It's the Tony Abbott Show!

 
  Barrington Womble Photo Nazi

Location: Banned
No, I had not noticed you had handed in your badge, so I am happy to withdraw my statement about moderators, as you are no longer one.

A week ago? I don't remember who or what I supported yesterday, much less a week ago.
TheBlacksmith
No problem with the statement withdrawl. I thought it might be an idea to point this out before you got too far ahead of yourself...

I am sniggering creepily at your last comment. Razz

Sponsored advertisement

  don_dunstan Dr Beeching

Location: Adelaide proud
Talking about Work Choice II (as I was a few days ago), its interesting to note that Chris Pyne has come out in Fairfax today repudiating comments from Tony Abbott's senior business advisor (Maurice Newman) that wages should be cut; in particular the minimum wage. For those of you who might have missed it, Maurice Newman gave a speech a few nights ago advocating a very dry Tory agenda including the usual stuff like cutting welfare and health, restricting collective bargaining and cutting wages across the board.  Much to my surprise Christopher Pyne told the Sydney Morning Herald 'oh but that's not what we want to do.'

So at the moment I stand corrected on that agenda; there isn't a plan for Work Choices II... not yet anyway.
  T88 Junior Train Controller

Location: Banned
Wage cuts? Penalty rates gone? No way! But funny enough union membership is in decline? How does that work? Slowly but surely things seem to be eroding into the abyss. I can't see the carbon tax ever getting abolished. If Julia can get away with saying no carbon tax while she was in term. Tony can say he will get rid of it and actually keep it in place or rename it. The lucky country is no more!
Young people that work in the cafes and food industry are the hardest hit with long hours,contracts and no penalty rates. Yep the rich are getting richer and the poorer will get poorer. The widening of the gap between the haves and have nots is leaving less and less people in the middle. As for the aged people that have worked and paid tax, they seem to been forgotten and thrown on the scrap heap. How can illegal migrants get more money and benefits and contribute nothing to our society? Personally I don't think my superannuation will be worth diddly squat by the time I retire. The rules will be changed and the pension will only be for the disabled and Im sure as hell that i won't be entitled to a pension after paying tax my whole working career. Typically the government has adjusted unemployment figures on paper in regards to Part time work. Seriously who wants to work split shifts or two part time jobs to make ends meet? But hey your not unemployed.
Whats my point to this post? I don't know. Just a observation over the last few years I guess.
  Valvegear Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Richmond Vic
Whilst we're in the mood for observations, let's have some more.

1. "We will turn back the boats" sounded good in opposition, but seems to have foundered because Indonesia dug its heels in.
Tony Abbott lecturing Indonesia on legal obligations for boats in distress is a bit rich.

2. Christopher Pyne appeared on TV a few days ago, claiming that refugee boat arrivals have dropped by 75%.  Eh?; 75% of what figure over what period? Nobody knows because the information is embargoed.  ( I will say that if Pyne told me the sun would rise tomorrow morning, I'd want a second opinion.) And why Pyne? This is Scott Morrison's area. Have the Coalition leaders already decided that Morrison isn't up to the job?

3. Joe Hockey wants to lift the debt ceiling by 67%; from 300 billion to 500 billion. If debt was bad under Labor, then it's equally bad under the Coalition.  As I predicted, and others agreed, some pages back, it's "because of the mess they've inherited from the previous Government." This is said by all incoming governments whenever there's change of Party in power; nobody believes it, and I wonder why they bother. It's as predictable as the full moon.

4. Abbott et al want a more dignified House of Representatives. I agree entirely with this sentiment. It would make a nice change from still extant TV footage of a red-faced Pyne, standing beside Abbott on the Opposition front bench, and literally screaming abuse  at the Prime Minister. Will the leopards change their spots? We don't have to worry about Bronwyn Bishop being tough in the role of Speaker, and I'm happy with that provided she's even handed.

It's early days yet; I'll continue to observe and enjoy.
  2301 Train Controller

Location: Banned
What a momentous day for our nation; the carbon tax repeal legislation is finally being table in Parliament.  Thanks for nothing Gillard, you silly silly woman!

Maybe we can cleanse our souls of this insidious tax which was nothing but a utopian socialist wet dream.
  2301 Train Controller

Location: Banned
Tony Abbott lecturing Indonesia on legal obligations for boats in distress is a bit rich.  
Valvegear
How is this rich Valvegear?  He is the PM of Australia and he should stand up for Australia's sovereign rights when they are being blatantly violated.  Nothing he has said so far is the least bit antagonistic towards the Indonesians; if anything he has been reserved which I personally do not believe is the right tactic especially given the Indonesians are bullies.

Abbott has only highlighted the legal facts, which Indonesia seems to be pig headedly deliberately ignorant of.  The problem is originating in their country, with their knowledge and yet they are completely unwilling to even acknowledge this or take people back when they are still in their own waters.............what lovely people they are.  Maybe the Government should redirect the $650 million to the Phillipines?
  michaelgm Chief Commissioner

What a momentous day for our nation; the carbon tax repeal legislation is finally being table in Parliament.  Thanks for nothing Gillard, you silly silly woman!

Maybe we can cleanse our souls of this insidious tax which was nothing but a utopian socialist wet dream.
"2301"



Brilliant observation, Einstein.

Nothing more than a misogynistic wet dream.
  2301 Train Controller

Location: Banned
Yes, I thought so too.
  Mickonthehill Station Staff

Location: Crimial Hill
What sovereign rights are being violated?  Oh you must mean the rights of any person to claim asylum?

Don't forget that the UN Refugee Convention (to which Australia is a signatory) recognises that refugees have a right to enter a country for the purposes of seeking asylum, regardless of how they arrive or whether they hold valid travel or identity documents.  You can check that fact here:
Refugee realities
  2301 Train Controller

Location: Banned
What sovereign rights are being violated?  Oh you must mean the rights of any person to claim asylum?

Don't forget that the UN Refugee Convention (to which Australia is a signatory) recognises that refugees have a right to enter a country for the purposes of seeking asylum, regardless of how they arrive or whether they hold valid travel or identity documents.  You can check that fact here:
Refugee realities
Mickonthehill

I think you will find that when they are leaving a country of safety, or in their case crossing multiple countries - they no longer meet the criteria of the refugee convention.
  Mickonthehill Station Staff

Location: Crimial Hill
you will find that when they are leaving a country of safety
2301
Since Indonesia is not a signatory to the UN Convention, how does it qualify as a place of safety?
  2301 Train Controller

Location: Banned
Since Indonesia is not a signatory to the UN Convention, how does it qualify as a place of safety?
Mickonthehill

The country does not have to be a signatory to the UN and besides these people are crossing multiple safe UN signatory countries - you are just splitting hairs.  Indonesia is an Islamic country that is not hostile to these people so they are not fleeing for their lives.
  michaelgm Chief Commissioner

The country does not have to be a signatory to the UN and besides these people are crossing multiple safe UN signatory countries - you are just splitting hairs.  Indonesia is an Islamic country that is not hostile to these people so they are not fleeing for their lives.
"2301"



You're insinuating that illegal maritime arrivals are of the Islamic faith.
  Barrington Womble Photo Nazi

Location: Banned
Don't worry about him, michaelgm, poor old 2301 will think that they're Dalek refugees next week.
They are coming here to destroy and exterminate after-all...What exactly remains to be seen.
  Aaron The Ghost of George Stephenson

Location: University of Adelaide SA
What sovereign rights are being violated?  Oh you must mean the rights of any person to claim asylum?

Don't forget that the UN Refugee Convention (to which Australia is a signatory) recognises that refugees have a right to enter a country for the purposes of seeking asylum, regardless of how they arrive or whether they hold valid travel or identity documents.  You can check that fact here:
Refugee realities
Mickonthehill
That's not true, I'll explain (... again ...) when I have more time.
  Aaron The Ghost of George Stephenson

Location: University of Adelaide SA
Bugger it, I'll waste my time and do it now.

MIGRATION ACT 1958 - SECT 228B

Circumstances in which a non-citizen has no lawful right to come to Australia            
          (1)  For the purposes of this Subdivision, a non-citizen has, at a particular time, no lawful right to come to Australia if, at that time:
                    (a)  the non-citizen does not hold a visa that is in effect; and
                    (b)  the non-citizen is not covered by an exception referred to in subsection 42(2) or (2A); and
                    (c)  the non-citizen is not permitted by regulations under subsection 42(3) to travel to Australia without a visa that is in effect.
            (2)  To avoid doubt, a reference in subsection (1) to a non-citizen includes a reference to a non-citizen seeking protection or asylum (however described), whether or not Australia has, or may have, protection obligations in respect of the non-citizen:
                    (a)  under the Refugees Convention as amended by the Refugees Protocol; or
                    (b)  for any other reason.

Sorted. Illegal, our own legislation, sorry refugee council, denied.
  Aaron The Ghost of George Stephenson

Location: University of Adelaide SA
Not enough evidence?

MIGRATION ACT 1958 - SECT 14
Unlawful non-citizens            
(1)  A non-citizen in the migration zone who is not a lawful non-citizen is an unlawful non-citizen.
            (2)  To avoid doubt, a non-citizen in the migration zone who, immediately before 1 September 1994, was an illegal entrant within the meaning of the Migration Act as in force then became, on that date, an unlawful non-citizen.

Still not enough?

UNITED NATIONS CONVENTION AGAINST
TRANSNATIONAL ORGANIZED CRIME
AND THE PROTOCOLS THERETO

Article 9. Prevention of trafficking in persons
1. States Parties shall establish comprehensive policies, programmes and
other measures:46
(a) To prevent and combat trafficking in persons; and
(b) To protect victims of trafficking in persons, especially women and
children, from revictimization.

Article 11 is also worth reading, but for some reason I cannot copy the sections to here. It talks about the responsibilities of nations (read Indonesia) to PREVENT the transnational shipment of people (read people smuggling), and the steps they're supposed to take to prevent such. Clearly that's not happening. And Article 3 of the above which defines the travel without visa as being illegal.
  Valvegear Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Richmond Vic
(2)  To avoid doubt, a reference in subsection (1) to a non-citizen includes a reference to a non-citizen seeking protection or asylum (however described), whether or not Australia has, or may have, protection obligations in respect of the non-citizen:
                    (a)  under the Refugees Convention as amended by the Refugees Protocol; or
                    (b)  for any other reason.
Sorted. Illegal, our own legislation, sorry refugee council, denied.
"Aaron"


Translation: "Stuff the UN Convention".
  don_dunstan Dr Beeching

Location: Adelaide proud
Wage cuts? Penalty rates gone? No way! But funny enough union membership is in decline? How does that work? Slowly but surely things seem to be eroding into the abyss. I can't see the carbon tax ever getting abolished. If Julia can get away with saying no carbon tax while she was in term. Tony can say he will get rid of it and actually keep it in place or rename it. The lucky country is no more!
Young people that work in the cafes and food industry are the hardest hit with long hours,contracts and no penalty rates. Yep the rich are getting richer and the poorer will get poorer. The widening of the gap between the haves and have nots is leaving less and less people in the middle. As for the aged people that have worked and paid tax, they seem to been forgotten and thrown on the scrap heap. How can illegal migrants get more money and benefits and contribute nothing to our society? Personally I don't think my superannuation will be worth diddly squat by the time I retire. The rules will be changed and the pension will only be for the disabled and Im sure as hell that i won't be entitled to a pension after paying tax my whole working career. Typically the government has adjusted unemployment figures on paper in regards to Part time work. Seriously who wants to work split shifts or two part time jobs to make ends meet? But hey your not unemployed.
Whats my point to this post? I don't know. Just a observation over the last few years I guess.
T88
You make some really interesting points there T88.  I used to be of the opinion that we shouldn't be cutting wages and that things like Work Choices were a bad idea.  Now-days I just think 'stuff it, people get what they vote for'.  

Your observation about union membership is astute; lowest participation in unions ever in this country.  The union bogey-man died years ago, I think Hawke's wages accord was the beginning of the end.  The only industries left with powerful unions are the really militant ones like the CFMEU but outside of that core of prominent, active ones people tend to be in much weaker unions that don't do much (like the Shop Assistants, whatever that's called now) or not in unions at all.  I've been in some really p*ss-weak unions myself over the years - reps who can't be bothered returning your calls or when you do actually speak to them they tell you they're too busy to do anything.  Honestly, I think the best thing you can do for yourself now-days is to not be in a union and get an IR solicitor when you really need one - there's so many solicitors around now that it's an affordable option for most people.

There does seem to be a race to the bottom happening in some sectors like unskilled or over-supplied industries.  My friend works in hospitality and in addition to there being very few rules and lots of cash slushing around people tend to get paid below-award and the industry uses lots of backpackers, foreigners on student visas getting cash under the table and Aussies who are desperate so they take anything.  You tend to get as little as $12 an hour or even less but at least (in my friend's case) you get to take home food from the restaurant so it does make up a bit for the terrible wages.

Even being educated won't protect you from slum conditions.  As people who've followed my posts would know, I've worked in the welfare sector for many years and there's been a constant race on to cut wages by some very well-known large charities and organisations to the extent that they try and pay degree-qualified social workers like they're receptionists - this is the latest trick I've heard.  So instead of $30 an hour they try and get away with paying $18.  If you bothered to go to uni and get qualified it's a real slap in the face... you'd be better paid cleaning offices.

If we do get a Work Choices II (which I think despite what Christopher Pyne says, we probably will) the main target will be things like penalty rates and sick leave - two things employers have been harping on about for ages.
  don_dunstan Dr Beeching

Location: Adelaide proud
3. Joe Hockey wants to lift the debt ceiling by 67%; from 300 billion to 500 billion. If debt was bad under Labor, then it's equally bad under the Coalition.  As I predicted, and others agreed, some pages back, it's "because of the mess they've inherited from the previous Government." This is said by all incoming governments whenever there's change of Party in power; nobody believes it, and I wonder why they bother. It's as predictable as the full moon.
Valvegear
An increase of 67% is ridiculous.  There were people in the cheer squad on this board extolling the virtues of a conservative government's prudent fiscal management - and now they're in government they're doing the exact opposite?  And please don't tell me it's Labor's fault (as you rightfully point out), the adults are in charge now, increasing debt by 67% is clearly the opposite of what they had been saying for the 3 years prior to being elected.

It's all a game of 'kick the can down the road'.
  Aaron The Ghost of George Stephenson

Location: University of Adelaide SA
Translation: "Stuff the UN Convention".
"Valvegear"
That's not necessarily a bad idea, we would not be the only nation with a similar section to an act. We do have a right to sovereignty and self determination...
  Valvegear Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Richmond Vic
That's not necessarily a bad idea, we would not be the only nation with a similar section to an act. We do have a right to sovereignty and self determination...
"Aaron"
Nobody denies Australia's right to sovereignty. But it might be good mannered to officially tell the UN that, although Australia is a signatory to the UN Convention in question, we have no intention of observing it, and would the UN please remove our signature. That would at least absolve us of hypocrisy.
  Aaron The Ghost of George Stephenson

Location: University of Adelaide SA
Nobody denies Australia's right to sovereignty. But it might be good mannered to officially tell the UN that, although Australia is a signatory to the UN Convention in question, we have no intention of observing it, and would the UN please remove our signature. That would at least absolve us of hypocrisy.
"Valvegear"
We do need to tell the UN that, the UN already know that. Nobody ought to deny any nation a sovereign right, but the UN seeks to do just that.
  Valvegear Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Richmond Vic
Nobody ought to deny any nation a sovereign right, but the UN seeks to do just that.
"Aaron"
I can't agree. The UN is seeking to get agreement from a huge number of sovereign nations on any number of issues, and that's not an infringement of sovereignty. It's rather like the street where you live, Aaron; your home exists under your sovereignty and your neighbours do not wish to alter that. But, an agreement with all the neighbours to cease drag racing in the street by 9.00 pm is possible none the less. It's a simple matter of cooperation by agreement.
  Aaron The Ghost of George Stephenson

Location: University of Adelaide SA
I can't agree. The UN is seeking to get agreement from a huge number of sovereign nations on any number of issues, and that's not an infringement of sovereignty. It's rather like the street where you live, Aaron; your home exists under your sovereignty and your neighbours do not wish to alter that. But, an agreement with all the neighbours to cease drag racing in the street by 9.00 pm is possible none the less. It's a simple matter of cooperation by agreement.
"Valvegear"
A better analogy is this: buy a house in a strata, want paint it green?... Nope can't do that, you have work within this range of strata approved colours, boring brown, red and cream.

Sponsored advertisement

Subscribers: bevans, br30453, jayrail, T88, wurx

Display from:   

Quick Reply

We've disabled Quick Reply for this thread as it was last updated more than six months ago.