So if one side won, nobody is allowed to even discuss the good or bad that either side does?
Is debate to be shut down because of an election result?
Democracy thrives when there's free and open debate.
Bill Shorten moves to distance Labor from union movement
- Thread starter MarkB
- Start date
So if one side won, nobody is allowed to even discuss the good or bad that either side does?
Is debate to be shut down because of an election result?
Democracy thrives when there's free and open debate.
He's not shutting the debate down, he's continuing it Geoff !
What he is saying is that the current government was elected with a clear majority and they are now doing what they promised to do.
Calls of labour getting in at next election are wide of the mark & with no basis whatsoever apart from having a good cry.
What he is saying is that the current government was elected with a clear majority and they are now doing what they promised to do.
Calls of labour getting in at next election are wide of the mark & with no basis whatsoever apart from having a good cry.
Last edited by a moderator:
He wasn't continuing the debate.
His side won.
He's having a crow about it.
I don't care about Labour or Liberal winning. Imho you can't get too worked up about these things (one side winning or not winning), because if you did, then it must completely suck when your preferred side is out of power (and bearing in mind that since Gough we've had governments of 7, 13, 11 and 6 years).
I just want whoever is in power to do a good job.
Fraser -> Lame / wasted opportunities
Hawke/Keating -> pretty good until they got stale
Howard -> pretty good up until until he got stale too.
Rudd/Gillard/Rudd -> Shambolic (imo the blame for that belongs to Rudd)
This government has started with a hiss and a roar and a large majority. They might yet turn out to be lame or shambolic and, even if they don't, they'll also go stale after a couple of terms unless efforts are made to renew themselves.
Threads run their own course, but the thread started about BS's attempts (even if it is just words atm) to reform the ALP.
No-one is disputing the results of the last election.
Like I said, we just don't do 1 term federal governments (which made the ALP hash-up / the Abbott performance in the 2010 election so remarkable imo).
Otoh, politics is a fickle game.
"Kevin07" became "Lets get rid of this narcissist!" pretty quickly.
And when I was working in Canberra at the height of the Howard years, Abbott was seen as unelectable. You know, things change.
...and when there are strong opposing points of view.
The voting public deserve a real choice.
Which is actually a pretty sad indictment on the ALP (especially at the federal level) because the voters really had no choice but to send the ALP packing in 2013.
Again, I am not a avid fan of any political party. I am a die-hard fan of a strong democracy though.
Last edited:
I wasn't shutting down the debate.
I wasn't continuing the debate.
I was simply stating a fact.
Yes, that's what I want the now elected Govt to do....govern.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dazz
Mark : "I admit, that is a problem."
If you admit that it is a problem Mark, then you join the ranks of the majority view nowadays. Do you honestly believe that this latest move by BS will rectify that ??
Business competency and respected reasonableness within the Labor ranks is pitifully low and not about to change any time soon. The ones who displayed any skills in the last Parliament (Martin Ferguson and former Speaker Harry Jenkins in particular) have all pulled the pin.
I wasn't continuing the debate.
I was simply stating a fact.
Yes, that's what I want the now elected Govt to do....govern.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dazz
Mark : "I admit, that is a problem."
If you admit that it is a problem Mark, then you join the ranks of the majority view nowadays. Do you honestly believe that this latest move by BS will rectify that ??
Business competency and respected reasonableness within the Labor ranks is pitifully low and not about to change any time soon. The ones who displayed any skills in the last Parliament (Martin Ferguson and former Speaker Harry Jenkins in particular) have all pulled the pin.
I admit that the ALP is up crap creek, in a leaking boat, with no paddle and a broken compass.
So I, for one, am not questioning how bad a situation the ALP finds themselves in.
I just don't think they are irredeemable.
...It is only a start and talk is cheap (but it is a start).
I also admit that realistically I have to be prepared to be disappointed though, but my philosophy has always been to have low expectations with regards to politicians of all persuasions.
That aside, as I have said several times, but why not say it again, I believe strong political parties are an essential element in a democracy that allows for differing points of view.
And I would also like to see a genuine choice come election time.
If people still vote one way or the other - whatever. The sun will still rise the next morning - but at least people will have had a real choice (again, as I said, unlike last time where the only choice was really to throw Rudd & co out).
Again, I agree.
Last edited:
Union movement silence on Bill Shorten?s proposals to sever ALP links to unions
NSW Labor boss Jamie Clements yesterday backed federal Opposition leader Bill Shorten's break with the union movement, claiming they were the most important reforms in 40 years.
But many of the nation?s top unions fell silent following Mr Shorten's declaration of a symbolic split, though the Rail, Tram and Bus Union broke ranks to call on Labor-affiliated unions to reconsider the millions of dollars paid to the party in donations and fees annually.
Mr Clements said the Labor Party was united behind Mr Shorten.
"These are the most significant reforms by a Labor leader since Gough Whitlam," Mr Clements said.
The package of reforms, outlined in yesterday's Daily Telegraph, involve increasing the weight of member votes by 20 per cent in lower house seats with more than 300 members from the current 50-50 split with a central state panel.
Primary-style community pre-selections would be held in non-held seats like already in NSW, while states would follow the 50-50 split between members and caucus to elect parliamentary leaders.
Rail, Tram and Bus Union national secretary Bob Nanva yesterday labelled Mr Shorten a "mug" for providing "thought bubbles" and ignoring one million trade union members.
Mr Nanva said he supported the changes to membership but said the pre-selection changes to empower members would inadvertently help smaller groups of branch stackers and factional chiefs.
"If they view our relationship as nothing more than being a cash cow and finding foot soldiers for them, then unions such as ours would be entitled to consider its future arrangements (for donations and affiliation fees)," he said
NSW Labor boss Jamie Clements yesterday backed federal Opposition leader Bill Shorten's break with the union movement, claiming they were the most important reforms in 40 years.
But many of the nation?s top unions fell silent following Mr Shorten's declaration of a symbolic split, though the Rail, Tram and Bus Union broke ranks to call on Labor-affiliated unions to reconsider the millions of dollars paid to the party in donations and fees annually.
Mr Clements said the Labor Party was united behind Mr Shorten.
"These are the most significant reforms by a Labor leader since Gough Whitlam," Mr Clements said.
The package of reforms, outlined in yesterday's Daily Telegraph, involve increasing the weight of member votes by 20 per cent in lower house seats with more than 300 members from the current 50-50 split with a central state panel.
Primary-style community pre-selections would be held in non-held seats like already in NSW, while states would follow the 50-50 split between members and caucus to elect parliamentary leaders.
Rail, Tram and Bus Union national secretary Bob Nanva yesterday labelled Mr Shorten a "mug" for providing "thought bubbles" and ignoring one million trade union members.
Mr Nanva said he supported the changes to membership but said the pre-selection changes to empower members would inadvertently help smaller groups of branch stackers and factional chiefs.
"If they view our relationship as nothing more than being a cash cow and finding foot soldiers for them, then unions such as ours would be entitled to consider its future arrangements (for donations and affiliation fees)," he said
Bill Shorten under fire over proposals for Labor reform
Opposition Leader Bill Shorten's proposals for reforming the Labor Party will do nothing to prevent another Eddie Obeid or Ian Macdonald emerging in NSW, senior ALP members have warned.
Anthony D'Adam, a member of the state's ALP administrative committee, said Mr Shorten's reform package was timid when applied to NSW.
''Bill Shorten is not talking about significant reforms at the NSW level,'' Mr D'Adam said.
''It doesn't tackle the fundamental problem, which is the control exercised by union secretaries through the block vote at ALP state conferences.
''It does nothing to prevent a future Eddie Obeid being preselected or an Ian MacDonald, because a handful of union secretaries still control 50 per cent of the vote for delegates to state conference.''
Mr Shorten's proposal suggests increasing the proportion of rank and file involvement in preselections by 20 per cent, which would increase it to 70 per cent in Victoria. In NSW, the proportion is already at 100 per cent.
Mr Shorten left it open to the NSW ALP general secretary Jamie Clements to suggest NSW reforms.
Mr Clements has made it clear he is opposed to greater rank and file involvement in the election of members of the NSW upper house, federal senators or the ALP executive. He said the ALP state conference should continue to have carriage of those decisions.
''It is the supreme decision making body of the Labor Party ? and it needs to elect public office bearers and the administration of the Labor Party,'' he said.
Mr Clements said the proposals are ''the most significant reforms announced by a federal leader since Gough Whitlam''.
Darcy Byrne, the mayor of Leichhardt and a candidate in Labor's community preselection for the seat of Balmain, said further action was needed in NSW.
''To break the back of [Eddie] Obeid-style cronyism in NSW, rule changes must now be adopted at Labor's annual conference this July, giving all party members a vote in determining upper house positions, the general secretary and the state parliamentary leader,'' he said.
Rail, Tram and Bus Union national secretary Bob Nanva said ALP reform should strengthen the link between rank and file union members and the party to make it more relevant. ''The ALP has an extraordinary insight into a broad social cross-section of working men and women through its trade union link,'' he said.
''There's a real risk that branch stackers and factional warlords will simply tighten their grip on the ALP if we're not careful. Trade unions provide a unique insight into the real-world concerns of working Australian.''
Opposition Leader Bill Shorten's proposals for reforming the Labor Party will do nothing to prevent another Eddie Obeid or Ian Macdonald emerging in NSW, senior ALP members have warned.
Anthony D'Adam, a member of the state's ALP administrative committee, said Mr Shorten's reform package was timid when applied to NSW.
''Bill Shorten is not talking about significant reforms at the NSW level,'' Mr D'Adam said.
''It doesn't tackle the fundamental problem, which is the control exercised by union secretaries through the block vote at ALP state conferences.
''It does nothing to prevent a future Eddie Obeid being preselected or an Ian MacDonald, because a handful of union secretaries still control 50 per cent of the vote for delegates to state conference.''
Mr Shorten's proposal suggests increasing the proportion of rank and file involvement in preselections by 20 per cent, which would increase it to 70 per cent in Victoria. In NSW, the proportion is already at 100 per cent.
Mr Shorten left it open to the NSW ALP general secretary Jamie Clements to suggest NSW reforms.
Mr Clements has made it clear he is opposed to greater rank and file involvement in the election of members of the NSW upper house, federal senators or the ALP executive. He said the ALP state conference should continue to have carriage of those decisions.
''It is the supreme decision making body of the Labor Party ? and it needs to elect public office bearers and the administration of the Labor Party,'' he said.
Mr Clements said the proposals are ''the most significant reforms announced by a federal leader since Gough Whitlam''.
Darcy Byrne, the mayor of Leichhardt and a candidate in Labor's community preselection for the seat of Balmain, said further action was needed in NSW.
''To break the back of [Eddie] Obeid-style cronyism in NSW, rule changes must now be adopted at Labor's annual conference this July, giving all party members a vote in determining upper house positions, the general secretary and the state parliamentary leader,'' he said.
Rail, Tram and Bus Union national secretary Bob Nanva said ALP reform should strengthen the link between rank and file union members and the party to make it more relevant. ''The ALP has an extraordinary insight into a broad social cross-section of working men and women through its trade union link,'' he said.
''There's a real risk that branch stackers and factional warlords will simply tighten their grip on the ALP if we're not careful. Trade unions provide a unique insight into the real-world concerns of working Australian.''
Which, based on unsurprisingly unenthusiastic responses from union thugs, may yet be a 3rd party leader... himself.
I bet someone, somewhere, high up in your party is secretly shitting themselves at the mere thought that the ALP might be able to free themselves of the deadweight that is the union movement.
People worry about the strangest things you know.
Last edited:
Datto this is the real issue....wait till the may budget...a trail of broken LIB promises:
1. Pensions won't be touched.......work till 70...harder to qualify for..is that some sick play on words
2. Medicare won't be touched....wait for $6 per visit to the doctor
3. Promise of more jobs...well...this is the elephant in the room ...how many jobs were created compared to labor.
4. Fiscal management....why the obession with finances....out debt to gdp is among the lowest.
Wait for the next set of regressive policies:
1. Cuts to overtime penalties
2. Increase in the GST
3. Loss of working conditions
Datto I agree that this could be a one term govt...when the oldies and some of the less fortunate realise how tough life will get...forget about a second look in for the LIBS.
1. Pensions won't be touched.......work till 70...harder to qualify for..is that some sick play on words
2. Medicare won't be touched....wait for $6 per visit to the doctor
3. Promise of more jobs...well...this is the elephant in the room ...how many jobs were created compared to labor.
4. Fiscal management....why the obession with finances....out debt to gdp is among the lowest.
Wait for the next set of regressive policies:
1. Cuts to overtime penalties
2. Increase in the GST
3. Loss of working conditions
Datto I agree that this could be a one term govt...when the oldies and some of the less fortunate realise how tough life will get...forget about a second look in for the LIBS.
Because the GST is only collected by the Feds (the revenue is distributed to the states and territories), my understanding is that any changes to the rate can only be done with the agreement of all the governments (federal / state / territory).
Not impossible, but not simple either.
Similar threads
