About time...will all the Labor apologists on this forum now embrace Nauru as a good idea?

ALP & LNP are both national disgraces.

You meant the Green and the Independent that are the only ones in this picture that are taking a humane stance towards asylum seekers?

Whats your thoughts on it Matt?

I think it's a complex issue that has become a cheap policking point that has zero to do with what actually matters - the welfare of refugees and asylum seekers.

what a load of bollocks......................

IT WAS the second anniversary of Julia Gillard's famous promise that no government she led would introduce a carbon tax, and Tony Abbott was not about to let that pass without a celebratory bout of denunciation.
He did not calculate, however, on the independent warhorse Tony Windsor dumping a bucket of fermented recollection upon his merriment.
Hardly had Abbott finished a tirade concerning the numerous reasons why Ms Gillard should apologise to the Australian people for leading them up the carbon path than Windsor, quivering with indignation, arose from his crossbench, intent on burying Abbott in his own temerity.
''There's been a lot of discussion today about history,'' he began. ''This is a hung Parliament. The decision to do something about climate change … to put a price on carbon, was a condition of the formation of government.
Advertisement
''The Leader of the Opposition knows that very well, because on a number of occasions, he actually begged for the [prime ministerial] job. Begged for the job. You've never denied that, Tony, and you won't.
''He begged for the job, and he made the point, not only to me but to others who were in that negotiating period, that he would do anything to get that job. Anything to get that job.
''You would well remember, and your colleagues should be aware, that the only codicil you put on that was, 'I will do anything, Tony, to get this job. The only thing I won't do is sell my arse'.''
The House of Representatives dissolved into a tumult of whoops and guffaws from the government benches, where the word ''arse'' had apparently never previously passed a lip, and howling indignation from the opposition side.
But Windsor was simply building to his climax.
Abbott, he accused, was so desperate he would have agreed to put in place an emissions trading scheme or a carbon tax … if he had been asked. ''The fact that he wasn't asked is something of very, very good judgment, in my view. I'm very proud to have supported the price on carbon, I'm very proud to have supported doing something about climate change, and I think history will judge those who have had the guts to stand up and actually try and address what is a very difficult issue in a difficult Parliament.
''This man, the Leader of the Opposition, would have been quite prepared to do that if he'd been given the nod.
''You're an absolute disgrace,'' he roared at Abbott, ''in the way in which you're wandering around on this issue.''
Abbott later protested that there were plenty of things he would not have done to become prime minister, and one of them was that he would never have broken his pre-election promise not to introduce a carbon tax. Not like that dreadful Ms Gillard.
By then, however, the steam had quite gone out of the festivities he had planned to mark the second anniversary of the Prime Minister's abiding discomfiture.
Tony Windsor, the old National Party man gone feral, sat down, looking perfectly content that he had wrecked Tony Abbott's party.

What? So Abbott didn't actually say these things?

I guess it's a large elaborate ruse from the independents.

well we will never know will we....but it's a given that Gillard did because she won the race to the PM's chair by being manipulated by the greens and independants.......

he probably did promise them loads of shit....but it's kind of irrelevant now isn't it.....

The focus should be on the here and now and WHO is suppose to be in control.....not in the what could be might be.....thats the typical ploy of the media and spin doctors, deflect the actual haapening and get into hypotheticals post hast.........

that fact are the facts.....Gillard, the ALP the Greens and the Independants are a pathetic incompetent government...it's as simple as that........

it's beyond me how anyone can deny the facts........

well we will never know will we....but it's a given that Gillard did because she won the race to the PM's chair by being manipulated by the greens and independants.......

he probably did promise them loads of shit....but it's kind of irrelevant now isn't it.....

The focus should be on the here and now and WHO is suppose to be in control.....not in the what could be might be.....thats the typical ploy of the media and spin doctors, deflect the actual haapening and get into hypotheticals post hast.........

that fact are the facts.....Gillard, the ALP the Greens and the Independants are a pathetic incompetent government...it's as simple as that........

it's beyond me how anyone can deny the facts........

Insiders presenter Barrie Cassidy says the media has failed to hold Opposition Leader Tony Abbott to account for his prevarications on asylum seekers and the carbon tax.

When Jon Faine interviewed Tony Abbott on ABC's 774 on Tuesday, something unusual happened.

The Opposition Leader's careless use of words was actually challenged.

Abbott, discussing the asylum seekers issue, asserted:Faine responded:Abbott:Faine:

Tony Abbott did not further dispute the point. Like an errant school kid, he seemed to accept the admonishment. Yet within 24 hours, he was again referring to asylum seekers as illegals. Nobody in the media pulled him up. He knew they wouldn't. They rarely do.

For the record, he is wrong in domestic and in international law.

The Migration Act 1958 allows for those seeking asylum to enter Australia, with or without visas. The same situation is covered by the United Nations Refugee Convention, of which Australia is a signatory.

This is important for two reasons. Firstly, the truth matters. Secondly, the use of the word "illegal" suggests the Coalition is supporting tougher action against asylum seekers as "punishment" for breaking the law, whereas the publicly held position is that the measures are being adopted to discourage asylum seekers from taking a dangerous journey by boat.

Dennis Atkins wrote in the Courier Mail this week about Abbott's "relentless negative assault on the price impacts of the carbon tax", describing that, and his campaign to "brand Julia Gillard as an untrustworthy liar", as "the most reckless and audacious politicking most observers, including this one, can remember."

Atkins wrote:
Now Mark Latham has taken up the same issue in the Financial Review, writing that:

Latham pointed to Abbott's claim that the carbon tax would be "a wrecking ball through the economy"; data since then has demonstrated employment is holding up and the economy is still growing strongly.

Latham surveyed the media on Friday and Saturday when the data was topical and found just two critiques of Abbott: a report on the ABC Radio's PM and an article by Tim Colebatch in The Age.

It is a cop out for some in the media to argue, as they have, that opposition leaders are never subjected to the same scrutiny as prime ministers. Andrew Peacock, John Howard during his first experience as opposition leader, and Kim Beazley were all tested in the media and brought to account when they needed to be.

The Opposition Leader, no less than the Prime Minister, has an obligation to educate and inform the public and not mislead.

The media never misses Julia Gillard when she screws up, and that's as it should be. She has taken a hammering this week for embracing a policy on asylum seekers that she and the Government derided for years; a solution that, at least in part, the Opposition has been advocating since the Howard years.

It was embarrassing, and she was made to feel embarrassed.

But Tony Abbott too shifted position. He supported the 22 recommendations of the expert panel just weeks after saying that he would not heed their advice, and that, "we don't need a committee to tell us what our policies are".

Abbott embraced the recommendations even though they contained just one of his three previous bottom line demands - not a gold medal capitulation like the Prime Minister's, but one worthy of mention just the same.

Windsor dials up Abbott tension

DateAugust 17, 2012 - 12:57PM

Outspoken independent MP Tony Windsor has hinted that he could in future release phone messages to back up his claims that Opposition Leader Tony Abbott's begged to be prime minister after the 2010 election.

Mr Abbott, meantime has accused Mr Windsor of being embarrassed at putting Labor into power .

Mr Windsor stunned parliament yesterday when he lashed out at Mr Abbott during the Coalition's 64th attempt to suspend standing orders.

Mr Windsor accused Mr Abbott of begging for the job of PM, and offering to do anything for it, including introducing a carbon tax.

''You would well remember—and your colleagues should be aware—that the only codicil that you put on that was: 'I will do anything, Tony, to get this job; the only thing I wouldn't do is sell my arse.','' Mr Windsor told the parliament.

''If he had been asked to put in place an emissions trading scheme—or a carbon tax, for that matter—he would have done it.

''The fact that he was not asked was a very, very good judgment, in my view.''

After his spray at Mr Abbott, Mr Windsor sat down and pointed to his phone, indicating he evidence to prove what happened during post-election negotiations to form government.

When The National Times asked Mr Windsor today what was on the phone he said: ''I'm not going there.''

But asked about a possible future release of messages left on his phone, he replied he would not rule anything out.

''I wouldn't rule anything out. I'm not inclined to go there. There were messages left on phones, no doubt about it, but I'm not inclined to go there,'' Mr Windsor said.

Mr Abbott, speaking on Channel Nine's Today show this morning, said Mr Windsor had changed his story.

''Back in October of 2010 he said that I didn't want it enough. Now he says that I wanted it too much,'' Mr Abbott said.

''Tony Windsor is embarrassed at the fact that he is backing such a monumentally bad government.''



Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/political-news/windsor-dials-up-abbott-tension-20120817-24csm.html#ixzz23oJKBxg0

Coalition gets razors ready to slice bulky bureaucracy

DateAugust 18, 2012

COALITION frontbenchers have been instructed to slice away federal bureaucratic oversight of aged care, childcare, employment and family services in a bid to devolve government power and deliver budget savings through public service cuts.

The Coalition, which needs to find more than $30 billion in spending cuts, will pledge cuts to the bureaucracy, but says it will not hit frontline services. The policy is in line with the controversial ''Big Society'' philosophy of British thinker Phillip Blond, who was in Canberra this week for meetings with Coalition leader Tony Abbott and most of his frontbench.

Coalition families spokesman Kevin Andrews told The Saturday Age he had developed the model for stripping unnecessary federal oversight of federally funded services delivered by community and private organisations.

Under Mr Andrews' plan, family relationship programs run by Relationships Australia, Anglicare, Uniting Care and other groups would be subject to dramatically pared-back audit, reporting and compliance requirements.

The model was also applicable to aged care, childcare and job network services and possibly also to parts of the health and education portfolios, he said.

The measures were not primarily aimed at cutting public servants, but ''that may well be the consequence … there are certainly more public servants employed oversighting the agencies than there were 10 or 15 years ago … Changing the paradigm through which you look at services means you can have a much more limited role for the Commonwealth.

''Our thinking is that organisations in civil society … are not instruments or agencies of government, they are formed in the community …'' said Mr Andrews.

''It is not for the government to control them or tell them what they should be doing, the government should be empowering them rather than seeking to control them.''

Other shadow ministers, he said, were being asked to use his model ''as a guide to what they can do in their portfolio areas''.

The Labor government is moving its oversight of the not-for-profit sector in the opposite direction, introducing on Wednesday legislation to set up a new Charities and Not for Profits Commission as a national regulator for the sector.

Its aim is to streamline regulation and do away with duplicated state rules, but community sector groups are concerned it may result in more, rather than less, red tape.

But they are also wary of the ''Big Society'' devolution of power because in Britain it has resulted not only in huge cuts to the public service, but also massive cuts to local services.

Mr Blond, director of the British think tank ResPublica, advocates smaller government through a shrinking of inflexible, expensive services offered by the state and a re-empowerment of communities to decide upon and even run the services that they need.

But in Britain, the outsourcing program that was supposed to benefit little community groups ended up giving enormous contracts to large corporations, such as Serco, which runs Australia's detention centres, and in some parts of Britain now runs all the government-funded schools.

The Coalition has also flagged that it will cut the number of federal public servants that monitor how the states spend federal money.

On top of the initial 12,000 federal public servant jobs he has promised to cut, Mr Abbott has said the ''commission of audit'' he would establish in government would look for bigger cuts in portfolios such as health and education where the actual services were run by state governments.

And shadow treasurer Joe Hockey has said it is inefficient to have an ''army of public servants to measure and assess the performance of the states where funding is tied to performance benchmarks''.



Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/political-news/coalition-gets-razors-ready-to-slice-bulky-bureaucracy-20120817-24e53.html#ixzz23obGsWgr

[size=9]Fact is that Abbott promised more than Gillard ever did,[/size] and the independents wouldn't deal with him because he's slimier than Gillard by a considerable margin, which is quite slimy considering how much of a puppet to the religious right Gillard is.