Pick a side

Apparently an asylum seekers boat has been intercepted by the RAN and turned back in the last few days, but Indonesia would not accept the boat and its people! Well blow me down. What is going on here? Doesn't Indonesia listen to Tony's simplistic policies; we will stop the boats and turn them back when safe to do so. Well thy are saying you can keep them. And by the way I thought the boats had stopped but we are learning more about multiple boat movements from Jakarta then our own Government about what is really going on.

The obvious question always to ask him was: "Tony where are you turning them back to?". "do you have agreements with our neighbours to take them?" but no one managed to corner him long enough to get an answer or really they never tried too hard.

The fact is slogans don't work with your overseas neighbours that well.

What is the latest Tony Slogan " Here is my bill to lower your bills" delivered in a monotone manner as if we are all imbeciles.

How long can this go on before someone convinces him to actually talk openly to his people.

http://www.theage.com.au/business/beefedup-grant-raises-eyebrows-in-new-england-20131108-2x78y.html

  On 10/11/2013 at 10:40, The Hood said:

Apparently an asylum seekers boat has been intercepted by the RAN and turned back in the last few days, but Indonesia would not accept the boat and its people! Well blow me down. What is going on here? Doesn't Indonesia listen to Tony's simplistic policies; we will stop the boats and turn them back when safe to do so. Well thy are saying you can keep them. And by the way I thought the boats had stopped but we are learning more about multiple boat movements from Jakarta then our own Government about what is really going on.

The obvious question always to ask him was: "Tony where are you turning them back to?". "do you have agreements with our neighbours to take them?" but no one managed to corner him long enough to get an answer or really they never tried too hard.

The fact is slogans don't work with your overseas neighbours that well.

What is the latest Tony Slogan " Here is my bill to lower your bills" delivered in a monotone manner as if we are all imbeciles.

How long can this go on before someone convinces him to actually talk openly to his people.

well it was a rescue operation on an indonesian boat in indonesian waters crewed by indonesians with indonesian resident passengers on board

seems reasonable to me to try and hand them over to indonesia after rescuing them (it was their search and rescue area)

i suspect the spying allegation politics had more to do with the indonesian stonewalling

i wonder which aust government initiated that decision

btw indonesia has accepted the return of some boats lately but as is usual their position is a moving one

things aren't quite as black and white as you would like to convey, hood

This is a novel way of trying to get in: http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-11-10/asylum-seeker-arrives-on-christmas-island-dressed-as-cricketer/5081802

  On 10/11/2013 at 13:33, Grapeviney said:

This is a novel way of trying to get in: http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-11-10/asylum-seeker-arrives-on-christmas-island-dressed-as-cricketer/5081802

The important question is, can he bat? If so, sign him up.

  On 10/11/2013 at 10:56, RobbieF said:

http://www.theage.com.au/business/beefedup-grant-raises-eyebrows-in-new-england-20131108-2x78y.html

oh yeah.

Tony Windsor is the guy who was offered oral favours by our current prime minister so he could become prime minister when he didn't have the numbers.

The boat guy.

Your hero.

Hasn't Tony done anything embarrassing in the last 3 days? I could start on Christopher Pyne I suppose!

In a strange twist, Abbott's speech when Rudd announced his retirement was probably his best moment since becoming PM.

  On 15/11/2013 at 11:34, P-man said:

In a strange twist, Abbott's speech when Rudd announced his retirement was probably his best moment since becoming PM.

Worst, I thought.

Leaving aside Abbott's politics, I recently attended a fund raising function at which he was the main speaker.

I thought he spoke well and came across as an intelligent, sincere and honest person.

It brought home to me how dirty a game politics has become when people can't deal with the issues and personalities without resorting to personal attacks on the other which are often dishonest and designed to deflect from the real issues.

A bit like football club politics.

  On 15/11/2013 at 15:21, Ben-Hur said:

Worst, I thought.

Haha..that doesn't surprise me.

This thread is a cracker.

It looks like going for 4-8 years at this stage (unless conservative forces get it closed).

After watching Heavy Kevvy resign yesterday it struck me that a man who can only shed tears for himself in public (twice)

was a very fragile ego with a Jesus complex.

Yes he was undermined by his own apostles and he did resurrect himself however briefly ,but he was prone to swift and silly decisions.

Tony Abbott was the most gracious and most statesmanlike he has ever appeared in yesterdays sitting.

He will lose his lollies over his stupid "stop the boats" dogma and debt ,as well as his buffoonery in foreign relationships.

Twiggy,Gina and Clive will drag him into the mud(or brown coal) as well.

Despite this ,The Mad Monk will probably win two terms.

The electoral belting Labor received has been a good thing.

Some of dead wood of the ALP has packed up and it will have a post bushfire regrowth if it continues to go back to basics.

The Parliament was full of time-servers (list-cloggers) in footy terms.

Unfortunately for the Liberals they will need some Big Ideas which has always been a weak point.

There is little intellectual strength in the Liberal party to give it serious clout which is the only thing stopping it from three terms.

The left side of politics is only ever one charismatic and eloquent leader away from an election victory.

I dont see that in Shorten or Albanese.

  On 16/11/2013 at 00:41, Biffen said:

This thread is a cracker.

It looks like going for 4-8 years at this stage (unless conservative forces get it closed).

After watching Heavy Kevvy resign yesterday it struck me that a man who can only shed tears for himself in public (twice)

was a very fragile ego with a Jesus complex.

Yes he was undermined by his own apostles and he did resurrect himself however briefly ,but he was prone to swift and silly decisions.

Tony Abbott was the most gracious and most statesmanlike he has ever appeared in yesterdays sitting.

He will lose his lollies over his stupid "stop the boats" dogma and debt ,as well as his buffoonery in foreign relationships.

Twiggy,Gina and Clive will drag him into the mud(or brown coal) as well.

Despite this ,The Mad Monk will probably win two terms.

The electoral belting Labor received has been a good thing.

Some of dead wood of the ALP has packed up and it will have a post bushfire regrowth if it continues to go back to basics.

The Parliament was full of time-servers (list-cloggers) in footy terms.

Unfortunately for the Liberals they will need some Big Ideas which has always been a weak point.

There is little intellectual strength in the Liberal party to give it serious clout which is the only thing stopping it from three terms.

The left side of politics is only ever one charismatic and eloquent leader away from an election victory.

I dont see that in Shorten or Albanese.

Biff I think the LNP big idea is about restoring the the status quo circa 2006. That will set their agenda for two terms and importantly keep Uncle Rupert happy.

And there are plenty of list cloggers in the LNP but there is also plenty of aggressive grunt in the mid field in Tony, big Joe and Scott M with a nifty winger in Pyne to cover for some other very pedestrian performers in the team.

Is this one of the ALP's big ideas?

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/in-depth/labor-told-of-31bn-nbn-risk/story-e6frgaif-1226761478500

Julia has really done herself proud, be interesting to see if she finishes up in the slammer.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/opinion/how-julia-gillard-was-ready-to-censor-our-free-media/story-e6frgd0x-1226761407076

Then there was.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opinion/columnists/how-julia-gillards-ambition-destroyed-kevin-rudd-and-alp/story-e6frg75f-1226761414074

Meanwhile an old problem for the current leader may come back to haunt him.

Sorry Robbie can't get through the Oz pay wall to see whatever sleaze has been dug up by Ruperts henchmen. Can you direct me to the Internet troll site they are sourcing?

  On 16/11/2013 at 09:18, The Hood said:

Sorry Robbie can't get through the Oz pay wall to see whatever sleaze has been dug up by Ruperts henchmen. Can you direct me to the Internet troll site they are sourcing?

This help; but then again maybe you just don't want to read it, its better to remain ignorant of the facts.

Why, then, have so many media-freedom-loving leaders in the Australian journalistic community, and in academe, been silent and, worse, sneeringly critical of two journalists who have been censored, intimidated and seen their reputations trashed for disclosures in late August 2011, about Gillard's conduct?

Now, in the new light of hard, documentary evidence from exhaustive investigations during the past 11 months by Victoria Police fraud squad detectives, who will be back in court early next month, it is difficult to avoid one disturbing conclusion.

It is that Milne, Smith and their employers were subjected to a shameless, unprecedented, unfair and disproportionate counterattack by Gillard, who wanted their attempted reporting about her role in setting up the slush fund killed off for all time. A conga line of media critics (for whom party-political preference and ideology appeared to trump the principles of a free press) joined in to make sure the credibility of the two was shredded. Despite the rhetoric we often hear about the importance of repulsing overt intimidation of the media, Milne and Smith were cut down, and lampooned as conspiracy theorists. Attempted media regulation followed.

For those unsure of where things are at, the police interest remains high. The police are due to go back to court in a couple of weeks. A month ago, lawyers for Victoria Police explained to the Melbourne Magistrates Court why they have been taking the slush fund fraud investigation so seriously. The police, who have numerous incriminating statements, want to peruse more than 360 documents seized from Slater & Gordon relating to Gillard's former client and lover, Wilson. He is fighting to prevent the police from having access to this material.

Ron Gipp, for lead investigator Senior Sergeant Ross Mitchell, told the court last month that police were confident in their case so far. "The evidence is very strong," Gipp said. "What we are talking about here is not merely Mr Mitchell saying: 'Look, I've got a suspicion.' This is going way, way beyond just mere suspicion."

Earlier this year, police seized hundreds of documents under the warrant, which specifically sought files held by Slater & Gordon relating to Wilson and Gillard, including her personnel files, invoices, travel records and documents from the firm's partner meetings relating to Gillard and the AWU.

Perhaps those who still don't get it - who still lampoon The Australian, Milne, Smith, Baker and other journalists, including this one, who have been involved in exposing these issues - should explain to the fraud squad detectives and the police lawyers why they, too, are barking up the wrong tree.

- See more at: http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/opinion/how-julia-gillard-was-ready-to-censor-our-free-media/story-e6frgd0x-1226761407076#sthash.c0gC6X9w.dpuf

A SECRET review of the NBN prepared for the Gillard government almost three years ago estimated it would leave taxpayers up to $31 billion worse off and warned of major risks in the plan, many of which were later realised.

The Weekend Australian has learned that the review by investment bank Lazard found the project would confront construction problems leading to cost increases for the building phase.

It also found that the project - once touted by the former Labor government as ideal for "mum and dad investors" - was so risky that no private investors would stump up the capital.

It is believed Lazard had raised concerns about Telstra's involvement under a multi-billion-dollar deal transferring many risks associated with the project from Telstra's books to NBN Co, while leaving Telstra with the option of competing against the NBN - yet still receiving funds from it - after 20 years.

Significantly, The Weekend Australian has learned that Lazard's calculations concluded that taxpayers would own an asset, NBN Co, with a negative net present value - the difference between the cash a project is expected to achieve and its costs - as high as $31bn.

Net present value calculations are done specifically to take the risks involved into account.

The advisers said the project had significantly underestimated the cost of its capital, and provided alternative figures, but in the end reasoned that this was a theoretical endeavour.

Citing the risk of the project and the long investment horizon, Lazard concluded that "no investor group other than the government" would provide equity finance to NBN Co while key planks of the business case were plagued by uncertainty.

The information clearly suggests that Lazard's views of the project were very different from those of NBN Co, which used Goldman Sachs as an adviser. The Goldman Sachs conclusions have never been made public.

- See more at: http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/in-depth/labor-told-of-31bn-nbn-risk/story-e6frgaif-1226761478500#sthash.zmKLqRss.dpuf

  On 16/11/2013 at 09:58, RobbieF said:

This help; but then again maybe you just don't want to read it, its better to remain ignorant of the facts.

Why, then, have so many media-freedom-loving leaders in the Australian journalistic community, and in academe, been silent and, worse, sneeringly critical of two journalists who have been censored, intimidated and seen their reputations trashed for disclosures in late August 2011, about Gillard's conduct?

Now, in the new light of hard, documentary evidence from exhaustive investigations during the past 11 months by Victoria Police fraud squad detectives, who will be back in court early next month, it is difficult to avoid one disturbing conclusion.

It is that Milne, Smith and their employers were subjected to a shameless, unprecedented, unfair and disproportionate counterattack by Gillard, who wanted their attempted reporting about her role in setting up the slush fund killed off for all time. A conga line of media critics (for whom party-political preference and ideology appeared to trump the principles of a free press) joined in to make sure the credibility of the two was shredded. Despite the rhetoric we often hear about the importance of repulsing overt intimidation of the media, Milne and Smith were cut down, and lampooned as conspiracy theorists. Attempted media regulation followed.

For those unsure of where things are at, the police interest remains high. The police are due to go back to court in a couple of weeks. A month ago, lawyers for Victoria Police explained to the Melbourne Magistrates Court why they have been taking the slush fund fraud investigation so seriously. The police, who have numerous incriminating statements, want to peruse more than 360 documents seized from Slater & Gordon relating to Gillard's former client and lover, Wilson. He is fighting to prevent the police from having access to this material.

Ron Gipp, for lead investigator Senior Sergeant Ross Mitchell, told the court last month that police were confident in their case so far. "The evidence is very strong," Gipp said. "What we are talking about here is not merely Mr Mitchell saying: 'Look, I've got a suspicion.' This is going way, way beyond just mere suspicion."

Earlier this year, police seized hundreds of documents under the warrant, which specifically sought files held by Slater & Gordon relating to Wilson and Gillard, including her personnel files, invoices, travel records and documents from the firm's partner meetings relating to Gillard and the AWU.

Perhaps those who still don't get it - who still lampoon The Australian, Milne, Smith, Baker and other journalists, including this one, who have been involved in exposing these issues - should explain to the fraud squad detectives and the police lawyers why they, too, are barking up the wrong tree.

- See more at: http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/opinion/how-julia-gillard-was-ready-to-censor-our-free-media/story-e6frgd0x-1226761407076#sthash.c0gC6X9w.dpuf

Well at least you have confirmed my suspicions that the Oz is merely running with Shyte coming out of that nut job Internet troll Smith. He has even managed to implicate Melbourne Water in massive payments to unions in the 90's and numerous other companies. I mean where does it end?

Easy journalism for the Oz to regurgitate this rubbish. And even if there is something in it, it happened 20 years ago and what does it all mean to you Robbie? Is Australian politics really a battle of good versus evil or two parties who have more in common than they have differences these days?

  On 16/11/2013 at 00:05, P-man said:

Haha..that doesn't surprise me.

It didn't surprise me that Tony was gracious, just that I disagreed with his sentiments. The left love to demonise Abbott, but the plain truth of the matter is that he's a very decent human being.

  On 16/11/2013 at 10:00, RobbieF said:

A SECRET review of the NBN prepared for the Gillard government almost three years ago estimated it would leave taxpayers up to $31 billion worse off and warned of major risks in the plan, many of which were later realised.

The Weekend Australian has learned that the review by investment bank Lazard found the project would confront construction problems leading to cost increases for the building phase.

It also found that the project - once touted by the former Labor government as ideal for "mum and dad investors" - was so risky that no private investors would stump up the capital.

It is believed Lazard had raised concerns about Telstra's involvement under a multi-billion-dollar deal transferring many risks associated with the project from Telstra's books to NBN Co, while leaving Telstra with the option of competing against the NBN - yet still receiving funds from it - after 20 years.

Significantly, The Weekend Australian has learned that Lazard's calculations concluded that taxpayers would own an asset, NBN Co, with a negative net present value - the difference between the cash a project is expected to achieve and its costs - as high as $31bn.

Net present value calculations are done specifically to take the risks involved into account.

The advisers said the project had significantly underestimated the cost of its capital, and provided alternative figures, but in the end reasoned that this was a theoretical endeavour.

Citing the risk of the project and the long investment horizon, Lazard concluded that "no investor group other than the government" would provide equity finance to NBN Co while key planks of the business case were plagued by uncertainty.

The information clearly suggests that Lazard's views of the project were very different from those of NBN Co, which used Goldman Sachs as an adviser. The Goldman Sachs conclusions have never been made public.

- See more at: http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/in-depth/labor-told-of-31bn-nbn-risk/story-e6frgaif-1226761478500#sthash.zmKLqRss.dpuf

I always thought one of the arguments for the NBN expenditure was that you could not do a reliable NPV because you are building basic infrastructure but you have no real way of predicting the income it may generate over the life of the asset, say 25 years because we are talking information technology that is reinventing itself every 7 years or so. So yes the private sector can't build it because they can't guarantee profits. We can stump numerous projects that were questionable at the time, a certain railway to Darwin, the desal plant, the harbour bridge, the Opera House, the proposed East West tunnell in Melbourne for that matter. How about the Snowy Mountain Scheme? Sometimes Governments of both persuasions, federal and state take a punt, sometimes there are secret reports too!

  On 16/11/2013 at 11:04, Ben-Hur said:

It didn't surprise me that Tony was gracious, just that I disagreed with his sentiments. The left love to demonise Abbott, but the plain truth of the matter is that he's a very decent human being.

As long as you don't find yourself standing between him and his objective!

  On 16/11/2013 at 10:53, The Hood said:

Well at least you have confirmed my suspicions that the Oz is merely running with Shyte coming out of that nut job Internet troll Smith. He has even managed to implicate Melbourne Water in massive payments to unions in the 90's and numerous other companies. I mean where does it end?

Easy journalism for the Oz to regurgitate this rubbish. And even if there is something in it, it happened 20 years ago and what does it all mean to you Robbie? Is Australian politics really a battle of good versus evil or two parties who have more in common than they have differences these days?

That's the way if you don't like it, dismiss it, it's easy that way.

When the former Prime Minister is facing the possibility of criminal charges I sit up and listen. If you don't care, suit yourself.

Systematic criminal behaviour in the Labor Party over many years is always a concern.

  On 16/11/2013 at 11:12, The Hood said:

I always thought one of the arguments for the NBN expenditure was that you could not do a reliable NPV because you are building basic infrastructure but you have no real way of predicting the income it may generate over the life of the asset, say 25 years because we are talking information technology that is reinventing itself every 7 years or so. So yes the private sector can't build it because they can't guarantee profits. We can stump numerous projects that were questionable at the time, a certain railway to Darwin, the desal plant, the harbour bridge, the Opera House, the proposed East West tunnell in Melbourne for that matter. How about the Snowy Mountain Scheme? Sometimes Governments of both persuasions, federal and state take a punt, sometimes there are secret reports too!

They commission a report, ignore it, and then tell everyone what a great idea it is and how it will pay for itself; yeah that seems fair.

We'll at least it does in your World.

You'd scream like a stuck pig if Abbott and the Libs did it.

  On 16/11/2013 at 11:17, RobbieF said:

That's the way if you don't like it, dismiss it, it's easy that way.

When the former Prime Minister is facing the possibility of criminal charges I sit up and listen. If you don't care, suit yourself.

Systematic criminal behaviour in the Labor Party over many years is always a concern.

Do the allegations given their timing involve the ALP or just people at the time who were members of unions, legal companies and maybe junior members of the party at the time? We're Bob Hawke or Keating in on this as well?