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.
"Several countries have already submitted their proposed emissions reductions target to the United Nations while Australia remains reluctant to commit to new plans. The need for more effective solutions to climate change has placed Australia in the spotlight as a new report revealed drought conditions in some parts of the country are getting worse."
Spotlight ?
Fact
"it is not good news that only five countries, including the EU and the US, have met the 31 March line. Only Russia and Gabon followed on 1 April."
Gosh some "real world" stuff!
However, on examination it would appear chosen purely because of the possible negativity apropos the current "malodorous" "govt". No, really?
So D9275, do you not accept/agree with Australia's actual proposed emission reduction target?
Australia will reduce its greenhouse gas emissions by 25% on 2000 levels by 2020 if the world agrees to an ambitious global deal capable of stabilising levels of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere at 450 ppm CO2-eq or lower. Australia will unconditionally reduce our emissions by 5% below 2000 levels by 2020, and by up to 15% by 2020 if there is a global agreement which falls short of securing atmospheric stabilisation at 450 ppm CO2-eq
Perhaps the author of your quoted C&P, without any original contribution from here, also is averse to research (sorry), because Australia's intended actions have been advertised some time ago.
ABC News 6 Sept 2013 (sorry about the forbidden history)
Both ALP and the Coalition agree on the science of climate change, and have formally backed Australia's emissions reduction target of 5 per cent by 2020. But there are some differences:
ABC News Oct 2013 (that will keep A3 happy)
" Environment Minister Greg Hunt says the Government will not change its targets until it gauges the international response at the next UN Climate Summit, due to be held in Paris in September 2015."
"This is one input, it's a draft report, I respect and appreciate the contribution," Mr Hunt said.
"Our time frame remains unchanged."
"The world will make a decision at the end of 2015."
Anyway D9275, accepting that Australia's possibly revised targets (emissions) will be announced Sept 2015 what figure(s) would you accept/prefer for our carbon emissions reduction? Do you think the general target limit of 2°C for global temperature rise is achievable, or like myself believe it is another political global talk-fest similar those which commenced with Kyoto?
Early announcement of the INDCs is important for the preparations of a climate deal in Paris. Although the UNFCCC evaluation of the post-2020 climate ambitions was postponed until October, transparency about the future mitigation efforts is needed early on. In particular as the drafted text for the new agreement includes the INDCs and should be ready by end of May. Given this timing of the process, it is not good news that only five countries, including the EU and the US, have met the 31 March line. Only Russia and Gabon followed on 1 April.
