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.
"i found that little bit in here http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au....." NOT THE DT ?
Perhaps you would prefer the ABC coverage HERE , wherein they have a copy of the official Nauruan government release and mention more lifeguards for the "locked up"
I have mentioned a few times before how easy it is to check the source, and whole content, of a C&P, as I do it all the time.
1. Take a meaningful part of the copy and use it as the criteria within a search engine.
2. Select the original source (NOT THE DT) by a process of elimination (or adding to the search criteria)
3. Note any possible political bias of the source, date, content etc.
4. Research any possible alternatives/aspects to the researched C&P
5. Provide some meaningful original thoughts apropos the C&P that will possibly add to the debate, or reflect a personal opinion other than that of someone else.
4 & 5 tend to be overlooked.
Example from C&Ps in an earlier post:
C&P was: "In Anibare, one of four open camps that house those who have been granted asylum"
Using 1. within Google takes us HERE
Then via 2 (NOT THE DT) we end up with THIS from The Guardian
3. and 4. and 5. are worth the effort, especially 5.
there's The Guardian article- nohting about begging to be locked in detention centre on GF night there either
Polks, i was just thinking the same- actually I was thinking of "fantasy island" 
fantastic!
but where did you get this???
Or do you mean these perhaps?
"Refugees on Nauru say they have pleaded with Australian immigration authorities to return them to detention centres because of violence and harassment from some members of the local population".
"The release of hundreds of refugees since May (2014) has caused turmoil in the tiny Pacific nation. Many Nauruans support the refugees and treat them with kindness. But a section of the community has declared its deep antagonism toward the new arrivals"
"More than 20 months after the Nauru processing centre was re-opened, Immigration Minister Scott Morrison has confirmed that the first asylum seekers have been released into the local community after their claims for refugee status were recognised"
"In Anibare, one of four open camps that house those who have been granted asylum" (see example below)
"Last month, refugees were warned to stay indoors on the night of the local Australian rules grand final.
“…there will be excessive drinking of alcohol by members of the community. Please be cautious travelling around Nauru on Saturday and stay at home on Saturday night,” the message said."
I thought this post covered your query!
I have mentioned a few times before how easy it is to check the source, and whole content, of a C&P, as I do it all the time.
1. Take a meaningful part of the copy and use it as the criteria within a search engine.
2. Select the original source (NOT THE DT) by a process of elimination (or adding to the search criteria)
3. Note any possible political bias of the source, date, content etc.
4. Research any possible alternatives/aspects to the researched C&P
5. Provide some meaningful original thoughts apropos the C&P that will possibly add to the debate, or reflect a personal opinion other than that of someone else.
4 & 5 tend to be overlooked.
Example from C&Ps in an earlier post:
C&P was: "In Anibare, one of four open camps that house those who have been granted asylum"
Using 1. within Google takes us HERE
Then via 2 (NOT THE DT) we end up with THIS from The Guardian
3. and 4. and 5. are worth the effort, especially 5.
I see searching is a problem, so:
"but this bit isn't there"
More than 20 months after the Nauru processing centre was re-opened, Immigration Minister Scott Morrison has confirmed that the first asylum seekers have been released into the local community after their claims for refugee status were recognised"
SMH May 22, 2014
More than 20 months after the Nauru processing centre was re-opened, Immigration Minister Scott Morrison has confirmed that the first asylum seekers have been released into the local community after their claims for refugee status were recognised.
"and this bit isn't there, it's from the daily telegraph"
Justice Minister David Adeang : "More lifeguards will also be appointed. as swimming and other water sports are popular with refugee families, particularly at the local boat harbour.
NOT THE DT !
Actually as I have mentioned, it is from this ABC article from 2 days ago
I prefer to use the link protocol when I decide to post a URL e.g. ABC
All the "bits" are there, you just need to search correctly, try the 5 steps..
However I do think you overlook (avoid) the point I am making in reply to these unresearched comments :
"These people have been locked up for years"
"also amazing is the new found freedom they have being able to access the whole island instead of being locked up"
That they are/were wrong.
"so do we just pick out bits from various articles to splice together to suit an agenda?"
What agenda?, other than producing facts to prove that "locked up for years" is nonsense.
