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.
the archives?? yes 
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-04-09/tv-drama-to-deter-asylum-seekers/6381092
The Federal Government is spending $4.1 million to make a telemovie designed to deter asylum seekers from coming to Australia by boat.
why is he spending $4 million on this if he's stopped the boats??
why is he spending $4 million on this if he's stopped the boats??
Probably for the same reason other organisations/companies continue to advertise their well established services/products, and of course many have short term memories and/or no idea how to research!
@debra9275 wrote:the archives?? yes
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-04-09/tv-drama-to-deter-asylum-seekers/6381092
The Federal Government is spending $4.1 million to make a telemovie designed to deter asylum seekers from coming to Australia by boat.
why is he spending $4 million on this if he's stopped the boats??
__________________________________________________________________________________________________
Canberra Times
...But the spokesperson [for the department of Immigration and Border Protection] would not be drawn on whether audiences would be told that the film was fully funded by the Australian government.
....The Refugee Council of Australia has condemned the move, with president Phil Glendenning telling Lateline that it was unlikely to be a deterrent for desperate people fleeing persecution.
"I don't think the government understands why people are on the move if they think a TV drama will be a deterrent," Mr Glendenning said.
@debra9275 wrote:the archives?? yes
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-04-09/tv-drama-to-deter-asylum-seekers/6381092
The Federal Government is spending $4.1 million to make a telemovie designed to deter asylum seekers from coming to Australia by boat.
why is he spending $4 million on this if he's stopped the boats??
They must imagine asylum seekers to be comfortably sitting in their living rooms making plans to migrate to Australia on a leaky boat. Have they forgotten there is a war on and most people who flee are not the slightest bit interested in watching Aussie propaganda films as they fight for their survival?
I see research and now comprehension are in the same paddock with the
Let us consider the C&P heading: Hockey wrong: ATO did publish tax dodgers' names. What a yummy topic if you are a MYOP, especially the Hockey wrong part.
But wait there is more:
"The names were published only where the penalty tax due exceeded $1750 and after all appeal rights had been exhausted.
A separate list in the annual report detailed the taxpayers against whom the Tax Office had secured judgements in the courts. Neither list (ever) included taxpayers merely suspected of underpaying."
Love this:
"But Fairfax Media can reveal that as recently as 1984 the Tax Office routinely published the names of taxpayers and companies it found to be engaged in breaches or evasion."
1984, is that allowed A3? because "recently as" makes the "forbidden history" rather insignificant!
There is a common theme to be found in the above, HINT : due process.
To make it simple taxpayers who broke the law were named and shamed. This current (feel good) inquiry chaired by Labor Senator Sam Dastyari wants details of companies LEGAL tax affairs (to be made public) if they operate their tax commitments via OS hubs, legally.
Tax Commissioner Chris Jordan says publishing taxpayers' personal details would be "unprecedented". Treasurer Joe Hockey says "confidentiality of taxpayer information has been a key feature of Australia's taxation system since the 1950s".
Both are right, apropos legal taxpayers, unless of course you wish to have a ALP/Green populist topic aired, with research that would be acceptable here
