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.
"why not just state the correct figure in the first place - which is under 70%"
So why not produce your "correct figure" as you have stated earlier that mine is wrong
So this week Harvey Shorten produced a lot of empty rhetoric (mainly for media consumption) : the Marriage Bill and Small Business fast-track Motion, both destined for absolutely no chance of success, and the latter for no useful or practical purpose other than to "excite" those unaware of parliamentary procedures. e.g.
it was a motion to to pass the Bill through thre HOR, the LNP voted against the motion to pass their Bill, which also means they voted against passing their Bill,
what I posted wasn't wrong at all
Yes it was wrong, the motion was for a vote to "fast-track" the Bill, NOT a motion to pass the BILL. If the motion had of passed, the BILL would then have had to be debated and THEN another vote taken as whether to pass it. (a second vote)
Further simple information can be obtained from here Making Laws or even: House of Representatives Practice - Parliament of Australia.
some unfortunate but amusing photos 
"Citizenship stoush: Tony Abbott refuses to provide Bill Shorten with briefing despite demands to reveal Labor's position"
"I refer to reports that the government will introduce legislation to permit the revocation of Australian citizenship for dual citizens involved in terrorism into the Parliament this week," Mr Shorten wrote" ???
A somewhat convoluted statement from Harvey Shorten which for clarity would be better written thus:
I refer to reports this week that the government will introduce legislation to permit the revocation of Australian citizenship for dual citizens involved in terrorism into the Parliament.
That aside, the article SMH is somewhat disingenuous e.g.
"Citizenship stoush: Tony Abbott refuses to provide Bill Shorten with briefing despite demands to reveal Labor's position"
"Prime Minister Tony Abbott has rejected the opposition's request for a briefing on a plan to strip dual citizens of their Australian citizenship, in a sign the bipartisanship on national security may be breaking down."
"But wait. there's more":
"However, it is understood the Prime Minister's office has told the Opposition Leader's office a briefing will be provided once the legislation is prepared, which is not expected until later this month. "
So where did "refuses to provide" and "rejected the opposition's request" emanate from, other than an active imagination ?
How outrageous, Abbott's office indicating a briefing will be provided once the legislation is prepared, and not before .
I think it is just another attempt to provide more MEDIA FODDER, seeing that the other two publicity shows this week were hardly convincing ( Marriage, Small Business).
One must also bear in mind that the annual ALP Conference kicks off in less than 3 weeks, and Harvey Shorten must show that he is really not on lay-by, but ready for action, and instructions.
