Bang on.

-PB

I haven't been keeping up with Australian politics. But did the Australian PM call for a re-election? 2 months after their party was voted in?

Edited by scott21: 5/12/2014 12:09:17 AM

Wouldn't the converse also be true?

@Scott21

Isn't it just the result of the right-coalition refusing to deal with SD? How is it any way an indictment on compulsory voting?

No it's a result of SD backing the Alliances budget. Not the governments meaning the government don't have the majority.
Those who are passionate about eg. immigration issues vote. Vote SD.
I feel if everybody voted their power would be watered down. Then you have people voting for the feminists these days too which doesn't help the overall scheme of things. Because they aren't on any teams side either.
I don't agree with compulsory voting because in a democracy you should have the right to choose whether you want to or not. Even if you do a non vote, you still have to do the dance.
It good though however because there can be no or less doubt what the people want.

Didn't break promises :lol: , repeat ad nauseam , stop the boats , roads and repeal carbon tax . Yet he as broken 14 core promises , and news Ltd have said nothing

How good is this? FFS.

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/abbott-government-cuts-university-support-funds-priests-training-20141204-120a3c.html

Abbott government cuts university support; funds priests' training

Matthew Knott
Published: December 5, 2014 - 7:34AM

Taxpayers would subsidise the training of priests and other religious workers at private colleges for the first time under the Abbott government's proposed higher education reforms.

As well as deregulating university fees and cutting university funding by 20 per cent, the government's proposed higher education package extends federal funding to students at private universities, TAFES and associate degree programs.

Religious teaching, training and vocational institutes would be eligible for a share of $820 million in new Commonwealth funding over three years.

Labor and the Greens attacked the policy, saying it breaches the separation of Church and State. Earlier this year the government controversially announced it would provide $244 million for a new school chaplaincy scheme but would remove the option for schools to hire secular welfare workers.

In correspondence with voters, Family First Senator Bob Day has singled out funding for faith-based training institutes to explain his support for the government's reforms.

Eleven theological colleges are currently accredited by the Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency (TEQSA) to provide courses designed to prepare students to enter religious ministries.

Institutes such as the Sydney College of Divinity, Brisbane's Christian Heritage College and the Perth Bible College, which currently charge students full fees, would be eligible for an estimated $4214 funding a year each student under the reforms.

The John Paul II Institute for Marriage and Family in Melbourne, which offers course units including "Theology and Practice of Natural Family Planning" and "Marriage in the Catholic Tradition", would also be eligible for federal support.

The institute says on its website its mission is "promote marriage and the family for the good of the whole Church and the wider community".

The Anglican Diocese of Melbourne requires all trainee priests to receive theological training at Ridley College or the Trinity College Theological School, both of which would likely be eligible to offer Commonwealth Supported Places under the government's changes.

Labor higher education spokesman Kim Carr said: "This raises serious questions about relationship between Church and State. The Church has traditionally funded the training of its own personnel."

Mr Carr said there was a difference between federal funding for theoretically-focused religious studies courses and courses designed to prepare graduates for the priesthood.

Greens higher education spokeswoman Lee Rhiannon said: "Mr Pyne has gone one step further than robbing Peter to pay Paul – he is attempting to rob Australia's public and secular university system to pay private, religious colleges.

"Courses that Mr Pyne wants to extend funding to include those teaching prescriptive Christian ideology on sexuality and marriage – is this really the best use of the higher education budget?"

On its core values page on its website the Perth Bible College says, "We believe in the urgent need to reach our broken world with the gospel of Jesus Christ and to train men and women to be effective servants for God."

A spokesman for Education Minister Christopher Pyne said courses offered by private colleges would have to be approved by the independent regulator to gain access to federal funding.

"Consistent with current practice, the government will not distinguish between faith‑based and secular higher education institutions for registration and funding purposes," the spokesman said.

Family First Senator Bob Day said, in a letter to a member of the general public, that it is unfair that public universities receive federal funding but religious colleges and other private providers do not.

"The Government's proposals … reduce the subsidies given to universities, while for the first time addressing inequity by providing significant subsidies for non-universities (but still less than universities)," he wrote. "Some of these non-universities that will receive funding for the first time - if this Bill passes - are faith-based training, teaching, theological and vocational institutions."

University of Divinity Vice-Chancellor Peter Sherlock declined to comment, but in a recent Senate submission the private university said federal funding would bring down course fees for its students.

The government's reforms were voted down by the Senate this week but will return to Parliament, with some amendments, next year.

Figures released on Thursday by the Universities Admissions Centre showed a slight increase in year 12 applications on last year despite claims of vastly increased fees under a deregulated system.

http://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2014/dec/05/senate-gives-scott-morrison-unchecked-control-over-asylum-seekers-lives

This has the potential to be a national shame in the future. Stories will come out about how the government has put vulnerable peoples' lives in danger and it's all to satisfy a xenophobic section of our community.

It's those xenophobic people who voted him in , in the first place . Sadly we have a government who is beholden to them and certain media people

:lol:

Big problems for the liberals again. They have likely (and unexpectedly) lost a by election in South Australia. If Labor win it they will regain majority government in SA - if not they have still picked up an 8pc swing.

And a new Galaxy poll has the federal liberals down 4pc to 45pc 2PP. Labor's primary vote is over 40.

I can smell the napalm already

Edited by lastbroadcast: 6/12/2014 11:07:18 PM

Did not see that coming at all =d>

Cheers Tone :lol:

And galaxy is usually a pro right agency too

Australia's first corporate sponsored police force.

What the actual fuck?

I think regardless of whether you have compulsory or non-compulsory voting, you still end up having the same demographics in charge.

Rich, white businessman/women or lawyers.

People who are good at spinning a yarn.

And....
What the actual fuck?

Fuck the what actual in

Yep

What are you waffling on about? Morrison just released the hundreds of children that Labor and the Greens had locked up. That's the national tragedy. What about the thousands of men, women and children who died trying to get here, isn't that a "national shame"? Nooooo, it's Mr Morrison having more power to turn back boats and stuff. That's not shame that's spin.:lol:

Labor have a lot to answer for too. Give me evidence that it's Greens policy to lock up kids?

To answer your question everything that has happened with this is a national shame. Don't try guilt tripping me because I don't think you give a stuff about these peoples' lives. It's just a convenient argument for you.

The Greens were complicit in the thousands of men, women and children who died, as well as those who were locked up, by encouraging and agreeing to reopen the borders, knowing full well unworthy state of sea vessels and their appalling conditions on board, as well as Labors position on mandatory detention. It was in fact Keating who brought in mandatory detention in the 90's.

I think there's anything shameful about resettling the second highest number of refugees, both in total and per capita, of ALL countries. I also don't think there's anything shameful about respecting human life and enforcing sovereignty with our borders, which some might call xenophobic, but is the policy of every single country on earth. If there's any shame it's the Greens and Labor who bear all of it, who've put their own need for a sense of moral purity above that of human life. The Greens don't care about peoples lives, that's why when a boat full of children sinks they just raise their hands and say "oh well accidents happen".

Some Andrew Bolt level delusion right there.

Which part was delusional? The fact is when Labor and Greens were running the (freak) show, they allowed their conscience to purely dictate immigration policy, by repealing Howards pacific solution, which was also a political manoeuvre because they didn't like it was so successful. But due to this decision thousands of people died and thousands more were locked up, and yet there was no net increase in refugees. It wasn't like thousands of lives were sacrificed to allow a far greater majority to experience a better life, it was just the same numbers of refugees being processed with a couple thousands dead folk thrown in the mix. Yet Labor and the Greens just sat on their hands and did nothing, not wanting to concede the political victory to the Liberals. They put politics before human life. The Liberals did it too by blocking the inferior Malaysia solution, it doesn't matter where you are on the political spectrum the need to seen as right trumps doing what is right nearly every time. Sometimes the Greens and Labor think they're above all the politics but they are just as power hungry as anybody.

Pacific Solution was successful?

Children overboard was successful? :lol:

-PB

The pacific solution was tremendously successful. The repealing of those policies is what led to the thousands of deaths at sea and even more men, women and children locked up in detention centers. If you weren't a such a biased lefty you might be able to admit this.