You might find the getting into NZ comes with a requirement to have undergone a full psychological assessment, based on the deeds of some absolute smeg loser back in March. He's  probably ruined any chances of that for those looking to make such a move.

Regards

Earlier posts re: Chris Bowen... Anyone associated closely with the campaign that has just been run by the fed alp should steer clear of any shadow ministry or prime ministerial ambitions. Tanya P, is a smart cookie which is why she is not entering the alp leadership contest. Time for a fresh lineup and as much as Albo is a well liked favourite, he does not seem to have the energy needed to take on Morrison or attract younger voters.

What are you proposing ANR? That the ALP don’t have a shadow ministry at all? Everyone in Parliament has just been closely associated with the last election... That’s, um, why they’re in parliament now...

As unaccustomed as we are in Victoria to being lied to by politicians in recent years, because Premier Andrews has not done this before...a mere three days after the federal election, it seems we are being lied to by the Morrison government.

One of the very few promises of a scant agenda this lot made was to promise tax cuts withing 8 weeks of the election, these were Treasurer Frydenberg's own words. Now we are being told...despite ScoMo advising during the campaign the tax cuts wouldn't need legislation to be passed to enable their delivery, that they may not be delivered until some future date after July.

https://www.theage.com.au/federal-election-2019/tax-cuts-for-10-million-workers-in-doubt-as-morrison-concedes-delay-to-parliament-20190521-p51pgs.html

It looks like lies to me and isn't a very good start for this new government.

Mike.

Aaron, on second thoughts, maybe Chris Bowen should be elected ALP leader.

As unaccustomed as we are in Victoria to being lied to by politicians in recent years, because Premier Andrews has not done this before...a mere three days after the federal election, it seems we are being lied to by the Morrison government.

One of the very few promises of a scant agenda this lot made was to promise tax cuts withing 8 weeks of the election, these were Treasurer Frydenberg's own words. Now we are being told...despite ScoMo advising during the campaign the tax cuts wouldn't need legislation to be passed to enable their delivery, that they may not be delivered until some future date after July.

https://www.theage.com.au/federal-election-2019/tax-cuts-for-10-million-workers-in-doubt-as-morrison-concedes-delay-to-parliament-20190521-p51pgs.html

It looks like lies to me and isn't a very good start for this new government.

Mike.

And you would really believe anyone that attends one of those happy clapper cult groups that believe in fairies in the sky. Ha ha, all sucked in and don't complain to me as I didn't vote for ScoMo.  All Liberal voters are just greedy c*nts.

It looks like lies to me and isn't a very good start for this new government.

I think it's pretty obvious that all politicians, as soon as they are elected, believe that they have a God-given right to lie through their teeth.

It looks like lies to me and isn't a very good start for this new government.

I think it's pretty obvious that all politicians, as soon as they are elected, believe that they have a God-given right to lie through their teeth.

So in this case you'd rather them to break the law and deliver tax cuts without the motion to pass through Parliament?
Do you have any evidence they lied, no zip! Just dribble! You both have been around long enough how such events occur.
If you have direct evidence to such they deliberately set this up to fail. Then fine, call them for what they are!

Usual issue that happens in big business, budget worked on ahead of the election, the election timing without consideration to a commitment in the budget on one issue, the two events not linked, coupled with delays in the voting.

Rather harp on what you both know is illegal, lets see how they resolve the issue, then you can call them out at being useless, ripping us off or acknowledge it was handled well or not. That's how most business operate when such issues arise!

Yes I would say the same if the ALP had the same issue!

Yeah, and I bet none of them will be 50km north of Brisbane.

Given there is no local manufacture, what happens overseas will be the determinant. If North Queensland is the only market for current-style 4WDs the price will probably rise to what an electric vehicle is today, or more.

https://mr4x4.com.au/rivian-r1t-electric-ute-unveiled/
(no starter motor, no gearbox, no diffs, no oil changes, etc)

Yeah, and I bet none of them will be 50km north of Brisbane.

or West...

Yeah, and I bet none of them will be 50km north of Brisbane.

Given there is no local manufacture, what happens overseas will be the determinant. If North Queensland is the only market for current-style 4WDs the price will probably rise to what an electric vehicle is today, or more.

https://mr4x4.com.au/rivian-r1t-electric-ute-unveiled/
(no starter motor, no gearbox, no diffs, no oil changes, etc)

And about as ugly as they come!

ABC computer modelling currently has the Coalition on 76 seats with 4 in doubt.

If counting was stopped now, the 4 in doubt would be split evenly between the two majors.

If they all go to the ALP, we would be certain to see a very lively House of Representatives for the next three years as subtracting one government MP to go to the Speaker's chair would leave the government with exactly half of the House.

Earlier posts re: Chris Bowen... Anyone associated closely with the campaign that has just been run by the fed alp should steer clear of any shadow ministry or prime ministerial ambitions. Tanya P, is a smart cookie which is why she is not entering the alp leadership contest. Time for a fresh lineup and as much as Albo is a well liked favourite, he does not seem to have the energy needed to take on Morrison or attract younger voters.

Albo needs to stay on the team - although probably not as the leader or deputy - simply for the fact that he can provide a lot of support to a fresh leadership team which lacks experience. The ALP will have been in opposition for nearly nine years by the next election (plus the time they were in opposition against themselves in the latter half of the Gillard/Rudd term) and will need to have a couple of experienced former ministers on the team to show they can be a party of government.

What Albo really should have done is ruled himself out of the long term leadership and put his hand up to be the interim leader for a period of around six months, and shifted to providing his credibility to the incoming team after that.

Labor also needs to do whatever it takes to get Shorten out of the way as soon as possible - ideally by the end of the year to allow a fresh young star to take his place in a by-election in February or March. He will be a major liability for whoever leads the party at the next election if he's still lurking in the shadows with a knife.

Let's get a grip here. It was hardly an overwhelming endorsement of the LNP in spite of the unexpected result.  They are only likely to marginally improve their position on the 2016 election.  The reality is that the electorate is evenly split between the two major parties.  Both suffered a reduction in their primary vote.  It wasn't a landslide as some would like to make out.  

In hindsight, I think Labor failed in not grandfathering their franking credits policy, similar to their policy on negative gearing, but more importantly, they failed to communicate effectively with the coal mining communities in both Qld and NSW in providing a policy for maintaining employment in transitioning from the a fossil fuel economy to renewables.

The re-elected LNP is sooner or later going to have to face up to the reality that the continued drain on the budget because of middle class welfare, such as negative gearing and franking credits refunds, is no longer sustainable if it wants to maintain services which the community expects.  They drag up the old chestnut of cutting the public service to balance the budget, but that will soon translate into public anger that the level of services deteriorates.  They are bereft of any vision for reform in the future other than maintaining the status quo.  Let's see how that pans out in the next three years.

Yeah, and I bet none of them will be 50km north of Brisbane.

or West...

Fewer again east.

Morrison has come out today and stated there may be delays in the tax cuts.

The Constitution or at least the electrol commission rules/law what ever has priority over the the incumbent govt.

Let's get a grip here. It was hardly an overwhelming endorsement of the LNP in spite of the unexpected result.  They are only likely to marginally improve their position on the 2016 election.  The reality is that the electorate is evenly split between the two major parties.  Both suffered a reduction in their primary vote.  It wasn't a landslide as some would like to make out.

It's a lot more of a coalition endorsement than it is an ALP one! A coalition marginal increase of two seats, and 0.7% 2PP overall swing to them is significantly better than the ALP who will be returning to Parliament house with a net loss of two seats, and a -0.7% 2PP swing to their credit.

Both suffered a nett loss in primary vote, but Labor suffered worse and The Greens went backwards too, and at least LNP, Nationals and Country Liberals all had a nett increase in primary vote.

It was a landslide of sorts, just not the type you're used to seeing. Many thought the ALP would win buy up to 10 seats (some by more), not entirely unreasonable thoughts given the polling, yet they end up at -2 seats - it's a backwards landslide.

In hindsight, I think Labor failed in not grandfathering their franking credits policy, similar to their policy on negative gearing

No, it was just a rubbish policy. Labor failed to keep a dumb idea consigned to the bin of dumb ideas, instead somehow letting it escape into the open. Their negative gearing policy was equally silly.

Lots of Australians are not in the position to be paid dividends on shares or negatively gear property, but the idea of changing those rules was never going to have mass appeal. Why? Because although almost to a person, Australians hate rich people and the financial breaks they get, but 'taxing' these breaks is seldom as popular as Labor or The Greens or the other communist groups would like. Why? Because almost all those same people that are not in the position to receive share dividends or own multiple properties aspire to one day have those things, and they don't want to be taxed on it then.

'Grandfathering' it is even worse! Why vote today to not tax someone already getting it, so that one day when I get it I have to pay? How dumb do you want your voters to be?

they failed to communicate effectively with the coal mining communities in both Qld and NSW in providing a policy for maintaining employment in transitioning from the a fossil fuel economy to renewables.

They communicated with these people perfectly well! These are the exact people I mention above likely to be in the position (maybe even now) in the future to receive those things that the ALP wanted to tax or otherwise change the rules on. The people in those communities were communicated to and understood very well, precisely why the ALP didn't get nary a seat there.

The re-elected LNP is sooner or later going to have to face up to the reality that the continued drain on the budget because of middle class welfare, such as negative gearing and franking credits refunds, is no longer sustainable if it wants to maintain services which the community expects.  They drag up the old chestnut of cutting the public service to balance the budget, but that will soon translate into public anger that the level of services deteriorates.  They are bereft of any vision for reform in the future other than maintaining the status quo.  Let's see how that pans out in the next three years.

I suspect the 'middle class welfare' as you call it will be well kept, it's the middle class that won the election, mostly because all Labor could do was tell those middle class how tough they'd make it for them if they were elected.

Australian's looking to leave Australia and move to NZ after the election result.

https://www.smh.com.au/federal-election-2019/nz-immigration-website-traffic-surges-after-coalition-victory-20190521-p51pkt.html?btis

Given half a chance I'd love to move to the Wanka/Queenstown/Lake Teanu region, beautiful part of the world to live and retire and many do. I have a 35 year old friend and his Russian wife moved there last year, commutes to Iraq for work.

I however doubt too many anti-LNP supporters would be seriously considering such a move just because the same govt got voted back.

As unaccustomed as we are in Victoria to being lied to by politicians in recent years, because Premier Andrews has not done this before...a mere three days after the federal election, it seems we are being lied to by the Morrison government.

One of the very few promises of a scant agenda this lot made was to promise tax cuts withing 8 weeks of the election, these were Treasurer Frydenberg's own words. Now we are being told...despite ScoMo advising during the campaign the tax cuts wouldn't need legislation to be passed to enable their delivery, that they may not be delivered until some future date after July.

https://www.theage.com.au/federal-election-2019/tax-cuts-for-10-million-workers-in-doubt-as-morrison-concedes-delay-to-parliament-20190521-p51pgs.html

It looks like lies to me and isn't a very good start for this new government.

Mike.

Looks like compliance with legislation to me.

EDIT: I just read the article, 20 minutes after making my reply. You didn't read the article did you? It literally tells you why the tax amendment won't be occurring in the very first paragraph no less! Exactly as I suspected, governments cannot just implement changes to legislation (even with a majority in both houses) without following the proper processes. You mentioned elsewhere that you have worked all your life in the government, perhaps you should have spent a little of your generous at work downtime over those years actually learning how governments work.

And you would really believe anyone that attends one of those happy clapper cult groups that believe in fairies in the sky. Ha ha, all sucked in and don't complain to me as I didn't vote for ScoMo.  All Liberal voters are just greedy c*nts.

SO you have a sticker on your car that says

"Don't blame me, I voted Labor,
you know,
- the party that choose the most unpopular candidate for leader, the same guy who took money off cleaners in favour of union payments
- the party that choose tax increases as a means to grow the economy
- the party that who's leader and even local candiates for CQ couldn't even answer a simple bloody question on do you or not support Adani?

Yep, that was me who supported this mob!"

Hello RTT Rules and others,

Correction, Bill Shorten did clearly say during the Election Campaign, and live on the TV News Ch 7, 9, & 2 , that the Adani mine would go ahead if it secured the necessary regulatory approvals and finance. At the time of his statement, the environmental approval from the Qld Govt was delayed due to the submitted plan to protect endangered wildlife and a water cleansing process needing to be improved. I am not quite sure what other comment was appropriate, given that final approvals had not been reached, and given that as Opposition Leader during a general election, Bill Shorten was not in a position to say anything else. ( Nor, for that matter, was Scott Morrison, for exactly the same reasons. )

Regarding the so called Tax Increases, relating to negative gearing and capital gains tax exemptions, they were actually a reduction, not removal, of an existing set of tax concessions that would apply after 1st July 2019, with existing rates of exemption grandfathered until they expired ( which , with the passage of time, they constantly do, due to the concessions being of a transitory nature ) . According to the Commonwealth Treasury, the concessions currently represent $800M pa in foregone revenue, and it is anticipated to pass the $1B pa mark in the next 6 years. Realistically, this is unsustainable, at some point these tax concessions will need to be reduced or abolished , otherwise the Commonwealth Government will not have the revenue to fund health and social security , which costs are expanding due to an ageing population and a corresponding reduction in the percentage of taxpayers who actually pay tax.These two categories make up the bulk of Commonwealth expenditure.

Another way of looking at this issue is what alternatives are there to allow this rapidly growing tax exemptions to continue ? One possibility is to reduce the amount of payments the Commonwealth passes onto the States, less Commonwealth money, therefore less State Grants . What revenue raising measure can the States utilize that the Commonwealth has no legislative power over ? One choice is Land and Property taxes. Historically, State Parliaments implemented Land Tax partially to prevent a small number of people being able to purchase and hold vast land tracts to the detriment of other residents . ( They were not citizens then, but British Subjects living in a Crown Colony. Which remained the case until the passage of the Nationality and Citizenship Act, 1948. ) In this sense, the effect of Land Tax is to ensure that land is available for residents to purchase, as well as help fund the State Government. As taxes are not a tax deduction, the rates of land tax could be adjusted to accomodate the fall in Commonwealth revenue, and there is not much the Commonwealth can do about it.

Whilst the late High Court Judge, and former Commonwealth Parliamentarian and Cabinet Minister, Sir Garfield Barwick, said words to the effect that paying tax is a legal requirement and not an obligation; the reality is that Governments require revenue to provide collective services, and this is primarily some form of taxation, which residents and organisations need to pay to enable this to happen.

One persons tax deduction is covered by other peoples tax payments. One company's reduced tax liability ( often close to zero ) is covered by other companies and other individuals. Yes, mining companies for example pay Royalties , this is not the same as paying Company Tax . Minerals belong to the Crown ( ie, all of us collectively ), and a Royalty is a payment for permission to mine, which is not the same as Company Tax, which is a proportion of Net Revenue After Deductions that companies are liable to pay ( or not, if the company can establish a financial structure that conveniently avoids a Company Tax Liability )

Regards, Radioman.

So in this case you'd rather them to break the law and deliver tax cuts without the motion to pass through Parliament?

Do you have any evidence they lied, no zip! Just dribble! You both have been around long enough how such events occur.

Good God, man; I'm not talking about this one isolated instance. I am talking about a lifetime of experience, living in Australia, close to the action, and having seen more broken political promises than you've had hot dinners.

Am hearing that Chris Bowen will step aside from challenging Anthony Albanese for the leadership of the ALP, he is set to hold a presser at 3:45pm, thank goodness for that!!!

How devastating.

Maybe.......

The number of senate seats held by each state should be more accurately reflected by the states population???

As I see it, proportionally Senate seat wise, Tasmania should be reduced from 6 to 4 seats, SA and WA should be reduced from 6 to 5 seats. In order to maintain a 40 seat Senate, both Vic and QLD should increase from 6 to 7 seats, and NSW from 6 to 8 seats.

IMHO, this better represents the proportional spread of the country's population AND as such, is a better reflection of influence earned per capita.

To believe otherwise, is to advocate that the more populous states populations opinion, is worth less than those of less populous states.
Respectfully, I submit that it is NOT.

Some may say that's unfair. Really, what's the basis for comparison??? Should we open the can of worms about return of GST revenue????

Regards

The number of senate seats held by each state should be more accurately reflected by the states population???

As I see it, proportionally Senate seat wise, Tasmania should be reduced from 6 to 4 seats, SA and WA should be reduced from 6 to 5 seats. In order to maintain a 40 seat Senate, both Vic and QLD should increase from 6 to 7 seats, and NSW from 6 to 8 seats.

QLD with less seats than NSW?  NEVER !!!

The only way to get this over the line is to propose an alternative of a 7th state in Northern Queensland, so Sth Qld and Nth Qld would get 4 seats each, the same as NSW, and TAS goes back to 3.

The Queenslanders would be so terrified at the prospect of their State of Origin Rugby League Team being split and weakened they would vote to "keep Queensland unitied!" in a flash!

/s