As it's more than 100 days now, it has been suggested that a new thread was needed. The current govt has been breaking promises and telling lies at a rate so fast it's hard to keep up.
This below is worrying, "independent" pffft, as if your own doctor is somehow what? biased, it's ridiculous. So far there is talk of only including people under a certain age 30-35, for now. Remember that if your injured in a car, injured at work or get ill, you too might need to go on the DSP. They have done a similar think in the UK with devastating consequences.
and this is the 2nd time recently where the Govt has referred to work as welfare???? So when you go to work tomorrow (or tuesday), just remember that's welfare.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-04-20/disability-pensioners-may-be-reassessed-kevin-andrews/5400598
Independent doctors could be called in to reassess disability pensioners, Federal Government says
The Federal Government is considering using independent doctors to examine disability pensioners and assess whether they should continue to receive payments.
Currently family doctors provide reports supporting claims for the Disability Support Pension (DSP).
But Social Services Minister Kevin Andrews is considering a measure that would see independent doctors reassess eligibility.
"We are concerned that where people can work, the best form of welfare is work," Mr Andrews said at a press conference.
Mr Abbott is asked why unemployment has risen to the highest levels since August 2002 -which is when he was minister for employment.
Mr Abbott starts talking about the "Holocaust of jobs" lost under the previous Labor government but quickly withdraws and replaces it with the "decimation of jobs".
Peta has got hold of his "goolies" by the short and curlies 
Just the thought makes me shudder
Retired Rear Admiral and former submarine commanding officer Peter Briggs said he had never heard of the term "competitive evaluation process".
Perhaps that is why he is retired, too much salt water on the brain.
treasury paper
'When undertaking a procurement, agencies need to conduct an appropriately competitive
process of a scale commensurate with the size and risk profile of the particular procurement.
How about this:
"The decision to purchase new aircraft raised two major questions: what to purchase and how much to pay. Initially, in June 2002. the (Australian) Government set up a competitive evaluation process to examine its options.
You will "love" this one (?????)
REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL FOR THE DISPOSAL OF: ROYAL AUSTRALIAN SHIPS AND EX-HMAS MANOORA
i.e. SINK THEM. Very much a submarine type activity !!!! Anyway, within the paperwork (2011) is this:
These following criteria (not in any order of importance) may be used to establish the disposal options open to the Commonwealth but will NOT be used to assess individual responses for subsequent RFT activity. This RFP is not subject to a competitive evaluation process.
@monman12 wrote:
You will "love" this one (?????)
REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL FOR THE DISPOSAL OF: ROYAL AUSTRALIAN SHIPS AND EX-HMAS MANOORA
i.e. SINK THEM. Very much a submarine type activity !!!! Anyway, within the paperwork (2011) is this:
Wouldn't take that much to sink that old Rust bucket !!!
And re "SINK THEM. Very much a submarine type activity !!!! "
Er, the last ship they sank two RAAF F-111's did it with 2000 lb bombs
