Geez Louise, Maggie Thatcher is a bit of a debate starter eh.
Dead set learned more about British politics in the last 24 hrs than i did me entire life.
gosh.
Geez Louise, Maggie Thatcher is a bit of a debate starter eh.
Dead set learned more about British politics in the last 24 hrs than i did me entire life.
gosh.
UoN Liberal Club Defeated the UoN Labor Club last night in the first debate.
Amigos Aarau
Blows my mind that Turnbull believes this NBN bullshit. #fraudband and #stopthebytes are hilarious.
To be fair though, Stephen Conroy is all kinds of crazy too.Originally Posted by Grimario
Neither bloke is particularly convincing.
Geez Louise you wonder why no one likes or trusts any of these grubs.
Plan is to now pay the major parties $1 per vote per year (backdated to include last election) to cover admin costs for the major parties.
Labor stands to get $8m, Libs $7.5 and the Greens a couple $mil as well.
Of course no one is against it.
Tact doesn't seem to be a big thang down Canberra way.
i actually support full public funding of political parties. if you remove the need to raise money (i.e. provide guaranteed funding for each party based on an equitable system), then they don't need to be raising donations through some of the dodgy practices they all use at the moment (splitting donations to come under the disclosure cap for example). why should a corporation be able to pay for what is essentially special access and benefits when the ordinary taxpayer is unable to (to the same extent)?
in summary, all for it cause i think democracy is up the proverbial without it.
I totally agree with this concept also and wish that's the way it was run.
But.
This new bill adds more funding to the pre-existing amounts granted post elections, and no changes have been made to accepting money from corporates/unions etc (apart from the threshold now being $5k for reportable donations down from $11.5k).
This new bill has also been funded with an unallocated $500m left over from this years budget. The budget which we were all told that we need new taxes etc to pay for major policy (which I also mostly agree with).
All sides are guilty in this as no parties will oppose it. But maybe it's something that could have been timed a little better rather than "lets take some more tax $ to fund all the crap we're going to pour down your throats in the next 100 days".
Also, I think we would enter a minefield where advertising can be independently funded by a business council/union/hippy group like getup that is essentially political anyway.
Not sure how they would prevent that from tipping the balance.
Most of it is wasted money, I know who I'm voting for, you know who you are voting for, it's all spent on the knobs who have trouble finding the polling booths. Red headed backstabbing bitch out, take her offsider Noddy with her, and Dutchy wants a lift.
glad you didn't get personal or anything.
Thats the thing, Im actually still undecided. I dont believe any of the advertising, but what I usually base my vote on (whichever policies will benefit me personally and professionally most) are a bit light on from everyone so far.
and dont even start me on the leadership of both sides. fecking clowns the lot of them.
i hate that these things turn into a popularity contest.
bloody teenagers and their twitters and myfaces.
you can thank the whole Kevin 07 campaign with this popularity and american style campaigns.
your vote is for the member that you think is best for the area... Yes It does effect the seats and then you elect a political part to office. But thats what a good candidate should promote. With many a campaign of big swings come down to said candidates work on get the vote about the seat and the candidacy then this stupid voting about presidential type thing...
Amigos Aarau
99% of the time though your federal MP will do sfa for the local area, especially for us homies out here in the burbs. Everything important at a local level is outside of their jurisdiction. So really it does just come down to voting for a party, I would vote for a total clown as my local member as long as it was my preferred party and they weren't using union funds for hookers or sniffing chairs and whatnot.
All comes down to politics at all levels becoming professional.
Decrease the wages, remove incentives, and make them actually care about their constituents
bored at work.
I welcome more money being spent for political purposes. Lobbying is an important part of a high functioning democracy and it cost money. - http://intelligencesquaredus.org/edu...-overregulated
Only those who have never had their democratic rights suffocated could complain that the popularity of their elected leaders is a problem.
That’s what the upper house is for, bro. Guess you will never vote independent then.
And how would lowering their pay make them more professional or caring?
“In an anonymous comments section of the survey one MP wrote that such low levels of pay would soon mean that only MP's with private means would be able to enter parliament.” - http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2...ay-rise-survey
Give me the likes of Costello, Keating and Howard (not particularly 'personable' chaps) over the rabble we have had in the last few years anyway. At least they were focused on running the country not playing nice with Kochie and Mel etc.
I have no problem with political donations/lobbying etc.
how's this for a novel approach? If any pollies are found to be corrupt how about locking them up or kicking them out? That's probably the best way to avoid such issues.
Disagree on wages. Our pollies get paid a relative pittance compared to the private sector. Discouraging big brains from running the biggest company in the country (the economy) would be dangerous.
'getting their democratic rights suffocated'. WOT?
Newcastle City Council votes 7-6 in favour of NOT debating motions about gay marriage.
So NCC officially has at least 6 peanuts.
FFS, just pick up my bin and fix the potholes.
Send in the EDL.
I'll be voting Lib for the first time. 2 reasons, firstly the Gillardgate disgrace where the wishes of the people were ignored, "the people pick the party and we pick the leader", sorry the people pick both. Secondly the lack of money going to safe Labor seats, we need them to be borderline to get some big money into the Hunter.
My vote I'll be soley based on the Gonski reforms.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote