There are plenty who will see it as a good thing. It will still mean he is dead inside his own party.
If he did that the Nationals would dissolve the Coalition and sit in the cross benches. Staying with the right of the Liberal Party will kill them
That is the funniest thing I've read in ages.
ABCC has no chance, a Federal ICAC would be great, the Libs would never go for it as they know they have a lot more skeletons in the closet than Labor, but the best result will be the further erosion of support of both major parties, even if it does mean One Nation establishes a more permanent foothold. Whilst I would never vote for them having them in Canberra is better than having 4 puppets of the major parties.
Apart from the fact it is a waste of $160m from a government which talks up its pathetic economic credentials
So you keep saying. Are you scared of people having a say? You didn't mind that Ireland had a vote on SSM and passed it!
Holding the plebiscite shows that the Liberal Party are economic vandals, their credentials on economic management are non-existent. Howard pissed up the longest economic growth period since the 1950s against the wall in tax cuts and delivered nothing else. Debt trebled under the last government, budget deficit increased and they want to cut corporate tax as a result, for what, how about spend that $50b on infrastructure for future generations.
I sort of went blah blah blah when you mentioned Howard but both parties need to ignore the polls and just run the knife through spending.
Because the Liberals are not going to respect the outcome of the plebiscite regardless. Bernardi and the other homophobic religious arseholes have made public announcements that they will vote against the legislation change even after the public vote to legalise gay marriage.
Yes, because all our problems are caused by spending and not the fact we are a low taxing country that wants to cut taxes further while delivering services to a large country
People need to realise things cost money.
We elect, and pay politicians to make these decisions on our behalf, plenty of contentious decisions are made by governments all the time without putting to the people to vote on, carbon pricing, and the war in Iraq are two good examples. This needs to be seen for what it is, a last gasp delaying tactic by a small but vocal minority of conservative politicians.
Perhaps the government could also look at the income side. Like stopping companies avoiding taxation; had the guts to make major changes to superannuation and negative gearing rorts; took a closer look at family trusts; introduced an inheritance tax for estates over (say) $ 2 million; made a real attempt to get at the black economy. There are two sides to the matter.
The problem isn't spending the problem is revenue, if we don't solve the revenue problem which means getting rid of middle class and corporate welfare we are screwed as a country.
They will pass it if it gets up. Only Bernardi and Abetz are squealing out loud in public.
You can say goodbye to our oil supply if we do that. Plus, we will need more savings than a few billion. We need to cut at least $50b per year. Revenue isn't a problem, yet. Not that I agree with you on this anyway!
Why is it goodbye to our oil supply, the USA has done more damage to the world's oil supply than anyone, Iraq, Libya, Syria, Venezuela all in chaos because of the USA.
