Bad Politics

[The Artist formerly known as Sappho]

"Given that the details of the carbon tax have been decided, will she bring forward her carbon tax announcement to today so that this Parliament can fully scrutinise the biggest structural change in our economic history?" he said.

Though I loath you as a politician sir, I cannot deny the truth of the above. It is a dirty trick that the Gillard govt. should drag out this historical announcement until after parliament retires for Winter. Very bad form.

"I will be wearing out my shoe leather literally, Mr Speaker, around the country making sure that Australian families who want answers about the carbon pricing package get those answers," she said.

Madam, Australian Families voted in representatives to represent them in parliament in the vain hope that you would address these matters in parliament to be subsequently reported in the media. Wasting our tax dollars on a tour of Australia visiting a select minority for publicity purposes is not addressing this issue.

[Aussie]

Mr Coyote.....How can you blame Gillard for denying Abbott the headlines he would seek over the next several days if she announced the ETS details now...with only a couple of sitting days left.

There would be no real debate. The people of Australia would have been dry retching with Media headlining Abbott rhetoric, which would all have been entirely negative. The prick does not debate. He simple opposes. It is is mantra......"We are the Opposition. We do not have any responsibility to put up our details of direct action until closer to the election."

It is not the first time such a timing ploy was used by a Government, I am sure.

If truth were to be told, after Sunday, there will be much more relevant debate outside the Parliament, than within, such is the level to which Abbott has plumbed Parliamentary process.

If Turnbull were leader, I reckon Gillard would not have used this ploy.

[The Artist formerly known as Sappho]

There would be no real debate. The people of Australia would have been dry retching with Media headlining Abbott rhetoric, which would all have been entirely negative. The prick does not debate. He simple opposes. It is is mantra......"We are the Opposition. We do not have any responsibility to put up our details of direct action until closer to the election."

Do you hear what you are saying? Let me rephrase that for you in less emotional terms: We must deny the democratic process so that a politician can be censored.

"We can never be sure that the opinion we are endeavoring to stifle is a false opinion; and if we were sure, stifling it would be an evil still." ~John Stuart Mill, On Liberty, 1859

[Aussie]

Yeah, I hear what I am saying. In 1859, your Mr. Mill did not have to cope with today's Media, the (unelected) Fourth Estate, and the levels and methods of communication which exist today.

Tell me Mr Coyote....what would have come out of crap 'debate' in Parliament over the next several days about a Policy Decision? Remember, there is no Legislation on foot, just a Policy Decision made. It would have been Question Time circus crapola all week with a voracious Media jumping on one line grabs from each side.

[The Artist formerly known as Sappho]

Yeah, I hear what I am saying. In 1859, your Mr. Mill did not have to cope with today's Media, the (unelected) Fourth Estate, and the levels and methods of communication which exist today.

Did you know that the terminology 'Fourth Estate' predate's Mill's quote on censorship? It was first used as a reference to the Press in 1787 in the British Parliament. Does that not suggest that each age has their own issues with the printed word? Yet still, given that the 'Fourth Estate' was alive and well in Mill's time, he would still allow the right to speak freely. Gotta love Liberty eh?

Tell me Mr Coyote....what would have come out of crap 'debate' in Parliament over the next several days about a Policy Decision? Remember, there is no Legislation on foot, just a Policy Decision made. It would have been Question Time circus crapola all week with a voracious Media jumping on one line grabs from each side.

I am not a soothsayer Aussie, but I can make these very broad predictions based on past occurrences. There would have been some hyperbole from some, sound reasoning from others, lashings of hypocrisy, insults, humour, common sense, etc..

[Aussie]

I am not a soothsayer Aussie, but I can make these very broad predictions based on past occurrences. There would have been some hyperbole from some, sound reasoning from others, lashings of hypocrisy, insults, humour, common sense, etc..

I rest my case. I believe Gillard's decision to announce the Policy outside Parliament will provide better outcomes.

[The Artist formerly known as Sappho]

I am not a soothsayer Aussie, but I can make these very broad predictions based on past occurrences. There would have been some hyperbole from some, sound reasoning from others, lashings of hypocrisy, insults, humour, common sense, etc..

I rest my case. I believe Gillard's decision to announce the Policy outside Parliament will provide better outcomes.

Would you support the same scenario were it the Liberal Party seeking to deny the democratic process so that a Labor politician can be censored? (That Labor politician being deemed to be of the same opposing nature as Abbott.) I suspect you would not.

You seem to be complaining about the Forth Estate as being undemocratic on the one hand whilst courting it as a preferred and first means of disseminating Policy on the other, rather than the democratic method of introducing the carbon pricing model in the House of Reps. Any reason for this fundamental inconsistency in your argument?

[Rainbow Moonlight]

Thr policy will be subject to scrutiny when it goes through parliament. Why it should be subject to parliamentary scrutiny before it goes through parliament is lost on me. Announcing it to the public may allow for a period of public scrutiny which may even result in changed legislation been put before parliament. It is the governments right to announce the outcome of the multi-party talks in policy terms when the outcome is certain and it is ready to, within a reasonable amount of time.

[Aussie]

I am not a soothsayer Aussie, but I can make these very broad predictions based on past occurrences. There would have been some hyperbole from some, sound reasoning from others, lashings of hypocrisy, insults, humour, common sense, etc..

I rest my case. I believe Gillard's decision to announce the Policy outside Parliament will provide better outcomes.

Would you support the same scenario were it the Liberal Party seeking to deny the democratic process so that a Labor politician can be censored? (That Labor politician being deemed to be of the same opposing nature as Abbott.) I suspect you would not.

You seem to be complaining about the Forth Estate as being undemocratic on the one hand whilst courting it as a preferred and first means of disseminating Policy on the other, rather than the democratic method of introducing the carbon pricing model in the House of Reps. Any reason for this fundamental inconsistency in your argument?

Strawman.

My point is simple. This thing to be announced on Sunday will be the subject of community and parliamentary debate for a long period. Allowing Abbott a few days of headline grabbing negativity before the Winter recess would have been politically naive and stupidity.

Abbot will have his opportunity in good time. The Bill will have to be presented in Parliament, and then Abbott and Parliament will have their proper opportunities.

[Jovial Monk]

Gawd! Stupid coyote.

Bills have to be drafted then introduced into Parliament. I think there might be a tad of debate and scrutiny then?