's anti workchoices is about that alone.

So many people think once a poster openly say what party he is from much of what he/she says is biased.
And a constant flow of anti union stuff is forever going to be a part of any forum in our country.
It is much harder to get debate about those who are in fact unions for the other side, like the H R Nicol's society and so very many more.
For ever trade union a shadow group exists to defend conservative and employer views.
And no halos for unions, some union actions, clearly not all unions are dreadful.
But some hidden conservative groups are no less than criminal in their intent.
My personal views of 30 years from now sees a lot less unions but strong active ones.
A national system of IR that works fairly.
One that is used by unions and company's to resolve issues without needless war.
The strangest thing is right now we do not have the wars most unions and bosses work well to resolve the issues.
the Medea is uninterested in the good outcomes and some of the public are unaware of the other unions existence.
Tapp unionists are not unlike you just Aussie workers not a black enemy of truth.
Is it too late to again ask conservative Australia to debate the needless miss use of a mandate that was never for workchoices by workchoices?
Is the loss of government not about to be an outcome of John Howard failure to understand the Australian workforce?

Belly i have already posted The Australian Peoples IR policy unlike Labor

And since this is The Party for the people we have given choice.

If you even bother to read it I do understand but you cannot see that.

So while you are argueing with me get rid of the spin and answer the question, or is that too hard due to you dont know.

www.tapp.org.au

If I have freely and voluntarily entered into a contract with an employer or someone else for the purposes of providing my labour or services what right does the gang of commo thugs have to tear up this contract. My right to contract is no different to any PERSONS right to contract and that is exactly why this policy, NOT LAW, has been implemented.
If a person has been unlawfully coerced into entering into a contract that causes them financial detriment then that is an offence but the commos are smart enough to identify the procedures to deal with this conduct.
Both the gangs of criminals who wish to rule us like slaves will not elaborate on our basic right to property and that is in relation to our VOLUNTARY obligation to pay income tax.
If you and your family have been caused financial detriment and feel that it has been caused by this government's IR policy you should consider revoking the VOLUNTARY agreement (contract) you entered into when you applied for your tax file number as both of these ruling criminal gangs have changed the terms and conditions of that contract and nobody has objected to the various changes.
The simple answer is to advise Mr Michael D'Ascenzo the Commissioner of Taxation that the Tax File Number previously issued to you is no longer available for use by him or his office. That is that he is no longer permitted to use the number in connection with your identity, to store or maintain a record of it or to divulge it to third parties and that any attempt to use this number in a manner contrary to section 8WB of the Taxation Administration Act 1953 shall be dealt with according to law as it then becomes an offence.
If this ruling gang has caused you financial losses then recoup these losses by revoking your voluntary tax paying obligations but don’t bother asking the gang of commos they don’t want us to know anything about these policies or laws.

Young Dan your post does you no credit, commo thugs? are you sure you think like that?
My union born in the Australian bush is far from left and commo? about 2% at the most Australians could be called that.
The extreme left are as much my enemy's as Howard and in truth few in numbers.
Get your head around this some good honest workers can not even read and write.
Some would be too afraid to sit in an office with a boss and talk out an AWA.
And young Dan tell the increasing number of bosses asking us into there workplace to help them out that we are commos.
insults like those you throw around question only your understanding of the world.
It is my personal view that trade unions need not be very left to get the job done, that the extremes will fade away in time.
But that workers rights to be in a union will exist forever.
On the night Australia sends Howard into retirement your name will be among many that make me smile.
Filed under lost in space views.
Tapp if your party wins one seat in any poll I will be your servant for life.

belly i dont want you as a servant

the quetion belly

did the labor and unions lie to the people about tearing up the AWA's

Or are they just incompetent and do not understand the complexity

the truth should always win
and doing the right thing

www.tapp.org.au

Belly, I was not looking for any credit and there are plenty of commo thugs ruling us like uneducated slaves in Qld. Puppet Beattie and is gang of dishonest thugs are a perfect example.
A person's right to be a member of a union or an association is also an absolute right of choice and it is no different to his right to property so why doesn't your union advise its members that they also have this right to their property and that their tax obligation is only voluntary or cant you read and understand the legislation either so you not only pay money (your property) to the union (labour party) but you recommend that it also be paid to the other gang of thugs as well. As for election night it wont matter either way as I have removed myself from the electoral roll because I don’t consent to being forced to vote for any of the grubs that these gangs preselect for representation in the so called Parliament for the people. As for Howard going into retirement, I am doing by best to see that he retires behind bars along with some of his cronies that I no longer provide funding for. The local mafia and corrupt legal profession who control our parliaments and the pretend Qld Courts are next and I can assure you my understanding of my back yard is far better than my understanding of the rest of the world of which I am not much interested in. If we can't trust the elected members, the highly paid public servants and the so called judicial system then it will be dealt with eventually by what ever means required and not necessarily by me either as there are many who have seen through the illusion provided by both gangs.

The personal views each of us hold are not always right, the idea that the Labor party is commo, comes from an era that is long gone.
While my views are just that, not those of my union or my party, this is what I think is true.
In the 1940,s and 50,s many within both movements thought communism was something other than what it is.
It never ever was the friend of workers, it hurt them all over the world.
Today both my union, always an open enemy of communism, is called weak by those who can not match its service to members.
This is because of far less warfare in the workplace and a middle of the road policy, shared by its members.
Commo is a mindless chant if applied to the ALP or my union.
The ALP is constantly charged as being too Liberal like, often by greens who are in fact trying to influence ALP policy.
New Labor is a concern to true left activists they ,very much like those who constantly refuse to see Labors election victory's in every state for what it is.
Voters, more of them vote for Labor in its position near the center than any other party.
Do not look for reasons to decry Labors success, ask why the conservative failure.
Tapp understand why Labor is in control of every state, if you can not do that stop wasting your time in politics.
AWAs are in some cases chains no less than slavery, surely my detractors will agree some are far more able to negotiate one than others?
And surely imposed ones are more likely for the under skilled than others?
Tapp do you have no compassion for low income Australians?
And is your understanding of politics so poor you think I a rank and file member can make party policy's here?
Your enemy's appear to be both major party's? can you say in truth over 88% of voters know less than you?

It is nice to see other opinions about awa's
such as the highly skilled do well with awa's.
What a discovery.
The problem is that the less skilled, who incidentally are the bulk of any countries work force, need protection.For this reason the first half of the 20th century, laws were put in place to protect the weak or bulk of the work force.
When a young person is told what he has to do,and roughly what hours he will have to work.
If the young person is brave he will ask how much he will earn and if he is really brave, when will he be paid, but this question is seriously risking the chance of employment as most employers consider the last thing a new employee should ask is when he will be paid.
This scenario is fine if the young person can run to a union when he is dismissed after two weeks of working and told to go home as he is not wanted.
He can be instantly dismissed for asking for his pay.Yes, a fact in our current employment climate.
Most of the correspondents to the forum have the misguided view that the workers are lazy,incompetent and if you work in a mill or on the factory floor you deseve to be treated with contempt.
Unfortunately for most Australian workers, they cannot negotiate a package as most law students,scientists and the other professionals are able to do.
The seats of our State and Federal parliament are littered with the smart talking people who have children able to call on their parents network of skills to ensure that their young ones are never cheated by the employer out of a few weeks wages.
Workers are asked to work on Friday, Saturday,Sunday nights without even a days warning with no avenue to complain.
How many lawyers accountants or other professionals would be willing to work for low pay from 6pm till 6am.I fear very few.
Doctors are of course the exception ,they are trained and well paid to work odd hours in the course of their occupation.

the question belly

or is this way to hard for you to tell the truth

did the labor and unions lie to the people about tearing up the AWA's

Or are they just incompetent and do not understand the complexity

the truth should always win
and doing the right thing

www.tapp.org.au

Stu

You are being a little mischievous, Labor has stated that there will be no new AWAs and existing ones will be phased out in 2-3 years.

Having read your IR policy just how do you intend to "Amend Australian workplace agreements" ? Would these amendments be phased in? How long would the transition process be?

The amendments would be immediate, as soon as passed by legislation.

That quick.

www.tapp.org.au

I like your post Brock and Steve's question to Tapp is a valid one tapps answer? evasive.
I as most know am a union official, and I think I bring some basics to the job.
One of 16 kids my education was mostly after I left school I consumed books and the printed word still do in fact.
However my parents put the most important education in me ,nothing is for free get a job work well, stand up for your rights.
In this my current job I am invited by some of south east Asia's biggest construction firms into offices to settle issues up front.
But walking in to a shop with 5 under paid workers full of fear is near imposable.
Workers are not the enemy and it is a dreadful slander to insult them as union trouble makers.
In fact many have never voted Labor in their lives but stay union.
Last week I drove a 12 hour return journey, why?
Members had been told on arriving at work each day they must wait one and a half unpaid hours to be drug tested them one hour that night unpaid on top of ten hours worked!
What is so evil about the union fixing that problem? about back pay won by the union?
My proud union is no enemy of bosses who treat workers fairly but forever opposes grubs!
One grub had the power to make a fool of himself and he will never turn into a butterfly.

Hey Belly that is wrong

And to Steve your answer

Labor stated that it would tear up all AWA'S when getting into power
and also its called policy, all you have is talk and spin nothing more.

So Belly scared off being expelled by the party if you answer my questions.

As a union man that you are your respect for the workers should be beyond question so why is it you cannot or will not answer.

Also as being the son of a union secretary for the ASE and also my father had been the president of the trade and Labor council in the town I grew, I would say I have great respect for the worker and also what a union should be doing.

So we can play tit for tat or you can answer as we the people wish to know.

www.tapp.org.au

Stu

You have still to enlighten me on how you would amend AWAs, does this direct quote from your stated "policy" mean scrap them? reinstate the no disadvantage test? make everything negotiable?

Your failure to answer this simple question may imply "unfinished business" in your IR policy.

It is quite obvious Steve that the simplicity of TAPPs policy may be too hard for you.

I would suggest re read it

Remember policy, this then has to become legislation and have stated what we will do.

I dont plan to give my policy to Labor on a silver platter.
It seems that those i speak to can read and understand what will happen.

I still have 2 questions un answered so when you decide to give me the same respect that i give you when answering you will get no more.

Answer my 2 easy questions then we can get on.

www.tapp.org.au

Sorry Stu, Maybe I'm a bit slow but I have re-read this thread and cannot find the two questions you are waiting to have answered.

If you would like to ask these questions again, I will be only too happy to answer.

Here you go Steve it actually was the first in this post
It may have been a bit poor on the question

stu

What is it with the Labor and Liberal party on this issue. They can not work together and thus fight who has more testorone than the other.

As Labor has said from the start we ill tear up AWA's.

Now it is very indepth and must walk carefully and that is why we have a 3 year transition.

My question is

1 If Labor was just going to tear these up, they must have been incompetent to the issue and it was an exercise to generate membership, for not only Labor but the unions as well.

2 On the other hand Labor is just lying and has full intention of keeping AWA's.

So what are your veiws and thoughts.

OK I think I found your questions: Usually a question has a ? after it.

"If Labor was just going to tear these up, they must have been incompetent to the issue and it was an exercise to generate membership, for not only Labor but the unions as well."

This is not a question and is based on a false premise that Labor is not going to ban any new AWAs, since Labor has categorically stated that there will be no new AWAs consider it answered.

"On the other hand Labor is just lying and has full intention of keeping AWA's."

See the answer to psuedo question 1.

All Labor is saying is that it will take 2-3 years to undo the mess that John Howard has made of IR.

Grasping at straws Stu, got 500 members yet? Have you nominated for a seat as an independent, bet you don't.

Soon the thread will slip away to that place threads die in, the lost thread heaven or is it hell?
However until the last day of this election campaign it will be very near the top of the list of issues.
Tapp you are being evasive and then saying it is me! you lead a party and make the policy's yet you can not answer?
I am a committed rank and file member waiting for our national conference to speak, surely a difference exists?
AWAs do favor highly skilled , and low income earners are often nothing less than victims of them.
Workchoices bought less strikes by bringing less rights, while our country sails in China fueled clear waters we can not see the full impact.
Tapp as the leader of a whole party can you say lower income for low income workers is good?
Can importing workers on lower than Australian rates of pay be justified?
Can we forever refuse to train our own?
Why miss use the worlds poor?
If we need workers why not bring them here forever on the right rates of pay?
The thread will slip away Aussie fair go must not.

had enough off you two playing around

THE PROBLEM

Labor stated they would tear up AWA'S when they got in
Labor has now stated it will be up too a 3 year transitional period.

THE QUESTIONS

1 Was Labor and the unions incompetent at beleiving they could just tear these up when they got in.?

2 Did Labor and the unions know they could not just tear these AWA's up.?

3 If Labor and the unions did know they could not just tear these up why did they LIE to the people.?

4 Was the stated fact off tearing these AWA's up as soon as Labor and the unions got in merely just a membership drive , and thus not only LIED to the people BUT ALSO acted in a fraudulant manner.?

Answer the question.
You are going on how bad they are, and this will keep going until the election.
So this doesnt negate either from these points to be answered, unless of course you are too scared off being expelled.

www.tapp.org.au

Stu

What Kim Beazley actually said was "I will tear up Howard’s extreme industrial relations changes".

So it is you that is being untruthfull.

IF Labor win the next election one of the first things done will be to tear up the governments IR legislation.

If you care to check your facts the person who has been saying "Kim Beazley says, We're going to tear up AWAs." Is none other the Jovial Joe Hockey.

If you wish to spread falsehoods at least do some basic reserch and get your facts right.

You have no idea of the truth
what date did Joe Hockey say that

Now answer my questions

www.tapp.org.au

Stu.

It was on lateline, ABC TV, 01/12/2006 this is the first mention that Labor would tear up AWAs, made by Joe Hockey although Kevin Andrews did say something along the lines of "if labor are going to tear up AWAs what are they going to replace them with?"

Before and after this Labor has said it will tear up the unfair work choices legislation and remove new AWAs. Labor has never said they would tear up existing AWAs.

As I have said before, I cannot answer questions that are based on a false premise. You assert some kind of dishonesty in the fact that Labor has said it will take 2-3 years to get rid of existing AWAs but they have never stated otherwise.

This is a bit like "mass sackings" another favourite of the coalition but never actually said by any member of the opposition.

I cannot answer your questions because they cannot be answered.

"As Labor has said from the start we ill (sic) tear up AWA's": no they did not, Joe Hockey was the person who said it.

So the rest of your assertions are meaningless.

If you wish to keep spreading Joe Hockey's mis-information for him fair enough, but if you read your own IR policy it looks like your position is closer to the Labor party that to the existing laws.

Could it be you who has indulged in an exercise to generate membership?

Just so you understand.

LABOR HAS NEVER SAID IT WILL TEAR UP EXISTING AWAS

Tapp My voice is not raised I am not angry just amused, extremely so!
Labor said it would rip up workchoices not AWAs.
It will stop new AWAs, and use common law contracts but those AWAs still in force will only be canceled if one party wants to cancel them before the expiry date.
I am in fact going to keep a record of your posts your all over the shop record here may well be of interest one day, not in elections however.
Now my view not my union not my party my view only.
A national IR system is likely after an ALP win, basic minimum things protected in any contract or agreement like annual leave and overtime.
States may still have IR laws that are not in conflict with the national system.
Union membership will remain by choice.
Some review of training and importation of part time foreign workers may take place.
A stab in the dark? maybe ,what is your policy on imported workers?
AWAs? lowing wages for low income earners?
is there room in your plan for agreements based on productivity increases?
is productivity increases important in your plan?
do you think workers should have reduced income to fuel growth?
are some Australians less worthy of the good life than others?
Is the human race heading for trouble if wealth is our only measure of worth?

So lets have a look will rip up IR laws does this not include AWA’S
By Kim Beazley, Federal Labor Leader

The IR laws are a nightmare designed to control workplaces, desert the vulnerable, wreck family life and abandon decency and respect – and Kim Beazley's first act at PM will be to rip them up.
Date: 12 January 2006
• The first thing I’ll do as Prime Minister of this country will be to rip up these laws – all 1252 pages of them.
• And the second thing I’ll do will be to rewrite the laws to restore the rights of every Australian.

Belly I do actually agree with most of the ACTU’s policy but not all.
That will now sort that out.

LAURIE OAKES: Well let's talk about Labor's IR policy. The Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry wrote to you in August asking about your policy on Australian Workplace Agreements. Have you replied, and if so what did you tell them, what will you tell them?

KIM BEAZLEY: Well I'll tell them this, what I tell you and I tell any other Australian. Our view on workplace agreements - that's not the course we favour.

We favour collective bargaining and awards. We think that those give the right incentives for productivity changes in the workplace, those collective agreements that have been entered into since we put in place that level of flexibility in our workplace relations, and awards which give essential protections to people on things like penalty rates. That's what we favour.

We don't favour individual contracts, and we believe that if you properly protect collective agreements and awards against an ability of the AWA system to undermine them, AWAs will disappear and that'll be a good thing.

LAURIE OAKES: So you no longer subscribe to the policy Labor took to the last election, which was effectively to abolish AWAs

Stu

Unlike Belly I am getting angry, why did you omit Kim Beazleys reply "There'll be a million of those things in place when we come into office and you can't wander around cancelling contracts."

July 2006. Interview with Laurie Oakes from which Stu selectively quotes.

Have you already learnt how to mis-quote and bend the truth? Or are you well and truly out of your depth?

Now that you have pointed out another instance of the Labor party never ever saying they will rip up AWAs in fact your post gives even more credibilty to my arguement that Labor has never said they will tear up AWAs.

Stu, instead of asking for answers to your illogical assertions how about -

Sorry I was wrong, I got my facts wrong, I apologise.

I didnt mean to condocend you it comes down to words.

Now that it said the second thing was to restore rights to the workers.
Now how was he to do that, for those on contracts.

It also seems that the unions are having enough trouble with the labor party about ir reform, this can be seen on the actu website.

So the question still exists why do they require a transistion period.

Why is it that many seem to see the tearing up of IR laws inclusive with AWA's.

well i suppose labor would not have said anything different, why tell the people the truth.

www.tapp.org.au

In my view WorkChoices will be a thing of the past if just the right people are bothering to pursue JUSTICE!
Not until last week did I have time to read the 14 November 2006 judgment of the High Court of Australia, as I was busy finishing other books and have them published and now having started on my next book, due to be published next month about WorkChoices legislation I had to read the judgment.

Well, my book in Chapter 22 sets out why the judges went so of the rails and why there is no doubt by me that the decision will be overturned.

See also my blog http://au.blog.360.yahoo.com/blog-ijpxwMQ4dbXm0BMADq1lv8AYHknTV_QH

If I had been a Member of parliament I could have on my own prevented, using constitutional grounds, the amendment Bill (WorkChoices) to have even been put to a vote, as while it takes a majority to pass a Bill it takes only one person to prevent a Bill from being permitted to be voted upon using the correct procedure.

It is terrible that with so much suffering to many innocent people, even loosing their homes because they cannot service their mortgage, lawyers appearing before the High Court of Australia never bothered to appropriately pursue the case.
Even so I was not at Court and neither read their submissions, the High Court of Australia judgment makes it all too clear how narrowed the lawyers presented the case.

So, instead of winging about the problems with WorkChoice I spend the past week working on exposing what is wrong with the legislation as well as the Courts judgment. Now it is up others to use it and then have the judgment overturned.
Those who desire to have a copy of this Chapter 22 of my book can get it by email, at no cost, as such it is not some sales gimmick.

See also my website http://www.schorel-hlavka.co

I started a job delivering pizzas in 1996, before AWAs came in and was on a contract where I earned a certain amount per hour (less than $10) and a small amount per delivery. There was certainly no shift penalties or rates for working on weekends or public holidays. As a matter of fact, my boss would send home the 14 year olds early on a Sunday because they would be on double time and be earning more than me. I would then have to do not only my job, but the work of the people who were sent home as well.

So where were was Greg Combet then? The state labor government in NSW as part of their recent election campaign said that they were protecting workers rights from the federal government, so what was Morris Iemma doing back then? The conditions that I was working under are exactly the sort of thing they are campaigning against now, so where were they back in '96?

Now you may ask, why didnt I complain about this back then? Well maybe the owner/manager of the store was working longer hours than I was. Maybe the manager was there when the store opened at around midday and was still there closing up when I finished at 04:00am for 6 days a week, just to keep the store running. Maybe if the drivers were on different rates, the store would have closed and a lot of people may have lost their jobs. I mean isn't this the sort of business that the new IR laws were brought in to help?

Most of the people getting involved with protesting against the Work Choices legislation are not affected by it, and I would bet most of them wouldn't even know someone who has been adversely affected either. They either choose to believe the propaganda spewed forth by the ACTU, which ignores the new jobs created and the actual salary increases, or are just using this for their own political or personal gain.

Derick do you understand that trade unions are not Charity's?If that young man, you had rang this union official you may have got help.
Workchoices in fact outlaws a union official helping non union members.
And after lie ing about non members being paid up to help them out so very many times only to find they never join I agree.
AWAs are not a part of workchoices Tapp, they existed long before workchoices.
Right now this country is in crisis and workchoices plays a very big part in that.
Medea thumps Rudd on minor issues in an attempt to destroy his profile.
Howard's dirty half dozen drive the fight again fear of the publics thoughts on workchoices is driving election debate to new lows.
Tapp you must not adopt these tactics, time will pass and one day post workchoices and post a dysfunctional Medea we will look back in shame to these times.
How will this look after a new IR system put in place by Labor finds massive support in both sides of the IR debate?
Look at the polls Australia is not buying the lies ,workchoices or John Howard.
Conservative Australia do you really think some must go hungry so wealth can be created?
Or that some are more entitled to the good life than others?
Or that we can forever bring the worlds poor to our country use them and send them back to that poor life again?
Is wealth the only measure of our country's worth? or do we care about fair go mate still?

Now that you have pointed out another instance of the Labor party never ever saying they will rip up AWAs in fact your post gives even more credibility to my argument that Labor has never said they will tear up AWAs.

Stu, instead of asking for answers to your illogical assertions how about -

Sorry I was wrong, I got my facts wrong, I apologise.

Let’s see now it does seem that whilst doing research it was not Joe Hockey who said Labor would tear up AWA’S but Stephen Smith.

What I have also found is that Kevin Rudd has also said that he will tear up AWA’S but this seems like a back flip, rollover.

The question now is Kevin Rudd going to tear up AWA’S or are they going to phased out in the so called transitional period?

Who is Labor standing for the worker or business?

Belly it seems with a two party preferred polling system that who else can anybody poll. We know the polls are about Labor and Liberals and nobody else, so one can say it really isn’t the whole truth.

Now Steve It is you turn for research you have the names
How about sorry i was wrong
Sorry I was wrong, I got my facts wrong, I apologise.

www.tapp.org.au

Stu

You asked me for details, can you provide the details when Stephen Smith or Kevin Rudd have explicitly said they will tear up existing AWAs?

Given your last attempt to hide the truth by deliberately omitting the relevant part of an interview I will never believe you without evidence.

If I can verify what you say is correct I will apologise, but I think you are telling porkies again.

here we go steve

With this you will even find that they put up a billboard with kim beasley tearing up an australian workers agreement(awa)

MEDIA RELEASE
Stephen Smith MP Shadow Minister for Industry, Infrastructure and Industrial Relations
Member for Perth E&OE T51/06
TRANSCRIPT OF INTERVIEW WITH GEOFF HUTCHISON – MORNING PROGRAM, 720 ABC RADIO, PERTH, THURSDAY, 6 JULY 2006

Howard must revisit IR
By Glenn Milne
March 25, 2007 12:00
Article from:
Font size: + -
Send this article: Print Email
The question John Howard must face in the wake of Labor's victory in NSW is this: did simmering discontent in the electorate over the Federal Coalition's industrial-relations reforms underpin Morris Iemma's survival?
That was the claim being made by senior federal Labor figures last night.
If true, it bodes badly forHoward, facing an ascendant Kevin Rudd whois adamant he intends tearing up Australian Workplace Agreements - the centrepiece of Howard's WorkChoices legislation.
If Rudd ever wavered in this determination, he won't after the NSW result.

So steve it seems that not only is kevin rudd is decietful he doesnt know who he is batting for.

Tearing up awa's
Having a transitional period.
Veteran affairs mockup
team sunrise

truth is much better

www.tapp.org.au

Tapp like most of us you may never visit the thread now its on the back page but you try so hard to avoid accountability.
The election was up for grabs, both independents thought they would win.
The ALP vote was split and weakened yet they won.
you seem to admit your party has no chance in saying it comes down to Labor and Liberal!!?

Belly did you not forget something

when a independent is truely and independent they are not a member of the labor party.

indepenence no

The party dictatorship even playing for the independent vote even though being labor.

so where did the prefences go labor of course labor member.

do as you are told or be expelled.

www.tapp.org.au

Stu.

I will start with your second piece of evidence first, just because Glenn Milne says something do not take it as being true. I think this is a desparate attempt to justify your position, if this is the best you can find I rest my case.

As for the Stephen Smith TRANSCRIPT OF INTERVIEW WITH GEOFF HUTCHISON – MORNING PROGRAM, 720 ABC RADIO, PERTH, THURSDAY, 6 JULY 2006.

I will admit I probably have an unfair advantage, having managed a capital city office of a major media monitoring company, I still have contacts in the industry. Sorry Stu you made it up or are relying on false info.

Just what did Stephen Smith say? was this before or after the major interview on that show? (Will Stan Lazaridis return to Perth to play soccer).

I know the answer, do you?

Now Steve since I had to wait for posting time

I gave you the info you find and since you have contacts you should be well aware that i am correct.

Whats that 2 years

Seems that you enjoy playing games just like labor

And the unions selling out the workers well done there.

Can only strike for collective agreements and then those who do not wish to have a collective agreement will be forced.

How much more are you willing to sell out.

Business is now asking to remove unfair awa ads.

So labor has no interset in the people and as kevin rudds statement, we see where we stand.
And steve since you are so in the fold you find it.

I know the truth and will keep reporting it.

will you comply

Their is only one thing left to say and will quote Kevin Rudd.

POLITICS IS ALL ABOUT POWER

GOLD COAST BULLETIN

LIVE EXPORT TRADE INQUIRY WOULD BE LIKE LAMBS TO THE SLAUGHTER

THE RSPCA may have the answer for fed­eral Labor politicians struggling to galv­anise voters with the AWB bribery scandal.

The recent 60 Minutes program on Channel 9 revealing cruelty on Australian cattle in the Middle East hit a nerve.

Not that the RSPCA was surprised by the strong response from Australians outraged at endemic cruelty in the live export trade.

Many Australian voters may not give two hoots about $300 million in kickbacks to Saddam Hussein to sew up Australian wheat sales to Iraq. But it would be a different story if the AWB was ever linked to live exports.

The Gold Coast-based Halal Kind Meats is off to the backblocks of Queensland and West­ern Australia to look for Australian slaughter­ing opportunities. Dozens of Australian abatt­oirs have closed since the live export trade boomed in the 1990s. Kindness to animals is part of the Australian 'fair go' tradition.

Labor appears more concerned with the future of Australia's livestock trade overseas than banning the practice.
AFIC RSPCAQLD PALE Put up an alternative- Nobody cares
Posted by People Against Live Exports & Intensive Farming, Sunday, 18 March 2007 5:12:11 AM

Now A few facts. We cant get Skilled workers in to Australia To work in Plants because of the unions.
How is that good for the country
Small business especially can not afford not to be able to sake somebody on the spot that has stollen from them etc.
Nor should they be forced to pay maternity leave etc.
The labour mentality is everybody should be treated eaqually.
Umm Well if I worked to be a Dr or Vet Or Lawyer and a office worker was destroying my biz by being on drugs etc - Then I reserve the right to say POQ.
When people have to compete for jobs more are filled.
Thats good for this country.
Labour encourage a nation of bludgers and complainers
Little Else.

It is not about protecting workers rights or employers rights but to protect “civil rights”.
People should be entitled to make their own contractual agreements and either party should be bound by it.
It serves no one if either is allowed to ignore the others rights.

The Constitution specifically provides to discriminate against “aliens” as to protect Australian workers their rights, but the problem is that too many politicians are involved to do what they desire to get into power and once they are they wreck it further.

Just look at what we achieved in more then one hundred years of federation;

Hansard 21-1-1898 Constitution Convention Debates
QUOTE
Mr. HOWE.-
As I have already pointed out, the best of our citizens now try to make provision for a rainy day. Do not the records of our financial institutions show that this is so? Have not the workers of Australia been praised for the thrift which they have exercised? Certainly that is so. But, unfortunately, as I have already shown, failure often overtakes these institutions. They collapse, and the provision which the workers thought they had made for their declining days vanishes.
END QUOTE

Today, the media reported a 74-year old man loosing about 700.0000 dollars, having now to live of a social security pension.
The crook got 8-years imprisonment for stealing 15 million dollars, then it just makes it worthwhile for crooks to continue doing it, as after 8-years the crook will walk out being a millionaire, if he was smart enough to send the monies overseas.

When are the Governments dealing with these crooks? Thousands upon thousands having to rely upon social security where they had in fact saved up for their old age.
Governments always seek more power but can’t even handle the power they already have.
If we pursued to avoid crooks getting their hands on other peoples monies, by doing this, we do ourselves a favour, as less of our tax money will be needed to support those duped by the crooks! Lets see which political party will pursue this in the election!

Stu.

Given that you have bent the truth, omitted responses that prove you are wrong, quote others saying what I assert was never said by the person themselves and posting a reference to an interview that never took place, I have a few suggestions.

If you want tapp to have any chance of gaining support you tell us what you would do differently, don't refer us to the mother hood and apple pie statements you call policy.

Don't rely on attacking Labor, especially when 50% of people seem to want to vote for them at this time.

How about some positive posts, how you will make things better, how your views will get you elected.

Lastly stop posting inane drivel, I will hound you, yes I am having fun, but a warning - don't mess with a guy with incurable cancer I have absolutely nothing to lose - do you?

Well people have to die sometime

TAPP is for Euthanasia

If you cannot find the interview even when I have given who it is by then it is you and those who do your research are incompetent.

If you are to lazy to check policy dont blame me blame yourself for not getting of your Ar#e.

Now it seems the others can just talk and you will lap it up but it is about policy and 50% well that would be due to a 2 party prefered system including polls.

If you dont give people the choice like i have given you all then stiff, that is your problem, your responsibility.

And if you dont like what i have posted and you call it inane, I call it the truth and what these dictatorships are really about.

Labor says we will not force you

wrong

Labor says we will look after you

Wrong

Labor says only we can do it

WRONG

When you take your blinkers off you will see.

And by the way
You have cancer
I should already be dead

www.tapp.org.au

Stu

The big difference between you an I is that I am not trying to get a fledgling political party off the ground.

I have not been a member of the Labor party since I resigned in disgust over the actions of the musicians union taking over my local branch and the Ros Kelly "white-board" pork barrel (a rort the Liberals have elevated to an art form).

With each post you make on OLO you ensure that no sane person will join your party. All your hard work for nothing.

You have shown us that you are happy to omit facts, twist the truth and say black is white (maybe you could make it as a Liberal).

Its easy to criticise, how about you try something different.

This bit is funny, funny man steve

Its easy to criticise, how about you try something different

No Steve

You have shown your discontent for facts and also since i did apologise regarding that also due to the word count available.

You forgot that bit.

You also forgot that since you are so experienced that you and your mates could not find a simple article why, You couldnt be bothered.

You say that you know but when required cannot find, obviously not that good at what you did, if you cannot find simple articles of truth.

Since you can no longer debate what is fact about labor saying they will tear up AWA's after your excuse of deciet using hockey as a patsy.

Especially after i said kim was there at the putting up off one of his i will tear up AWA signs and you still deny.

The truth, something you do not like
And even you say how bad they are, how disgusted you are.

www.tapp.org.au

Stu, please listen to Steve. He can at least write fluently, not like your disjointed rot. And he is right that one person saying that Kevin Rudd (or anyone else) said something, does not mean that the person referred to actually said it.

The Labor party may well tear up the legislation (which it does appear to have said and often), but please do a little bit of legal training before taking on a legal situation. The legislation does NOT include the AWA's - these are contracts and are outside the governments immediate control.

AWA's are good for some and not for others. Awards are good for some and not for others. The problem with having little contracts here and there is that they are hard to monitor for fairness. An award on the other hand is set by govt and then employers can be audited for compliance - everyone knows the rules in each workplace which makes life simpler.

BROCK made comment about the poor young people who risked being fired for asking when and how much they would get paid when starting a new job. I was a young person who did ask about this. Did I get fired - no! I simply got told that the rate was $7.54/hour and payday was Friday fortnightly. Also that I would miss the first payrun as my details wouldnt be processed in time, but it would be caught up in the next pay. Employers really dont care about this sort of thing, and most have it in the manual that they give to new employees on induction. Dont scaremonger.

Contry Gal

whats your going rate

must be pretty cheap

you will sell yourself to anything that the party tells you to.

www.tapp.org.au

nope

politics is about VOTERS

we get what we vote for.....

and one can fool some of the people some of the time

but not all of the people all of the time

most australians of 18 and voting age,

have the intelligence to know how the world around

them works, and very much so in a practical sense

JHH