I think the ball is in Tony Abbott’s court.... The question is, does he only have two gears – dull and do nothing and save his job, or extreme ideology.
@am*3 wrote:
@*julia*2010 wrote:this is from bolt's blog - can somone confirm
this is what was actually said at the press conference?
JOURNALIST: What do you make of the reports this morning Mr Shorten that the deficit levy could be gone in this coming Budget after 2017, and also no GST on goods purchased online under $1,000. Would you be supportive of those measures?
SHORTEN: There’s the Government going again with thought bubbles in substitute for well-argued and reasoned policy.... In terms of what we will support, I think the Government just needs to do its homework, tell Australians of what it’s doing – not a process of selective leaks of half thought-out ideas which they then retreat from as soon as they get the first whiff of political gunpowder in their nostrils.
JOURNALIST: Would you like to see the deficit levy continue?
SHORTEN: Well first of all I’d like to see what the numbers in the Budget are. I’m not going to start putting up all the propositions of the Government.... We’ve done a fair bit of the Government’s homework. I would like to see the Government adopt our approach, going after the multinationals, not putting them in the too-hard basket. I’d like the Government to do something about the biggest worst kept secret in town, which is the excessively generous superannuation contributions which have turned superannuation – for the lucky few on many millions – turned superannuation from a comfortable retirement into a legalised tax haven in Australia.
JOURNALIST: When will the Labor Government deliver a Budget surplus?
SHORTEN: First of all we have to be in Government. I think the question though that should be asked of the Abbott Government is that – they’ve now been in power about 604, 605 days, when will they stop blaming Labor around every corner for everything that this Government hasn’t done? ...
We saw before the last election, the Abbott Opposition said they’d deliver a surplus, no worries, then we saw it stretch out while they’ve been in Government to one year, to three years, to sometime in the future, to Treasury saying not in the next 40 years. So I think this Government’s got a lot of explaining to do to Australians. Last year, they got the economy wrong. They just got it wrong. They went after lower-income people – cutting pensions, GP taxes, $100,000 degrees, family payments on the line.
JOURNALIST: Can I ask what is needed – more spending cuts or tax increases?
SHORTEN: What’s needed is the Government to keep its election promises, what’s needed is the Government not to attack low-paid people....I put forward our tests very clearly and I – like you – wait to see what it really is, not their selective leaks, not Scott Morrison using childcare to grab Joe Hockey’s job, or Tony Abbott using childcare to keep his own job. We’ve said they should be responsible and fair, and should be about the future, not a nip and tuck here and there where they’re desperately trying to hold onto their jobs in the caucus room. The only reform that they can think of is one that’s unfair to most people.
JOURNALIST: This morning Tony Abbott said that the Government has been able to save about $3 billion or so over the forward estimates as a result of its asylum seeker policy. Is this something that Labor will continue if you were to win Government?
SHORTEN: Well, I will give some tips to Tony Abbott. He could save north of $20 billion by taking up our changes to multinationals and superannuation…Tony Abbott needs to stop focusing on political point scoring against Labor. He has been in office for 604 days. When will the man do his day job and stop blaming everyone else, and start working in the long-term interests of Australia? Simple test by Labor – is it fair? Is it honest and responsible? Does it help us in the future, where we’re seeing the great transition from the mining boom to the non-mining sector, we’re seeing the rise of age and the digital disruption, the equal treatment of women long overdue, we’ve got an ageing society – we’ve got to make sure that we are a services-based society so we can capture the great new middle class of Asia. That’s the game in town ladies and gentleman, it’s the future. Tony Abbott has got to answer the future test.
JOURNALIST: But given the savings that Operation Sovereign Borders – the Government says – have been achieved, is it a policy that Labor would continue with if you were to win government next year?
SHORTEN: Well, I don’t accept the assumption – you’re asserting numbers, we haven’t seen them yet. Let’s see what they look like in the Budget. But in the meantime, I just invite Tony Abbott to take up our constructive suggestions… Tough areas, superannuation concessions for the mega-wealthy, looking at multinational taxation…Australians don’t understand why Tony Abbott make wants to make it harder for working-class kids to go to university, why he insists on trashing bulk-billing and Medicare, why on earth he’s still persisting with cuts to the pension indexation rate, which are real cuts to pensioners, and yet on the other hand when we say, “Here is some money,” he needs to be dragged kicking and screaming to the table to go after the top end of town, but he’s always got a plan to put his hand in the pocket of middle Australia.
JOURNALIST: You were saying before that you’ve got three tests that you are going to apply to the Abbott Government’s Budget, if the savings measures that they propose don’t meet those tests, are you committed to blocking them?
SHORTEN: Well, first of all, let’s see what they do. We all know that last year’s Budget was a complete disaster
It was the biggest train wreck of budgets of recent decades, and they’ve complained, you know, a few people have complained that somehow the Australian people are selfish, they’re not up for reform or that the Parliament is being selfish. It’s not selfish to want to defend Medicare, it’s not unreasonable for the Australian people to be against pension cuts or $100,000 university degrees for the vast bulk of Australian students in the future.
No, I think the ball is in Tony Abbott’s court.... The question is, does he only have two gears – dull and do nothing and save his job, or extreme ideology. Does he have the wit and wisdom to learn over the last twelve months – stop being negative, stop blaming everyone else. Pick up the good ideas, we’re willing to be bipartisan, and I hope today that he takes up our deal on the Renewable Energy Targets and maybe tomorrow to put Australia in a more confident mood, he drops his rotten cuts to the pension. Last question.
JOURNALIST: Well, what do you make of what the AFP have had to say?
SHORTEN: Well I’ll need to see what they’ve actually said. I have been obviously here with you giving this speech, and what I’ll have to do is look at the transcript of what they’ve said. What we’d make clear though is we don’t understand why the Federal Government dropped their Direction of the federal police in terms of opposing the death penalty. There may be a very reasonable explanation for this. It has been a very hard time for the families of the two men who were executed, I’m very conscious of the AFP not being caught as the meat in the sandwich here, but on the other hand, I’ll read the transcript. But I do think there is an opportunity for the Liberal Government and the Labor Opposition to work together to campaign against the death penalty in countries where it currently exists.
thanks am*3
that's even worse 
@crosbystills wrote:http://tenplay.com.au/channel-ten/the-bolt-report/2015/5/10
Y'know Icy, that's a 44 minute video. Perhaps you could give us a clue where to look for the relevant bit.
I did hear this in the second minute:
Bolt: "Tony Abbott has copped much more media vilification than Gillard..."
What utter rubbish.
Perhaps icy could give a few examples?
am*3 wrote:
*julia*2010 wrote:
this is from bolt's blog - can somone confirm
this is what was actually said at the press conference?
JOURNALIST: What do you make of the reports this morning Mr Shorten that the deficit levy could be gone in this coming Budget after 2017, and also no GST on goods purchased online under $1,000. Would you be supportive of those measures?
SHORTEN: There’s the Government going again with thought bubbles in substitute for well-argued and reasoned policy.... In terms of what we will support, I think the Government just needs to do its homework, tell Australians of what it’s doing – not a process of selective leaks of half thought-out ideas which they then retreat from as soon as they get the first whiff of political gunpowder in their nostrils.
JOURNALIST: Would you like to see the deficit levy continue?
SHORTEN: Well first of all I’d like to see what the numbers in the Budget are. I’m not going to start putting up all the propositions of the Government.... We’ve done a fair bit of the Government’s homework. I would like to see the Government adopt our approach, going after the multinationals, not putting them in the too-hard basket. I’d like the Government to do something about the biggest worst kept secret in town, which is the excessively generous superannuation contributions which have turned superannuation – for the lucky few on many millions – turned superannuation from a comfortable retirement into a legalised tax haven in Australia.
JOURNALIST: When will the Labor Government deliver a Budget surplus?
SHORTEN: First of all we have to be in Government. I think the question though that should be asked of the Abbott Government is that – they’ve now been in power about 604, 605 days, when will they stop blaming Labor around every corner for everything that this Government hasn’t done? ...
We saw before the last election, the Abbott Opposition said they’d deliver a surplus, no worries, then we saw it stretch out while they’ve been in Government to one year, to three years, to sometime in the future, to Treasury saying not in the next 40 years. So I think this Government’s got a lot of explaining to do to Australians. Last year, they got the economy wrong. They just got it wrong. They went after lower-income people – cutting pensions, GP taxes, $100,000 degrees, family payments on the line.
JOURNALIST: Can I ask what is needed – more spending cuts or tax increases?
SHORTEN: What’s needed is the Government to keep its election promises, what’s needed is the Government not to attack low-paid people....I put forward our tests very clearly and I – like you – wait to see what it really is, not their selective leaks, not Scott Morrison using childcare to grab Joe Hockey’s job, or Tony Abbott using childcare to keep his own job. We’ve said they should be responsible and fair, and should be about the future, not a nip and tuck here and there where they’re desperately trying to hold onto their jobs in the caucus room. The only reform that they can think of is one that’s unfair to most people.
JOURNALIST: This morning Tony Abbott said that the Government has been able to save about $3 billion or so over the forward estimates as a result of its asylum seeker policy. Is this something that Labor will continue if you were to win Government?
SHORTEN: Well, I will give some tips to Tony Abbott. He could save north of $20 billion by taking up our changes to multinationals and superannuation…Tony Abbott needs to stop focusing on political point scoring against Labor. He has been in office for 604 days. When will the man do his day job and stop blaming everyone else, and start working in the long-term interests of Australia? Simple test by Labor – is it fair? Is it honest and responsible? Does it help us in the future, where we’re seeing the great transition from the mining boom to the non-mining sector, we’re seeing the rise of age and the digital disruption, the equal treatment of women long overdue, we’ve got an ageing society – we’ve got to make sure that we are a services-based society so we can capture the great new middle class of Asia. That’s the game in town ladies and gentleman, it’s the future. Tony Abbott has got to answer the future test.
JOURNALIST: But given the savings that Operation Sovereign Borders – the Government says – have been achieved, is it a policy that Labor would continue with if you were to win government next year?
SHORTEN: Well, I don’t accept the assumption – you’re asserting numbers, we haven’t seen them yet. Let’s see what they look like in the Budget. But in the meantime, I just invite Tony Abbott to take up our constructive suggestions… Tough areas, superannuation concessions for the mega-wealthy, looking at multinational taxation…Australians don’t understand why Tony Abbott make wants to make it harder for working-class kids to go to university, why he insists on trashing bulk-billing and Medicare, why on earth he’s still persisting with cuts to the pension indexation rate, which are real cuts to pensioners, and yet on the other hand when we say, “Here is some money,” he needs to be dragged kicking and screaming to the table to go after the top end of town, but he’s always got a plan to put his hand in the pocket of middle Australia.
JOURNALIST: You were saying before that you’ve got three tests that you are going to apply to the Abbott Government’s Budget, if the savings measures that they propose don’t meet those tests, are you committed to blocking them?
SHORTEN: Well, first of all, let’s see what they do. We all know that last year’s Budget was a complete disaster
It was the biggest train wreck of budgets of recent decades, and they’ve complained, you know, a few people have complained that somehow the Australian people are selfish, they’re not up for reform or that the Parliament is being selfish. It’s not selfish to want to defend Medicare, it’s not unreasonable for the Australian people to be against pension cuts or $100,000 university degrees for the vast bulk of Australian students in the future.
No, I think the ball is in Tony Abbott’s court.... The question is, does he only have two gears – dull and do nothing and save his job, or extreme ideology. Does he have the wit and wisdom to learn over the last twelve months – stop being negative, stop blaming everyone else. Pick up the good ideas, we’re willing to be bipartisan, and I hope today that he takes up our deal on the Renewable Energy Targets and maybe tomorrow to put Australia in a more confident mood, he drops his rotten cuts to the pension. Last question.
JOURNALIST: Well, what do you make of what the AFP have had to say?
SHORTEN: Well I’ll need to see what they’ve actually said. I have been obviously here with you giving this speech, and what I’ll have to do is look at the transcript of what they’ve said. What we’d make clear though is we don’t understand why the Federal Government dropped their Direction of the federal police in terms of opposing the death penalty. There may be a very reasonable explanation for this. It has been a very hard time for the families of the two men who were executed, I’m very conscious of the AFP not being caught as the meat in the sandwich here, but on the other hand, I’ll read the transcript. But I do think there is an opportunity for the Liberal Government and the Labor Opposition to work together to campaign against the death penalty in countries where it currently exists.
LOL! More words, still saying nothing!
Attack on Prime Minister Tony Abbott a new low
IF you believe reporter Peter Hartcher, our Prime Minister decides mid-flight he doesn’t want to be met at the airport by a gay.
If you believe Hartcher’s claims in the Sydney Morning Herald and Age on Wednesday, Tony Abbott actually checked who’d be in the greeting party when he landed in Paris on Anzac Day.
You also believe Abbott got a staffer to ring ahead and tell the gay guy on the list — the Australian ambassador’s partner — to “sit in the car” instead.
Seriously? Abbott has copped plenty of abuse from the media, portraying him as a lying, racist, woman-hating thug.
But I doubt any mainstream journalist has matched this nonsense.
According to various versions — in the Fairfax press, Sky News and 2GB — Abbott objected to being met not just by ambassador Stephen Brady but Brady’s partner, Peter Stephens.
Brady refused the instruction, which was blamed on Abbott personally, saying he “did not want the ambassador’s partner to be part of the greeting party”.
Worse, Hartcher said: “I don’t know and can’t say that it was a homophobic moment,” but we could “speculate”.
It takes a peculiarly jaundiced view of Abbott to believe this.
After all, Abbott is known for his close bonds with his gay sister, Christine Forster, his transgender friend Cate McGregor and his former speechwriter and confidant, the late Christopher Pearson.
He is also a Christian distinguished by his courtesy. He’d never do a Kevin Rudd — shout at an air stewardess or get kicked out of a strip club.
Hartcher is no doubt now aware the Prime Minister hadn’t issued such instructions.
Besides, Abbott had held a dinner for Brady and Stephens before they left for Paris and had taken them to dinner the night after his arrival. Does that sound like a homophobe?
Moreover, Hartcher overlooked the obvious explanation — a junior official had reminded Brady of the protocol for receiving the Prime Minister.
It dictated that if Abbott was with his wife, he should be received by the ambassador and his own partner, but if Abbott was alone, only the ambassador should turn up.
So the real story is that Abbott broke protocol to meet the gay partner of the ambassador and then took the two men to dinner.
And will he apologise?
