Talking Politics | PUNT ROAD END | Richmond Tigers Forum
  • IMPORTANT // Please look after your loved ones, yourself and be kind to others. If you are feeling that the world is too hard to handle there is always help - I implore you not to hesitate in contacting one of these wonderful organisations Lifeline and Beyond Blue ... and I'm sure reaching out to our PRE community we will find a way to help. T.

Talking Politics

Azza said:
Can you go into a bit of detail on this Tommy?


Azza, go to http://www.parliament.vic.gov.au/static/www.legislation.vic.gov.au-bills-status.html type in Building Legislation Amendment Bill 2014. There is the detail - if you take the time to read through it is pretty good. Unfortunately we have a current government that looks like it is more governed by silly membership bodies as these changes would be very good for consumers. They are threatening for Builders thus the outcry. Tail wagging dog stuff.
 
Have a mate who is an ex builder and boy, some of the stories he has to tell about what used to happen and what is still going on in the building industry.

Dodgy as all buggery!

Example 1: Shop Stewards getting a separate credit card with a $100,000 limit on it so they will turn the other cheek to certain events.
 
K3 said:
Have a mate who is an ex builder and boy, some of the stories he has to tell about what used to happen and what is still going on in the building industry.

Dodgy as all buggery!

Example 1: Shop Stewards getting a separate credit card with a $100,000 limit on it so they will turn the other cheek to certain events.


The building industry is supposedly overseen by the current VBA (Victorian Building Authority aka Building Commission pre July 2013). They are governed by the current governments in power. They have had no powers to keep in check these dodgy builders due to being hampered by the laws which they have to abide by.
 
in case any further evidence was needed, this government is an absolute disgrace:

Commission slams transfer at sea as clear rights breach

The United Nations has expressed ''profound concern'' over reports that Australia was poised to hand Sri Lankan asylum seekers back to the country's navy on Thursday after only the briefest refugee assessment.
For the first time, the Sri Lankan government confirmed that failed asylum seekers would be switched straight onto its navy ships at sea, even as the Australian government dug in on its hardline refusal to provide any information.

Fairfax Media confirmed that refugee assessments of the more than 200 Sri Lankans trying to reach Australia on two separate boats have been cut back to four questions, prompting dire warnings by international law experts that Australia risked breaching international obligations.
In a rare statement, the UN High Commission for Refugees said the organisation viewed ''with profound concern recent reports in the media and from the community in relation to the interception at sea of individuals who may be seeking Australia's protection''.
The organisation stressed that ''requests for international protection should be considered within the territory of the intercepting state, consistent with fundamental refugee-protection principles.

It added that asylum seekers should be ''properly and individually screened for protection needs'' through a ''through a substantive and fair refugee status determination procedure''.
Keheliya Rambukwella, Sri Lanka's Media and Information Minister, said a transfer at sea would take place. ''They will be accepted and received by the [Sri Lankan] navy and the normal procedures will take place from there onward,'' he said.
Fairfax Media can reveal that the number of questions being asked of the Sri Lankans to establish whether they are genuine refugees has been slashed fivefold - from 19 to just four - a move that has drawn heavy fire from international-law experts.

An Australian government leaflet that is handed out to refugees at the camp.
Don Rothwell, a professor of international law at the Australian National University, branded the development ''unprecedented'' and said it took the tough Operation Sovereign Border approach to a new level.
''It is suggestive of a minimalist approach in compliance with Australia's refugees obligations,'' Professor Rothwell said.
Fairfax Media has obtained a list of 19 questions that are usually asked of Sri Lankan asylum seekers who arrive in Australia. This is in stark contrast to the four basic questions asked of the 50 asylum seekers on one of the vessels believed to have been intercepted by Australian authorities at the weekend - their name, country of origin, why they came and where they departed from.
Professor Jane McAdam, from the Kaldor centre for international refugee law at the University of NSW, said this did not comply with international law.
''You can't just decide a case within the hour,'' she said.
''And we also know that people are very scared and are fearful of authority.''
A professor of international law at the University of Sydney, Ben Saul, said refugee convention stated officials had to have a ''sufficiently robust and protective determination procedure''.
Immigration Minister Scott Morrison refused to confirm or deny the existence of the two boats. ''You're making presumptions about instances that I can't comment on,'' he said.
Greens senator Sarah Hanson-Young said Mr Morrison was showing ''total contempt towards the public and the law".
"If the government believed what they were doing was legal, they wouldn't be hiding from it,'' Senator Hanson-Young said.
Prime Minister Tony Abbott said Sri Lanka was a ''peaceful country'' since its civil war ended in 2009. ''Everything we do is consistent with safety at sea and everything we do is consistent with our international obligations,'' he said.
The Department of Foreign Affairs says Australians should exercise a ''high degree of caution'' due to the ''unpredictable security environment'' in Sri Lanka.
Meanwhile, Mr Morrison has confirmed an eight-week-old Australian-born baby is among a group of 14 asylum seekers from four families sent from the South Australian Inverbrackie detention centre to Darwin.
They will be transferred to Christmas Island because they have been deemed fit to return to the island.

http://www.watoday.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/commission-slams-transfer-at-sea-as-clear-rights-breach-20140703-3bbi1.html
 
rosy23 said:
And who was he parading around like prize cattle prior to the election? And whose virginity was he discussing?

Have you got a gig as Senator Lambie's advisor Rosy? (this was a gold post for me BTW, I've used it in political discussions)
 
Abbott has done well in the past week.
First he offends Indigenous Australians by suggesting that Australia was 'unsettled' until white folk came, and comparing present day foreign investment to English settlement:

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/tony-abbott-says-australia-benefited-from-foreign-investment-because-it-was-unsettled-before-the-british-20140703-zsvby.html


then he praises the way Japanese soldiers acted in WW2.
"We admired the skill and the sense of honour that they brought to their task although we disagreed with what they did"
http://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/2014/07/09/appalling-and-insensible-china-rebukes-abbott-praising-japans-wwii-skills
 
mld said:
One wonders what he would say if Angela Merkel visited.



I don't bother even listening to what him or his merry band of fellow wankers say anymore. What a disgrace and he prides himself in his religion.
 
I thought Gillard would be hard to beat but I fear Abbott may go down in history as Australian's worst ever Prime Minister.

His handling of the leadership of our great nation has been nothing short of appalling. A vast majority of times he opens his mouth he puts his foot in it, his handling of the budget and the Senate is University Politicking at its worst.

Please may he be removed from the Office of Prime Minister before he does more damage.
 
Baloo said:
RT, aren't you a card carrying Liberal member ?

No mate. I have always been a swing voter. Sadly I vote firstly on what is good for my family and I (usually viewed through the hip pocket) and then what is good for the community (Local elections), state (State elections), nation (Federal elections).

Being in and owning my own businesses most of my life I have an intense dislike for bludgers (those that can work but choose not too or those that are in work but would not know what an honest effort is). I currently have 32 staff in my three businesses and I have often said to each member "we have an agreement you work honestly for an hour and I will pay you as agreed in our contract for that hour." All the time I keep up my end of the agreement, sadly there are times when certain members of the team renege on their side of the agreement. I understand we are not robots and being human we all do have off days but I draw the line at off weeks and off months and off quarters. A majority of my staff are "Y" generation and it is mandatory for them to study - the business pays their fees and helps with tutors etc. - this helps keep my promise that if they are honest diligent workers their CV will be better the day they leave my employ when compared to the day they started.

I know my business is the people who represent it. It is not the walls or the ceiling or the windows or the IT or stock - therefore I believe in - if I look after the people the people will look after the business. Therefore I have no issues with award wages and salaries - do find it intriguing that we pay loadings for Saturdays and Sundays which are exactly the same as every other day of the week - sun comes up and the sun goes down. Please don't use the religious argument or the family time argument - try being a business owner and see how much of those times you get . Yeah and right most people say but you get the huge profits the worker only gets their pay cheque. Well allow me to advise that huge profits are a thing of the past, there are lean times and their are OK times - the lean times mean that the least paid employee actually takes home in a year more that I get. The good times I do OK but so do my employees with bonuses etc.

There is a middle road that we should travel - far to the right would be wrong as the business would be seen a tyrannical - far to the left and their is no return on investment for the owner. Surely living in such a civilised country we can find that middle road?

Because I like the middle road in life I also like it in politics. Hence I am a swing voter. (Do dislike the minor parties having the balance of power but having said that I am enjoy the theatrical show Clive Palmer and his PUPs are putting on - Mr. Abbott must be unbearable to work with at the moment - even though his public persona tries to show him as a steady fair man with his hand firmly on the tiller.)

Long answer to your question - sorry......which way do you swing politically?
 
A lot of people, rusted on Libs included, seem to have changed their tune on Abbott. I never had any doubts he'd be terrible.
 
RemoteTiger said:
Long answer to your question - sorry......which way do you swing politically?

No need to apologise, it was an interesting read. I've mistaken you for someone else the. Pretty sure there was an interstate PREer who carried a Lib card.

Me? Left leaning swing voter. Bring based OS I tend to look at the leader more than the party and how I feel they represent us.

It hoes without saying I'd prefer Pauline Hanson than Abbott as PM.
 
rosy23 said:
A lot of people, rusted on Libs included, seem to have changed their tune on Abbott. I never had any doubts he'd be terrible.

im not sure why anyone would have changed their tune. as you say there was never any doubt how he would behave/perform.
 
Brodders17 said:
he would probably introduce her as Angela Merkin from Germainian.

or Andrew Gherkin from Mermania.

He whupped Vlad Putin good and proper but. Put's must be laying awake at night worrying about Tony and Julie dissing him. WTF?
 
Hang your head in shame Greenies, after refusing to pass Rudd's Emmision Trading Scheme, Australia is left with Abbots Direction Action Plan. They are a joke of a party who have no credibility after playing politics on the ETS.
 
tigerman said:
Hang your head in shame Greenies, after refusing to pass Rudd's Emmision Trading Scheme, Australia is left with Abbots Direction Action Plan. They are a joke of a party who have no credibility after playing politics on the ETS.

I don't think I would kick them that hard, but I do think they are 'negotiating' themselves into a position of much less relevance.
 
Going the way of the Democrats.

Maybe it's Palmer's turn to fill the void for a couple of decades