The Turnbull Government

[TLS]

The Prime Minister sets the agenda and direction, decides priorities and who he will listen to is in effect the government and if the electorate decides to vote for what they see as a moderate government then they don't want a right wing upstart taking over (and vice versa) without their permission.

So really, how can you trust a party that is so divided by ideology that they can't guarantee who their leader will be in six months or a years time ?

The Libs are too much of a risk to vote for imo.[/QUOTE]

So which party has a stable leader at the moment (I'd say none) . It wasn't that long ago that your biased party leader was being challenged too...

 

[SirRumpole]

So which party has a stable leader at the moment (I'd say none) . It wasn't that long ago that your biased party leader was being challenged too...

If you are talking about Bill Shorten (he's not my leader as I'm not a member of the Labor Party), that was about 5 years ago I think.

Biased ? Who the hell isn't in politics ?

 

[SirRumpole]

Yes Rumpy, see you at the booth, how are the Labor how to vote pamphlets going?
Julia, Kev and Bill would like to join you, but they are still receiving medical attention, to remove the knives they put in each others back's.

FFS they got voted out because of their disunity.

Same should happen to the Libs.

 

[TLS]

If you are talking about Bill Shorten (he's not my leader as I'm not a member of the Labor Party), that was about 5 years ago I think.

Biased ? Who the hell isn't in politics ?

Oh well , I thought he was .. end of topic for me now.

 

[sptrawler]

Biased ? Who the hell isn't in politics ?

No one should be biased in politics, it isn't as though either side has a monopoly on intelligence and neither side has all the right answers.
The responsibility of the voter, is to choose which ideas and policies, will make a better Country.
Sometimes this may require a tightening of the belt, sometimes a loosening.
One thing for sure, constantly pandering to people's wants, will result in disaster.
Because as can be seen by the charts of what people are spending money on, their wants far exceed their needs and always will.

 

[SirRumpole]

Because as can be seen by the charts of what people are spending money on, their wants far exceed their needs and always will.

Who is pandering to the want of tobacco ?

Was plain packaging of cigarettes pandering to smokers ?

 

[sptrawler]

FFS they got voted out because of their disunity.

Same should happen to the Libs.

And probably will, doesn't mean it wasn't the right thing to do, Turnbull should have waited untill Abbott lost the election.
I and most of the right leaning memebers on here at the time, said it was a disaster.
Turnbull never has known what he stands for, just lovers driving the big chair. IMO
We all said, Morrison should have been put in, if Abbott was to be toppled.

Not saying Turnbull isn't a nice guy, but it isn't about being a nice guy, it is about getting the job done. Then being judged on what you stood for, Turnbull can't do that, Bill will struggle with the same problem.

I think Morrison is one who will make a commitment and stand by it, because I have the feeling he thinks it through, maybe he isn't into populist politics.
That would be novel, can't wait to see how the media handle another John Howard. Just my opinion.

 

[sptrawler]

Who is pandering to the want of tobacco ?

Was plain packaging of cigarettes pandering to smokers ?

People can smoke if they want to, but taxpayers shouldn't be buying the cigarettes for them, then have to pay for their health problems as a result of their smoking.

 

[SirRumpole]

but taxpayers shouldn't be buying the cigarettes for them

Huh ?

Australia has one of the highest taxes on cigarettes in the world.

 

[sptrawler]

Huh ?

Australia has one of the highest taxes on cigarettes in the world.

Obviously not high enough, I still see the obviously unemployed smoking, while sitting in the City mall.
Like I said, if someone who is working wants to spend their money on smokes fine, but I do mind when I pay taxes and see the unemployed smoking how the hell can they afford that?
I gave it up years ago, because I couldn't afford it and I was working.
Now you want me to forego my retirement, to provide them with smokes, FFS?

 

[SirRumpole]

Now you want me to forego my retirement, to provide them with smokes, FFS?

They may be paying for your retirement with their cigarette taxes.

 

[PZ.]

They may be paying for your retirement with their cigarette taxes.

That's exactly what they are doing.

[2014] Australian Liberal Democratic senator David Leyonhjelm has just delivered a speech which stands up for the one rights of one in five citizens who choose to smoke.

His speech titled, Thank you For Smoking, he praises nicotine [friends] for their $8 billion a year contribution to the economy and says he did the maths: Last year smokers cost the health care system $320 million and another $150 million in bushfire control

https://www.businessinsider.com.au/...-staggering-generosity-to-the-economy-2014-10

Now even if those figures are exaggerated it's still very clear their revenue far outstrips their cost to the economy. Pretty sure the ALP want to increase tobacco tax by some 12% every year. It's worth noting - that $8b a year is even more revenue than the carbon tax was. Maybe we should change Shortens' moniker from Electricity bill to Puffing Billy.

Just for the record - I'm a non smoker for much the same reason as @sptrawler is. I can't justify paying all that tax for a puff

 

[SirRumpole]

Just for the record - I'm a non smoker for much the same reason as @sptrawler is. I can't justify paying all that tax for a puff

Same here, I don't mind taxes on stupid.

 

[Tisme]

I think my primary concern over all of this during the last ten years is our loss of democracy. What is the point of voting anymore .... I used to get that you voted for a party, not the leader but this has become ridiculous.

Ie. I had/have had an opinion of Judd vs Gillard, Abbot vs Turnball, Bishop, Scomo and would/would not have voted for each of them depending on who stood for the leadership at the time of an election. Still pissed at the loss of Bishop more than anything else out of all of this...

To me there is one thing that should instantly be put in place (legislation). Scomo come on down ....

A publicly elected PM should not be able to be ousted by internal party room machinations. The public voted them in and votes them out - simple equation in my mind.

- You want to change leaders. Fine by me but take it to an election.
- PM wants to make a radical decision like send troops to war etc without bi-partisan support. Fine by me but take it to an election.

Kevin Rudd went a fair way in making sure it is now difficult to replace their leader without rank and file support.

 

[SirRumpole]

Kevin Rudd went a fair way in making sure it is now difficult to replace their leader without rank and file support.

And if the Libs copied that they would look like a clone of the Labor Party.

 

[Tisme]

And if the Libs copied that they would look like a clone of the Labor Party.

They would need a rank and file first ... I'm not sure the LNP have any members these days.

 

[SirRumpole]

They would need a rank and file first ... I'm not sure the LNP have any members these days.

Not enough to fill the MCG that's for sure.

 

[PZ.]

The only way to fix the LNP is to go into opposition and stay there until they reform their ideology. Either they're a Liberal Party or they're a Conservative party. They can't be both.
It's never been a harmonious broad church. The only reason it looked stable under Howard is because all his opponents were shown the same door that just slammed on Turnbull.

The biggest problem for the LNP is funding. There's no money there. We might remember Malcolm Turnbull donating $1.75m to the party during the 2016 election. No chance of that again - if anything he should demand a refund due to fees for no service. On the other hand the Cory Tory party has a truckload of cash and it seems blindingly obvious to me that's it's the only way the Consevertives can campaign against a Labor party affluently funded by the unions.

We really should have a choice of Labor, Liberal Democrats or Conservatives. 3 clear choices.

 

[SirRumpole]

The only way to fix the LNP is to go into opposition and stay there until they reform their ideology. Either they're a Liberal Party or they're a Conservative party. They can't be both.
It's never been a harmonious broad church. The only reason it looked stable under Howard is because all his opponents were shown the same door that just slammed on Turnbull.

The biggest problem for the LNP is funding. There's no money there. We might remember Malcolm Turnbull donating $1.75m to the party during the 2016 election. No chance of that again - if anything he should demand a refund due to fees for no service. On the other hand the Cory Tory party has a truckload of cash and it seems blindingly obvious to me that's it's the only way the Consevertives can campaign against a Labor party affluently funded by the unions.

We really should have a choice of Labor, Liberal Democrats or Conservatives. 3 clear choices.

Maybe they could take some notice of a former party great.

https://theconversation.com/malcolm...d-reading-for-the-morrison-government-102187?

 

[PZ.]

LOL. Malcolm Fraser made the Coaltion very twitchy when he went Green and campaigned for Sarah Hanson-Young against an Abbott majority in the senate