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.
@j*oono wrote:Julia, the number cruncher LOL
Exactly Deb. Old numbers even from one year ago don't count anymore.
i'm sure the UNHCR is doing its best
to keep you up to date 
and if you read my earlier post, australia
is still up there as of 2015
(according to the UNHCR)
i realise the tables are from 2012 -
i posted them to show you the difference
between the different types of refugee
intake.
I got it open
but Julia the heading is
Top Ten for resettlement in 2012
the list shows
US 53,053
Aust 5 079
Canada 4755
(page 76)
CS: "Speaking of numbers, Tony Abbott last Friday claimed that Australia takes in more refugees than any other country, per head of population.
This must be news to Lebanon, population 4.3 million, who have accepted more than 1.1 million refugees to date. Once again, Tony's just making stuff up.
And there are those not researching, or even reading links?
What Mr Abbott means when he says Australia takes more refugees on a per capita basis is that Australia takes more refugees on a per capita basis through its re-settlement program.
September 6, 2015 http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-opinion/fact-and-fiction-with-prime-minister-tony-a...
I READ IT !
However, when considering the world's re-settlement programs, Australia's is one of the most generous.
According to the UNHCR Global Trends 2014 report, there were 105,200 refugees re-settled last year and the United States admitted the largest number (73,000), followed by Canada (12,300), and Australia (11,600).
Sweden (2,000), Norway (1,300) and Finland (1,100) then followed.
That is what Mr Abbott means when he says Australia takes more refugees than any other through the UNHCR on a per capita basis.
Australia takes one of the highest number of refugees on a per capita basis through its re-settlement program than most other countries.
Shadow Treasurer Chris Bowen used the same argument in 2013: "We do take more refugees per head of Australian population than any other nation in the world. We take either the second or third most in absolute terms, depending on how you calibrate your calculation."
I READ IT !
According to the Refugee Council of Australia, Australia ranked second in 2012 for resettlement of refugees per capita, while in absolute terms it came second behind the US and Canada.. (??)
As Bowen said it depends "on how you calibrate your calculation." and here is no exception, if you have researched!.
Gosh, not a single quote from "not the DT" either.
i fond the 'resettlement' figures for 2014, however they are small figures in comparison to the number of refugees
Bill Shorten slumps in latest Newspoll, Tony Abbott’s performance rating remains stable
DISSATISFACTION with Opposition Leader Bill Shorten is on the rise among voters, according to the latest Newspoll figures.
According to the latest survey published in The Australian, satisfaction with Mr Shorten’s performance fell from 34 points to 30 points and dissatisfaction rose from 52 to 58 points.
Prime Minister Tony Abbott’s performance rating remained stable.
In the measure of who would make the better prime minister, Mr Abbott has moved up from 35 points to 37 points while Mr Shorten rose from 40 points to 41 points.
Based on preference flows from the last election, Labor’s two-party preferred lead was unchanged at 54 per cent to the Coalition’s 46 per cent
funny article
stable??? does that mean consistently bad?
i notice they haven't included the poll results on satisfaction/dissatisfaction on abbotts perfomance against shortens
"hmmmm hope we get an RC into all this one day"
Perhaps we could start right here!
Let's see,a 2015 article (not the DT) covering a 2013 procedural failure and a post that ends
: "A subsequent treasury review found mistakes including double counting amounting to $11 billion. without explicitly indicating (here) that was a completely different event that happened in 2010
However, it is good to see that the forbidden history period is no more, and we can freely discuss the Circus antics, even perhaps those of Swan and his performance !
"Treasurer Wayne Swan said the ruling (apropos 2010) was "the final nail in the coffin for the Liberals' economic credibility"".
Economic credibility from a Treasurer who in the same pre election 2010 period vowed that a surplus would be delivered "come hell or high water" and subsequently managed all five of his budgets to be deficits.?
At least it proved that a Swan could not swim in boiling water?
