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.
"But it is the Scottish equivalent of the AIMN much beloved by the ........... and I would expect also you A3
Show me a quote I have posted from the AIMN"
I am writing this slowly A3 " I would expect also you A3" "expect" does not mean you have!.
And what quote did I specifically reply to? Please enlighten me. Read the opening post of that thread. What is it based on - the link provided
you have stated that : I note you were quite happy to reply to a quote from an unreliable source
"Didn't make a squeak about the link to one in the other thread." Why would I? I was only responding to Ladybug.
Forget the obfuscation A3, produce the reply and the quote responsible, it should be easy, just a C&P, and maybe a teeny bit of real comment.
Definitive statements based upon fact are simple to authenticate, so do it, without the waffle.
"Any person who posts an article from. The daily telegraph by Rown dean and thinks it 's a good true article has no right to critique any articles anyone else posts imo"
Any person who posts an article from. The Jakarta Post and thinks it 's a good true article has no right to critique any articles anyone else posts imo.
