Talking Politics

[TigerForce]

Memo to the LNP, revenue, revenue, revenue. Build, innovate, show some goddam creativity and promote Australia as a 21st century mover & shaker. Instead we have a bunch of lobbyists protecting their own interests and offering nothing in the way of fresh ideas for the future. The top 1% come out relatively unscathed but is this a great surprise? Most of those navigating the pain train are from this very privileged group, seems like a case of clear self interest to me. Abbott's Australia is looking very bleak indeed.

Yeah I suppose we all wait longer for our income, while the parliamentary fat cats still get huge bonuses when they retire. This is clearly the worst LNP I've ever seen with the PM and Treasurer looking like real imposters. Dennis Naptime isn't any better either.....just keep building roads.....

 

[RemoteTiger]

Whilst I'm not an Abbott fan, I do have to applaud the removal of middle class welfare. The economy simply cannot continue to sustain it. Plus it was set up decades ago as a vote catcher.

The lower class need help - for sure - give them a safety net. But the Middle and Upper class do not need our Taxes to support their lifestyle.

There are a number of areas where Mr Abbott will over step - the pensions area for one, the farming subsidies another, the Public Service job cuts another (it is a misnomer that the federal public service is bloated - it has been cut back by every Government since Howard - Rudd and Gillard included).

But hey we are all getting worked up over a Parliamentary report - it is not law until it is included in the budget or other statutory acts.

The media and us are all falling for the three card trick - beat the drum about how this and that which is worse than bad will be included in the budget but when budget night comes they are not and everybody says - oh its not so bad - when in fact they slip through items that change our way of life.

Australia needs this wake up call.....question is will we heed it?

Please don't say we need the Labor mob back in - their economic record will place all our lifestyles in jeopardy. Some of their social policies are great but they always take too many social policies to law and the cost simply cannot be borne by our economy.....

 

[Rosy]

Whilst I'm not an Abbott fan, I do have to applaud the removal of middle class welfare. The economy simply cannot continue to sustain it. Plus it was set up decades ago as a vote catcher.

The lower class need help - for sure - give them a safety net. But the Middle and Upper class do not need our Taxes to support their lifestyle.

There are a number of areas where Mr Abbott will over step - the pensions area for one, the farming subsidies another, the Public Service job cuts another (it is a misnomer that the federal public service is bloated - it has been cut back by every Government since Howard - Rudd and Gillard included).

...

What do you think about the proposed PPL scheme Remote?

 

[tigersnake]

Whilst I'm not an Abbott fan, I do have to applaud the removal of middle class welfare. The economy simply cannot continue to sustain it. Plus it was set up decades ago as a vote catcher.

The lower class need help - for sure - give them a safety net. But the Middle and Upper class do not need our Taxes to support their lifestyle.

There are a number of areas where Mr Abbott will over step - the pensions area for one, the farming subsidies another, the Public Service job cuts another (it is a misnomer that the federal public service is bloated - it has been cut back by every Government since Howard - Rudd and Gillard included).

But hey we are all getting worked up over a Parliamentary report - it is not law until it is included in the budget or other statutory acts.

The media and us are all falling for the three card trick - beat the drum about how this and that which is worse than bad will be included in the budget but when budget night comes they are not and everybody says - oh its not so bad - when in fact they slip through items that change our way of life.

Australia needs this wake up call.....question is will we heed it?

Please don't say we need the Labor mob back in - their economic record will place all our lifestyles in jeopardy. Some of their social policies are great but they always take too many social policies to law and the cost simply cannot be borne by our economy.....

agree that MCW needs drastic reduction, and agree its the three card trick. But cuts are going to happen, just a matter of how deep, and on the face of it they'll be felt disproportionately by the poor and lower middle class. Clinging to his 'wealthier you are the more you get' PPL, still no movement on huge tax breaks to rich people putting big lumps in super (every single inquiry has said this is bad policy), no mention that I saw on winding back negative gearing. Surely they can make negative gearing apply to 1 investment property only? Why is that such a radical notion?

arseholes on ecology and equality, the 2 main issues for me.

 

[tigerman]

Hockey says that everyone has to do the heavy lifting.
Well Joe there is over $200 BILLION in unfunded superannuation for public servants and politicians. How about getting your snout out of the trough and lifting your little finger just for starters.

 

[bullus_hit]

Hockey says that everyone has to do the heavy lifting.
Well Joe there is over $200 BILLION in unfunded superannuation for public servants and politicians. How about getting your snout out of the trough and lifting your little finger just for starters.

Yep, do as I say & not as I do. Top 1% are relatively untouched, the filthy rich like Rinehart & Twiggy Forrest will be taxed less not more, and Abbott will still remain mute when it comes to means testing his maternity leave.

Please don't say we need the Labor mob back in - their economic record will place all our lifestyles in jeopardy. Some of their social policies are great but they always take too many social policies to law and the cost simply cannot be borne by our economy.....

Sorry but their economic record was fine, low unemployment, low inflation, AAA credit rating, lowest debt % to GDP in the OECD and economic growth which has been the envy of the entire world. Labor had their problems but the economy was not one of them, the fact they have bucked the trend and been booted out of office whilst residing over a strong economy just goes to show how poisonous their infighting & bickering became. Abbott was certainly a formidable opposition leader but his rise to power had nothing to do with LNP policy, maybe aside from his infantile stop the boats & no more big taxes sloganeering.

 

[Scoop]

Yep, do as I say & not as I do. Top 1% are relatively untouched, the filthy rich like Rinehart & Twiggy Forrest will be taxed less not more, and Abbott will still remain mute when it comes to means testing his maternity leave.


Sorry but their economic record was fine, low unemployment, low inflation, AAA credit rating, lowest debt % to GDP in the OECD and economic growth which has been the envy off the entire world. Labor had their problems but the economy was not one of them, the fact they have bucked the trend and been booted out of office whilst residing over a strong economy just goes to show how poisonous their infighting & bickering became. Abbott was certainly a formidable opposition leader but his rise to power had nothing to do with LNP policy, maybe aside from his infantile stop the boats & no more big taxes sloganeering.

Just a lot of little ones. Went to bed, woke up with 800 less in my kicker.

I love how the audit report says we should stop trying to fight homelessness but supports payments for nannies.

 

[KnightersRevenge]

So far most of what the PM has done is misdirection. Make huge sweeping grandiose statements while sneeking stuff in the back door. No spine this bloke. The Commission of Audit recommends slashing cuts to the pension and minimum wage. None of us know how much of it will make policy but it is not beyond this mob to do it. Joe Hockey stood in the parliament and wept and railed against ALP asylum seeker policy and said "over my dead body". Hasn't raised a peep since. Hypocrite. The PM went after Gillard for a perceived broken promise and characterised that behaviour as anti-democratic, hypocrite.

 

[MB78]

Sorry but their economic record was fine, low unemployment, low inflation, AAA credit rating, lowest debt % to GDP in the OECD and economic growth which has been the envy of the entire world. Labor had their problems but the economy was not one of them, the fact they have bucked the trend and been booted out of office whilst residing over a strong economy just goes to show how poisonous their infighting & bickering became. Abbott was certainly a formidable opposition leader but his rise to power had nothing to do with LNP policy, maybe aside from his infantile stop the boats & no more big taxes sloganeering.

The economy position was inherited. And yes they maintained all of the above. We will never know the answer but I feel that Rudd/Gillard governments were never going to make the hard calls and reduce the spending.

 

[bullus_hit]

The economy position was inherited. And yes they maintained all of the above. We will never know the answer but I feel that Rudd/Gillard governments were never going to make the hard calls and reduce the spending.

It's not just about spending, it's also about revenue creation. If Abbott is such a fiscal genius then why is he abolishing the mining & carbon tax? Why is he introducing a non means tested maternity leave scheme? What we are seeing is a classic robbing Peter to pay Paul scenario. At least Labor understood the importance of infrastructure and R&D. This will all go under Abbott, he treats science with contempt & he is deliberately going about destroying industries that don't gel with his extremist views. I cannot think of a more destructive Australian leader in my lifetime.

 

[RemoteTiger]

What do you think about the proposed PPL scheme Remote?

Disappointing - further middle class and upper class welfare. Totally not needed. I am going to upset a few on here and say that it is policy based on ideology created by an ex Catholic Priest.

 

[K3]

Wow... just wow! I am amazed at the new 'low' Hockey has sunk to with this move. IMO it really is putting our country's democracy up for sale. Wonder what would happen if I had $32000 to blow and went along to the meetings to point out what a disgrace my being allowed to go to the meetings was?

Shameful!

If you have any interest, please go to the page and have a look down the list of 'involved people'. It pretty much left me with my gob open, in astonishment, and shaking my head in dismay and disgust.

Again, shameful!

-----

Treasurer for sale: Joe Hockey offers privileged access
Date
May 5, 2014 - 8:59AM
298 reading nowRead later
Sean Nicholls
Sean Nicholls
Sydney Morning Herald State Political Editor

Treasurer Joe Hockey is offering privileged access to a select group including business people and industry lobbyists in return for tens of thousands of dollars in donations to the Liberal Party via a secretive fund-raising body whose activities are not fully disclosed to election funding authorities.

The Independent Commission Against Corruption is probing Liberal fund-raising bodies such as the Millennium Forum and questioning their influence on political favours in NSW.

Mr Hockey offers access to one of the country's highest political offices in return for annual payments.

The key players.
The key players. Photo: Fairfax Graphics
The donors are members of the North Sydney Forum, a campaign fundraising body run by Mr Hockey's North Sydney Federal Electoral Conference (FEC). In return for annual fees of up to $22,000, members are rewarded with "VIP" meetings with Mr Hockey, often in private boardrooms.

The North Sydney FEC officials who run the forum – which is an incorporated entity of the Liberal Party – say its membership lists and therefore the identities of its donors are "confidential". Mr Hockey also says details of who he is meeting and what is discussed are confidential.

What little public information is available reveals members of the forum include National Australia Bank as well as the influential Financial Services Council, whose chief executive is former NSW Liberal leader John Brogden.

The FSC's members, including financial advice and funds management firms, stand to benefit from the changes to the Future of Financial Advice (FOFA) laws being considered by the federal government, which would involve a winding back of consumer protections introduced by Labor.

The National Australia Bank would also benefit from the changes.

The chairman of the North Sydney Forum is John Hart, who is also the chief executive of Restaurant and Catering Australia – a hospitality industry lobby group whose members stand to benefit from a government-ordered Productivity Commission review of the Fair Work Act that is expected to examine the issue of penalty rates.

Mr Hart also sits on Prime Minister Tony Abbott's Business Advisory Council.

On Monday, Mr Abbott was asked if he was comfortable with Mr Hockey's fundraising activities during an interview with Channel Nine.

Mr Abbott responded by saying while he had not read the article, "all political parties have to raise money".

"Typically, you raise money by having events where senior members of the party go and obviously they meet people at these events," he said.

"The alternative to fund-raising in this time-honoured way, is taxpayer funding."

Mr Abbott said that in the context of a "very tough" budget, the idea that taxpayers should fund political parties was "very, very odd".

When asked if there should be a federal ICAC, Mr Abbott said that he thought that Canberra had a "pretty clean polity".

"The thing is that we’re going to keep the lobbyists out [of politics]. And the problem that ICAC is exposing is a problem of lobbying, essentially its influence peddling . . . and we’re going to make sure that that has no place whatsoever federally."

Australian Water Holdings

In March, it was revealed a former member of the North Sydney Forum was controversial infrastructure company Australian Water Holdings (AWH), which has been linked to the family of corrupt former Labor powerbroker Eddie Obeid and is under investigation by the ICAC over its attempts to win lucrative government contracts.

When AWH's links to the Obeid family were revealed last year, the North Sydney FEC returned an $11,000 forum membership fee and AWH's membership of the forum was ended. In March, the North Sydney FEC revealed it had returned another $22,000 in membership fees from AWH, whose former chairman is Liberal Party senator and former assistant treasurer Arthur Sinodinos.

Senator Sinodinos stood aside as assistant treasurer in March, after giving evidence at the ICAC about AWH's attempts to win a billion-dollar contract with the NSW government. Before that, he was responsible for implementing the government's FOFA reforms.

During the three years AWH was a member of the forum, the company's chief executive was Liberal fund-raiser and former lobbyist Nick Di Girolamo, whose gift of a $3000 bottle of Penfolds Grange Hermitage to Barry O'Farrell shortly after his March 2011 election win led to his resignation as premier last month, after he gave false evidence to the ICAC.

North Sydney Forum deputy chairman Robert Orrell said he was "sure" Mr Di Girolamo – a close friend of Eddie Obeid jnr, who was employed by AWH – had attended private boardroom meetings with Mr Hockey.

However he was adamant Mr Obeid jnr did not attend any meetings.

The North Sydney Forum was established in May 2009, shortly after Mr Hockey became shadow treasurer in February, by Joseph Carrozzi, managing partner at professional services firm PriceWaterhouseCoopers.

Mr Carrozzi is also chairman of the Italian Chamber of Commerce and Industry in Australia and was a board member of the organisation when Mr Di Girolamo was its chairman.

He said he could not recall how AWH became a member of the North Sydney Forum but denied it was through this link. He said the chamber was not a forum member.

Mr Carrozzi, who said he had known Mr Hockey for 20 years, said he was "honoured to be asked" to establish the forum, which was "essentially there to provide a network and insight for small businesses".

"Members get an opportunity to sit down and chat with Joe. We've had other ministers, state and federal, participate as well."

Mr Carrozzi said NSW Transport Minister Gladys Berejiklian and Premier Mike Baird – until recently treasurer – had participated in the forum's functions for members.

Past forum members include wholesale distribution and marketing firm Metcash and business services group Servcorp, founded by long-time Liberal Party supporter Alf Moufarrige.

In 2008, it emerged Mr Moufarrige had given former treasurer Peter Costello six bottles of Penfolds Grange – reportedly worth about $3000 in total – as a thank you gift for opening a Melbourne building.

Mr Carrozzi said Mr Hockey "sits down regularly" with members of the forum. Mr Di Girolamo "may have attended one or two" meetings with Mr Hockey but Mr Carrozzi stressed "he was certainly not a regular attendee".

He said Mr Obeid jnr was "certainly not at any meetings I attended with Mr Hockey".

Mr Orrell said the forum had had about 12 lunches each year, "typically in a members' boardroom".

"It's genuinely an exchange of information," he said. "Joe just goes around the table and talks about issues."

The North Sydney Forum membership structure offers "full membership" for an annual fee of $5500 for which members are entitled to five boardroom events.

The fee for corporate and business members is $11,000 which offers an extra "VIP boardroom function" while private patrons paying $22,000 enjoy the additional benefit of "10 boardroom events".

Mr Orrell said money raised by the forum was often distributed to Liberal Party marginal seats.

However, the forum does not lodge its own disclosures to the NSW Election Funding Authority.

In its disclosures, the NSW division of the Liberal Party declares membership fees – regarded as donations for the purposes of the election funding act – but does not state they are for the North Sydney Forum. This practice masks who is donating directly to the North Sydney Forum and the identity of its members.

A spokesman for the NSW Election Funding Authority said: "There is no record of the North Sydney Forum in the EFA system."

Occasionally members name the North Sydney Forum in their disclosures to the Election Funding Authority but there is no requirement to do so.

The structure of the North Sydney Forum is based on that of similar vehicles established by other Liberal MPs, such as the Wentworth Forum which was set up for Communications Minister Malcolm Turnbull in August 2007.

The Wentworth Forum was established by former federal Liberal Party treasurer Michael Yabsley to raise funds for Mr Turnbull's re-election to the eastern suburbs seat of Wentworth following a redistribution in 2004 which made it a less safe Liberal seat.

It operated between August 2007 and late 2009 – for six months when Mr Turnbull was environment minister but primarily while he was shadow treasurer and then opposition leader – and gave members access to exclusive functions he attended. It also had a sliding scale of membership fees from $5500 to $55,000.

The Wentworth Forum was based on the Millennium Forum, the Liberal Party's main fund-raising body, which was established by Mr Yabsley in the late 1990s to replicate corporate fundraising practices.

Millennium Forum members are regularly invited to events hosted by NSW and federal ministers.

Last week the chairman of the Millennium Forum, Paul Nicolaou, resigned after ICAC heard allegations it and another entity, the Free Enterprise Foundation, were used to disguise payments from prohibited donors including property donors to bankroll the Liberal Party's campaign to win the 2011 NSW election.

Detailed questions were sent to the NSW Liberal party about the North Sydney Forum, how it operates and why its membership is not disclosed to authorities. A spokeswoman responded that the North Sydney Forum was "covered by the Australian Electoral Act with donations disclosed to the AEC in accordance with the law by the NSW division of the party and funds are used for the work of the party".

Questions were also sent to Mr Hockey inviting him to disclose details of his meetings with members. A spokeswoman responded: "Questions about the function and administration of the North Sydney Forum should be addressed to them. The Treasurer's diary is confidential."

Do you know more? Email [email protected]



Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/treasurer-for-sale-joe-hockey-offers-privileged-access-20140504-zr06v.html#ixzz30nL6gCkr

 

[RemoteTiger]

K3, All sides of politics do this - it has been going on since the days of Menzies - nothing new here.

All Prime Ministers, Treasurers and other inner Cabinet Ministers have been soliciting funds for their respective parties in return for meeting times. Until Australia outlaws party donations and uses Government funding only for political parties and campaigns this will continue.

 

[K3]

K3, All sides of politics do this - it has been going on since the days of Menzies - nothing new here.

All Prime Ministers, Treasurers and other inner Cabinet Ministers have been soliciting funds for their respective parties in return for meeting times. Until Australia outlaws party donations and uses Government funding only for political parties and campaigns this will continue.

Yeah, very true mate. My post was made after a really crummy night's sleep Still, I think it was the list of persons involved which really left me gobsmacked on this one. I know Labor has the unions and the Libs have big business, but getting in bed with the Obeid family (spelling?), along with with the involvement of the guy conducting the 'which departments should be shut up' report for the Libs... Just too much cross-over for me on this one.

I really think what you said about 'outlawing party donations' is spot on. In Russia the State and church have too much cross-over and in Australia it is likewise with big business and the unions.

Would be nice if the focus was on us for a change.

 

[mld]

Sure enough: NSW Labor fundraising program offers end of year drinks with Bill Shorten

 

[tigersnake]

K3, All sides of politics do this - it has been going on since the days of Menzies - nothing new here.

All Prime Ministers, Treasurers and other inner Cabinet Ministers have been soliciting funds for their respective parties in return for meeting times. Until Australia outlaws party donations and uses Government funding only for political parties and campaigns this will continue.

to be fair though, threshold for reporting donations used to be $1500. Howard raised it to $10,000. ALP voted against it. Then JG tried to lower it to $1000, the coalition blocked it in the senate and so didn't go through. Pretty clear whats going on there.

 

[MB78]

to be fair though, threshold for reporting donations used to be $1500. Howard raised it to $10,000. ALP voted against it. Then JG tried to lower it to $1000, the coalition blocked it in the senate and so didn't go through. Pretty clear whats going on there.

Out of interest who else blocked it in the senate?

 

[tigerman]

The article below is well worth a read and has some graphs also that i couldn't copy and paste. I found this quote----------" But 10 years ago 15% of taxpayers were in the top tax bracket, and they raised 51% of the tax; the latest figures show only 3% pay the top tax rate and now they raise 26.2% of total tax" ----------from the article interesting and very telling.

http://www.theguardian.com/business/grogonomics/2014/may/01/australia-needs-revenue-reform-tinkering-income-tax-wont-cut-it

Australia needs revenue reform, and tinkering with income tax won’t cut it
A debt levy won't solve the long-term problem of our tax system, but abolishing the tax fuel credit would be a solid start.

The proposed “debt levy” is a good step towards improving the government’s revenue, but it is only a limited solution. While it will help increase revenue it also will increase the government’s already large reliance on income tax. Real revenue reform needs to look beyond income tax if the government wants to find permanent solutions.

There has been a lot of confusion about the debt levy. Firstly let’s cut the bull – a levy is a tax; it’s just a type of tax – usually done for a specific purpose and often (such as with the Medicare levy) charged on a person’s entire income.

Secondly it’s a stupid idea to raise a tax just to pay off a deficit so you can then give a tax break. That’s not so much robbing Peter to pay Paul, as robbing Peter to pay Peter.

Finally we need to be clear about how the levy will work.

The first reports were that it was to be a levy of 1% for those earning over $80,000, and 2% for those earning over $180,000, and that like the Medicare levy it would apply to all income. By Wednesday this had changed to the 1% and 2% merely being an increase in the tax rates, and would apply only to income earned above the respective thresholds.

This, it goes without saying, makes a big difference. For those earning over $80,000 it is an $800 difference, for those earning over $180,000 it is $3,600.

Indeed a 1% levy on all your income would mean some people would be better off not earning over $80,000. If the levy was charged on all your income, you would need to earn $81,400 before your after-tax pay would be more than had you earned just $80,000

While 1% may not sound like much, to raise the same amount of tax by just increasing the nominal tax rate would require someone on $85,000 to pay a tax rate of 54% tax on income earned over $80,000 – that’s a fair jump from 37%.

Such a levy, while progressive, would be pretty stupid in the current economic environment. Our debt situation is not urgent, and such a tax increase would smash our already weak economic growth due to consumers cutting back spending.

As Crikey’s Bernard Keane noted, the reduction in spending would also see goods and services tax (GST) revenue fall – making it doubly stupid.

Tony Abbott’s logic on it all was also all over the shop – arguing the increase would be temporary pain but would lead to permanent gain.

Unfortunately the problems with the revenue side of our budget are not temporary.

If we look at the past 20 years, it’s obvious there’s been a fairly dramatic change to revenue since 2007:

That was OK while the mining boom was happening and company tax was soaring. But when the global financial crisis (GFC) hit, income tax revenue fell further to 9.3% of GDP (the lowest on record).

The big income tax cuts during this time were to the top tier. The threshold for the top rate of tax went from $62,500 in 2003-04 to $180,000 by 2008-09. As I noted two weeks ago, that saw it rise from about 1.3 times the average wage to about 2.5 now.

Crucially though, there has been little change in the ratio of the second-highest tax threshold: it has shifted between 108% to 137% of the average wage, and is currently about 110%.

But 10 years ago 15% of taxpayers were in the top tax bracket, and they raised 51% of the tax; the latest figures show only 3% pay the top tax rate and now they raise 26.2% of total tax

So while some commentators warn of the dangers of bracket creep and even argue the top tax threshold should have already been raised to $203,000, the reality is that fewer people in the past eight years have been paying the top tax rate than at any time in our history.

Thus increasing the top two tax rates is a sensible way to increase revenue, because it is not so large that economic growth will take much of a hit, and it certainly targets the wealthiest.

However reducing the tax, as Abbott says will happen in three years, will only see revenue fall again. Moreover the debt levy does nothing to solve the long-term problem of our tax system which, ironically, is that we rely too much on income tax

By 2017-18 the government is expected to rely on personal income tax revenue more than it ever has since the introduction of the GST.

Direct taxes such as personal income tax and company taxes account for about 70% of government revenue. This is not an efficient way to raise tax. As we saw during the GFC, such taxes can drop pretty quickly during economic downturns. They also tax labour and capital – and thus create disincentives to work and to invest.

Most nations in the OECD have a broader tax base and direct taxes account for only about 60% of total revenue (and less if you exclude social security contributions).

The problem is exacerbated when you consider that our company tax rate needs to remain competitive with other nations because companies (unlike most workers) can leave or choose to invest elsewhere

For now Australia remains an attractive place to invest, but in the future it is likely we will have to reduce our company tax rate to remain competitive. This was the main reason the Henry tax review recommended lowering it over time from 30% to 25%.

But doing that without changing anything else will place more burden on personal income tax.

The deficit levy will go some way to restoring the government’s revenue but ironically will exacerbate the problems with its tax base – especially because the government will also abolish the mining and carbon taxes.

For real revenue reform, tinkering with income tax won’t cut it. The issue of broadening the GST, or abolishing the fuel tax credit, ending the freeze on fuel excise indexation, remain to be tackled. Lenore Taylor reported on Wednesday that the government was considering abolishing the tax fuel credit. Doing so would give this budget the real sniff of one that is serious about revenue reform; the debt levy does not

 

[Brodders17]

personally i dont really think Abbott has broken any promises.
he just flat out lied and kept lying before the election.

he was always going cut education, health, ABC, pensions and the rest. but he thought he may not win the election if was honest so he lied. and lied. and lied again.

and anyone who voted for him should not really complain that he has lied because he has done it before. a lot. and it was obvious he was doing it at the time.

as for his policies, do i care that someone on $190k will pay an extra $200 tax a year for the next 3 years? not really.
do i care that petrol will go up a little? not really.
do i care that people wont be able to get the pension until they are 70, instead of 67 in 2030? no.

do i care that people under 30 are at risk of receiving no support if they cannot find a job? yes.
do i care that they are ripping funding from health? yes.
do i care that they are ripping funding from education? yes.
do i care that they are ripping funding from indigenous affairs? yes.
do i care that they are ripping funding from renewable energies? yes.
do i care that they are going to make it harder for people with disabilities to receive the disability support pension? yes.

i am sure i could on. my opposition to much of this is not based on me being any worse off, rather that we as a country will be worse off.

 

[Eat the rich]

Tony Abbott 22 August 2011

"Nothing could be more calculated to bring our democracy into disrepute and alienate the citizenry of Australia from their government than if governments were to establish by precedent that they could say one thing before an election, and do the other afterwards.”

Sarah Ferguson 7.30 report, 13th May 2014, To Joe Hockey

“ Is it liberating for a politician to decide that election promises don’t matter?" :clap