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.
Are they from Hansard or from the Newscorpse edition of Hansard? 
Oh goody some real research to consider.
Now for some more facts:
Growth in Australia's net debt is the third highest among the 17 nations surveyed.
Of course I must apologise for most of this graph below (forbidden history!), but it starts when Howard became PM. Lets see, the Circus came to town in 2007!!
The verdict ABC
Mr Hockey's claims about Australia's forecast levels of debt and deficits may be "pessimistic", but they are consistent with Treasury modelling.
His comments on growth in spending and debt compared to the 17 nations surveyed by the IMF check out.
He fails to mention the fact that Australia's overall debt as a proportion of GDP remains at comparatively low levels internationally.
Overall, Mr Hockey's claim is correct.
I have formed the opinion that practical economics (real world) are not really taken seriously (or understood?), but I certainly would not "brag" that, say, my CC debt is almost the lowest among my neighbours, when they could indicate that it is increasing at a greater rate than most of theirs.
Are they from Hansard or from the Newscorpse edition of Hansard?
I have indicated they are from Hansard D9275, so allow me to head you in the right direction, but you will have to do some work!:
Herein you can find the UNEDITED excerpts of mine, with a little research (sorry)
@monman12 wrote:Are they from Hansard or from the Newscorpse edition of Hansard?
I have indicated they are from Hansard D9275, so allow me to head you in the right direction, but you will have to do some work!:
Herein you can find the UNEDITED excerpts of mine, with a little research (sorry)
Yes, I did find the quote by Senator O'Sullivan in Feb 2015.
Senator O'SULLIVAN: Let me give you a minute now to read it in the context of your answer, because it says:
…once any decision was made to hold an inquiry I would have immediately told the minister.'
Prof. Triggs : I am not sure what your question is.
Senator O'SULLIVAN: It is coming.
Prof. Triggs : I think it would be very helpful if you were to provide me with a question.
Senator O'SULLIVAN: Did you immediately tell the minister once your decision was made to hold the inquiry?
Prof. Triggs : The answer is that he was told before, and that is set out in my letter of 10 December.
Senator O'SULLIVAN: The minister was told that you had made a decision to hold the inquiry before you made the decision to hold the inquiry?
Prof. Triggs : What we did at first was give a notification. This is all in front of you. I have given you this evidence on several occasions, and it is on the letter of 10 December. It is very clear—
CHAIR: Could you please answer the question now.
Prof. Triggs : I am reading then from what I have already provided you with. If I can direct you to page 2 of that letter, and it is the second paragraph—
Senator O'SULLIVAN: What is the reference on that?
Prof. Triggs : It was the letter of 10 December 2014 to the Senate.
CHAIR: We are over time, but—
Prof. Triggs : You will see in the second paragraph that I have given you a very precise answer to that question. It documents and makes clear that what I have said is strictly accurate.
Senator O'SULLIVAN: When was this tabled?
Prof. Triggs : I am sorry if you have not read this letter, but it does seem that many of the critical documents have not been read.
Senator O'SULLIVAN: When did you tender this?
Prof. Triggs : This was written on 10 December as part of the process.
Senator WONG: She has referred to it a number of times.
Senator O'SULLIVAN: How would we have—
Prof. Triggs : You have the letter. I am sorry if you have not read it yet, but if you were able to—
Senator O'SULLIVAN: Where would I have the letter, Professor?
Senator SIEWERT: Professor Triggs tried to table this letter this morning and you said she could not.
Prof. Triggs : No, this was—
CHAIR: As I understand it, this letter was sent to the secretariat.
Prof. Triggs : Yes.
Senator SIEWERT: Yes.
CHAIR: When did the secretariat receive it? In the last couple of days I understand.
Ms O'Brien : No, on 10 December last year.
Prof. Triggs : I have repeated this date several times; it is 10 December. It seems that you have not read it, but that is the critical letter in which absolute clarification is made, and it indeed clarifies the answers that I gave in the previous November—
CHAIR: Saying that your original answer was wrong, and this is the truth?
Prof. Triggs : No. Senator Macdonald, you have again, I am afraid, misunderstood the letter, and I would suggest that you read it, along with the report. We were very, very clear—
CHAIR: I have indicated why I will not bother to read the report.
Prof. Triggs : How can you know that the report is not worth reading if you have not read it—or even read the foreword or the first chapter?
CHAIR: I have seen excerpts of it, but it is so inaccurate as to make me think that the rest of it would not be worth reading.
Prof. Triggs : That is a very unfortunate decision to take, but I would like to reiterate that we have provided this letter on 10 December, and I very much had hoped that the members of this Senate committee would have been given that letter and would have read it so that they were aware, before they came to this meeting, of the precise information and documentation that we have spent a great deal of time and resources preparing for you at your request.
Senator HANSON-YOUNG: Apologies, Professor Triggs. They only care about bullying.
CHAIR: Thank you, Professor Triggs. Senator O'Sullivan, your time has finished and you will have to come back to it at a later time.
Senator O'SULLIVAN: I will come back to it.
@monman12 wrote:Are they from Hansard or from the Newscorpse edition of Hansard?
I have indicated they are from Hansard D9275, so allow me to head you in the right direction, but you will have to do some work!:
Herein you can find the UNEDITED excerpts of mine, with a little research (sorry)
I've alrady read it and seen it numerous time and know that Triggs did not say that in February. I also saw what happened when she was pressed to take a guess at answers in November and read the letter of clarification from December, hence my request for the full quotes in context.
@monman12 wrote:
The verdict ABC
Mr Hockey's claims about Australia's forecast levels of debt and deficits may be "pessimistic", but they are consistent with Treasury modelling.
His comments on growth in spending and debt compared to the 17 nations surveyed by the IMF check out.
He fails to mention the fact that Australia's overall debt as a proportion of GDP remains at comparatively low levels internationally.
Overall, Mr Hockey's claim is correct.
Dated March 2014, when Hockey was preparing his first May Budget (which was a fail,fail,fail).
Why don't you include the date/month/year with your quotes?
Someone who does really need to do 'research' before speaking out - Hockey - The Treasurer
Fact check: Joe Hockey's 'poor people' don't have cars, don't drive far claim misleading
The verdict
High income Australians spend more in absolute dollar terms on fuel, so will pay more fuel tax than lower income households.
However, as a proportion of gross income and weekly spending, fuel bills hit lower income families harder.
Census data and research from independent experts shows that people on lower incomes have enough cars and drive far enough to feel the impact of raising the fuel tax more than those on higher incomes.
Mr Hockey's statement is misleading.
Fact check: Joe Hockey's claim that people work half the year to pay income tax incorrect
The verdict:
Fact check: Hockey over-eggs 'borrowing $100 million a day' claim
Speaking on ABC TV's 7.30 program, Mr Hockey warned that Australia is at a "tipping point" and living beyond its means. "We cannot continue to go on borrowing $100 million a day as a government just to pay our daily bills," he said.
ABC Fact Check investigates whether Australia is borrowing $100 million a day, and it "cannot continue" as Mr Hockey claims.
The verdict
Mr Hockey is using a conservative figure to estimate the daily cost of borrowing the difference between the Government's expenditure and its revenue.
But economists said his statement that we are at a "tipping point" is more open to debate.
They point out Australia's debt and deficit are not at particularly high levels historically, or internationally, and that investors are prepared to lend more to the federal Government. They also point out that some spending goes towards building infrastructure and investing in future economic growth.
Hockey's howlers
2014
April 24
Defends a co-payment on GP services by saying
“my electorate of North Sydney has one of the highest bulk-billing rates in Australia and I have one of the wealthiest electorates in Australia”.
In fact, with a bulk-billing rate of 70 per cent, North Sydney is among the lowest bulk-billing areas in Sydney.
May 9
Channel Nine airs footage of Hockey and Finance Minister Mathias Cormann smoking cigars outside Treasury after putting the finishing touches on the May 13 budget. The image is widely lampooned on social media.
May 14
Caught offguard by Laurie Oakes when asked why he was dancing in his office to the song Best Day of My Life by the group American Authors before he delivered his budget speech.
May 15
Accused of being patronising when he compares the Medicare co-payment to beers and cigarettes: “One of the things that quite astounds me is some people are screaming about a $7 co-payment. You can spend just over $3 on a middy of beer, so that’s two middies of beer to go into the doctor.”
May 21
Incorrectly tells a chronic disease sufferer on Q&A that they would not be affected by the $7 co-payment. The Australian Medical Association quickly rejects the claim, saying chronic disease sufferers will have to pay.
July 7
Takes a week’s holiday in Fiji during the first sitting week of the new Senate.
July 16
Warns he is ready to bypass Parliament if Labor and the Greens oppose budget savings, sparking accusations the government plans a new round of tough spending cuts.
July 23
A biography by Madonna King reveals Hockey wanted the budget to be tougher and carries quotes from his wife that he will never again trust Communications Minister Malcolm Turnbull following the 2009 leadership spill.
August 8
Liberal insiders accuse Hockey of being a whinger after he says “everyone is against me at any rate”.
August 13
Says a proposed increase in fuel excise will not hit the poor as hard as the rich because they “don’t have cars or actually drive very far”.
