Australian Federal Election 2010

[lionking]

Two more years to go. Keep ticking.

Bitterness is a very sad emotion.

 

[Hallo Alfie]

The Age is turning too?

http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/po...epens-the-gillard-tragedy-20111014-1lpbg.html

The Prime Minister lost on this issue coming and going. As it became obvious in late September that the Coalition would not side with Labor, Gillard's insistence that the legislation go to a vote made this a political, rather than a policy, question. She was challenging Abbott to a test of strength. Along the way, she had also made it a test of her truthfulness and reliability. She had insisted there would be a vote in the lower house. But there was no vote. So Gillard lost the test of strength and damaged her credibility to boot.

It sounds like they are calling her a liar questioning her honesty too (my bold).

Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/po...ard-tragedy-20111014-1lpbg.html#ixzz1awYJ69j7

 

[lionking]

The big question is whether the most stupid Opposition Leader ever will contest the election in two years time.

 

[Hallo Alfie]

The assesors made a mistake?

Evidence

They got so sick of being in prison they took the money that was offered to go back rather than go insane?

Sources?

One can only assume they were correct in their attempts to flee a murduress* regime, and it was the Australian** who made the mistake.

I think we can assume a lot differently than that.

Sure they departed a murderous regime. Why would they go back unless they were anything but genuine refugees? Unless there were lots of murderesses (are they like the Sirens from Homer' Odyssey; deadly seductresses?) luring the unwary sailors to their ultimate demise

Have you evidence to any of this nonsense of yours? It was your article after all that you brought into discussion.

And finally (see **), are you blaming the Murdoch press for this too?

 

[Hallo Alfie]

The big question is whether the most stupid Opposition Leader ever will contest the election in two years time.

Who cares? If he brings down Gillard he will be a hero.

But rather than your usual efforts and cravenly bobbing up to troll LK, how about answering a question. Who will replace him or more importantly, why?

 

[lionking]

Trolling? Not enough laughing dogs in existence to do this justice. You have single handedly turned a thread about a long lost election into a marathon whinge fest. And I'm trolling?

Whinge away for the next two years.

 

[Hallo Alfie]

So you won't answer a question? I call that trolling, what would you call it, intelligennt discourse?

 

[lionking]

So you won't answer a question? I call that trolling, what would you call it, intelligennt discourse?

What I call it is one bitter and disgruntled person unable to accept the outcome of an election and unable to let it go. Pretty much the textbook definition of trolling to me.

 

[Wildy]

So Alfie, since you're asking for evidence how about you pony up the evidence you have that says that TPV's lowered boat arrivals?

 

[Hallo Alfie]

So Alfie, since you're asking for evidence how about you pony up the evidence you have that says that TPV's lowered boat arrivals?

Alone TPVs didn't stop the boats; it was a combination of TVs, offshore processing and the other elements of the Pacific solution.

Year ................... Number of Boats ................ Number of people

1976 .................... ??. ................................ 111
1977 .................... ?? ................................ 868
1978 .................... ?? .............................. 746
1979 ..................... ?? ............................... 304
1980 ....................... ?? ................................ 0
1981 ........................?? ................................ 30
1982–88 ................... 0 ..................................0

Year .................... Number of Boats ................ No. of people (excl crew)

1989 ...................... 1 .................................. 26
1990 ...................... 2 ................................... 198
1991 ...................... 6 ................................... 214
1992 ...................... 6 ................................... 216
1993 ...................... 3 ................................... 81
1994 ...................... 18 ................................. 953
1995 ...................... 7 ................................... 237
1996 ....................... 19 ................................ 660
1997 ....................... 11 ................................ 339
1998 ....................... 17 ................................ 200
1999 ....................... 86 ................................ 3721
2000 ....................... 51 ................................ 2939
2001 ....................... 43 ................................ 5516
2002 ....................... 1 .................................. 1 .*1. <- Pacific solution implemented
2003 ....................... 1 .................................. 53
2004 ....................... 1 .................................. 15
2005 ....................... 4 .................................. 11
2006 ....................... 6 .................................. 60
2007 ....................... 5 .................................. 148
2008 ....................... 7 .................................. 161 .<- Dismantled

Year ...................... Number of Boats .................... No. of people (incl crew)

2009 ...................... 61 .................................. 2849
2010 ..................... 134 ................................. 6879
2011 (to 30 June) .... 28 .................................. 1675

http://www.aph.gov.au/library/pubs/bn/sp/boatarrivals.htm
(about half way down the page of the source doc you will find this table)

So on average, about three boats per year under the Pacific solution, and four per week since it was dismantled.

 

[Hallo Alfie]

New polls out. Appalling news for Gillard and her team:

ABBOTT-LANCHE: Carbon tax anger points to landslide win for Opposition

•60pc say Abbott would repeal tax
•Coalition primary vote at 51pc
•Lead 58-42 on two-party preferred

Labor's primary vote is still 29%.

Worst PM ever.

 

[Hallo Alfie]

What I call it is one bitter and disgruntled person unable to accept the outcome of an election and unable to let it go. Pretty much the textbook definition of trolling to me.

No discussion going on here; no questions answered nor asked.

So tell me LK, why would the coalition remove Abbott given he has:

succesfully put them into a position where they will easily win the next election,
assisted greatly in removing one PM (Rudd),
on the way to removing another,
has the overwhelming support of his party,
has the electorate on side,
nearly brought down a first term government (virtually unheard of in Australia)
has a better approval rating with both men and women than the current PM,
is the preferred PM going by the consistent poll numbers

Can yo support your inanities? No?

Troll!

 

[Hallo Alfie]

Two more years to go. Keep ticking.

Bitterness is a very sad emotion.

Rats! I missed this one.

No bitterness here mate, I reckon the bitterness is all yours.

Can you imagine, a climate change skeptic voting for Gillard because she made a promise about a tax. Imagine the bitterness of one who has been duped and is constantly reminded about it on conservative sites, newspapers on both sides of the political spectrum not to mention his favourite forums. Imagine the bitterness of having his nose rubbed in his stupidity on a daily basis.

Interesting, no?

For me, this is the best time we have ever had in Australian politics. I am just loving it.

Thanks

 

[Wildy]

Alone TPVs didn't stop the boats; it was a combination of TVs, offshore processing and the other elements of the Pacific solution.

Except that the years I'm talking about pre-dates the Pacific solution.

Year ................... Number of Boats ................ Number of people

1976 .................... ??. ................................ 111
1977 .................... ?? ................................ 868
1978 .................... ?? .............................. 746
1979 ..................... ?? ............................... 304
1980 ....................... ?? ................................ 0
1981 ........................?? ................................ 30
1982–88 ................... 0 ..................................0

Year .................... Number of Boats ................ No. of people (excl crew)

1989 ...................... 1 .................................. 26
1990 ...................... 2 ................................... 198
1991 ...................... 6 ................................... 214
1992 ...................... 6 ................................... 216
1993 ...................... 3 ................................... 81
1994 ...................... 18 ................................. 953
1995 ...................... 7 ................................... 237
1996 ....................... 19 ................................ 660
1997 ....................... 11 ................................ 339
1998 ....................... 17 ................................ 200
1999 ....................... 86 ................................ 3721 <- TPVs introduced
2000 ....................... 51 ................................ 2939
2001 ....................... 43 ................................ 5516
2002 ....................... 1 .................................. 1 .*1. <- Pacific solution implemented
2003 ....................... 1 .................................. 53
2004 ....................... 1 .................................. 15
2005 ....................... 4 .................................. 11
2006 ....................... 6 .................................. 60
2007 ....................... 5 .................................. 148
2008 ....................... 7 .................................. 161 .<- Dismantled

Year ...................... Number of Boats .................... No. of people (incl crew)

2009 ...................... 61 .................................. 2849
2010 ..................... 134 ................................. 6879
2011 (to 30 June) .... 28 .................................. 1675

I've added a comment in blue. How do you explain the massive increase in boat arrivals after TPVs were introduced?

 

[Hallo Alfie]

I don't. I could only speculate: Perhaps the people smugglers had already sold their passages, and these were the backlog so to speak.

You appear to arguing a point I haven't made in that TPVs alone stop the boats. They don't; as I said earlier the entire package that is the Pacific solution was responsible for virtually stopping the smuggling business.

As it stands we have no border protection policy to speak of, what we have will not work (by the PMs own admission) and the boats are on their way. She has succesfully mismanaged her way into creating extremely tempting pull factors (eg. quick release to work, generous benefits etc). She has failed the test on this issue over and over; her judgement has been nothing short of appalling and tragically it will result in more deaths.

eta. Worst PM ever.

 

[Wildy]

I don't. I could only speculate: Perhaps the people smugglers had already sold their passages, and these were the backlog so to speak.

And yet the Senate Select on a Certain Maritime Incident stated:

As of 1 October 2002, 200 people processed on Nauru or Manus had been allowed into Australia, most on three or five year temporary protection visas. The majority were women or children with family in Australia.

You can speculate, but speculation does work a lot better when you look at the available evidence.

You appear to arguing a point I haven't made in that TPVs alone stop the boats. They don't; as I said earlier the entire package that is the Pacific solution was responsible for virtually stopping the smuggling business.

Ahem:

A very nice history lesson, however if anything the TPVs help prevent people from getting on boats, not the opposite as you are somehow claiming.

But you seem to refuse to accept that in the period where there were only TPVs and not the entire Pacific Solution package that numbers increased.

And considering the advice from the Solicitor-General suggests that at present even Abbott's desire to return to the Pacific Solution may be in doubt (which even the Coalition have admitted) and the way the Coalition is acting I don't think they're going to be able to easily fix it with legislation.

As it stands we have no border protection policy to speak of, what we have will not work (by the PMs own admission) and the boats are on their way.

Oh noes the boats that only make up (to the first quarter of 2011) 44% of total asylum claims are coming. We're going to be swamped by a minority of asylum seekers!

She has succesfully mismanaged her way into creating extremely tempting pull factors (eg. quick release to work, generous benefits etc).

So you think of these people more as illegal immigrants rather than genuine refugees?

And you know what else was a pull factor? TPVs.

I also think that you're seriously underestimating the power of "push factors".

She has failed the test on this issue over and over; her judgement has been nothing short of appalling and tragically it will result in more deaths.

Because deaths under Labor are Labor's fault, but deaths under the Liberals are the fault of people smugglers? Have I got that right?

eta. Worst PM ever.

Wow. You had to eta that? That makes me think that you're deliberately trolling.

 

[Hallo Alfie]

And yet the Senate Select on a Certain Maritime Incident stated:

That is a very long document; which bit do you want me to look at specifically?

You can speculate, but speculation does work a lot better when you look at the available evidence.

I'm not sure how this negates what I said. i.e. that maybe the reason for the number of arrivals was that the passages haad already been sold prior to the implementation of the TPVs.

Ahem:

And???

But you seem to refuse to accept that in the period where there were only TPVs and not the entire Pacific Solution package that numbers increased.

I am denying nothing. What I am pointing out is that when the Pacific solution was implemented in its entirety the boats stopped. You may have missed when I said earlier that TPVs alone did not stop them. Nor have I yet to see (or locate) any evidence that TPVs are a pull factor either (again, which part of the document shows they do?).

And considering the advice from the Solicitor-General suggests that at present even Abbott's desire to return to the Pacific Solution may be in doubt (which even the Coalition have admitted) and the way the Coalition is acting I don't think they're going to be able to easily fix it with legislation.

Speculative at best. Others speculate that it won't be a problem. And even if it were they can legislate for it which is what Gillard wanted Abbott to do. Only problem was that Abbott was not comfortable with Malaysia and as such wouldn't go along with it - and fair enough too.

You may also be interested to note that four of the seven judges specifically mentioned Nauru in their ruling effectively saying that their Malaysia ruling did not impact on Nauru.

Oh noes the boats that only make up (to the first quarter of 2011) RL="http://www.aph.gov.au/library/pubs/BN/sp/Asylumfacts.htm#_Toc299011018"]44% of total asylum claims[/URL] are coming. We're going to be swamped by a minority of asylum seekers!

And again you are arguing a position I do not take. It is not the refugees that concern me, it is babies dying on the rocks.

So you think of these people more as illegal immigrants rather than genuine refugees?

Nope. But is there a difference under international and/or Australian laws?

And you know what else was a pull factor? TPVs.

Again, please show me.

I also think that you're seriously underestimating the power of "push factors".

And you overestimating them and underestimating the effectiveness of the PS. Have you had a look at the numbers when the Pacific solution was implemented and then dismantled?

Because deaths under Labor are Labor's fault, but deaths under the Liberals are the fault of people smugglers? Have I got that right?

The problem of deaths was all but fixed with the PS, this meant that the deaths at sea stopped also. Anything that happened prior to the Pacific solution was unfortunate. If we were to blame a government we could say they didn't come up with the solution quickly enough; if you want to take that line we could blame the Liberals. Sure.

After the PS was dismantled, yes, Labor (and the Greens?) are largely responsible for giving the people smugglers back their market. The boats will now keep coming and that too is a problem of Gillard's making and the reason why she is in the trouble she is now: Dead woman walking.

Worst PM ever!

 

[Wildy]

That is a very long document; which bit do you want me to look at specifically?

I quoted the bit that I wanted you to look at, I even mentioned the page number that the statement first appears.

I'm not sure how this negates what I said. i.e. that maybe the reason for the number of arrivals was that the passages haad already been sold prior to the implementation of the TPVs.

And you have absolutely no evidence that supports your claim at all. On the other hand I have and have presented examples that people were going on the boats in order to be reunited with their families in Australia because of the TPVs.

And???

And what? You said that TPV's stopped people from getting on the boats. They're your own words.

I am denying nothing. What I am pointing out is that when the Pacific solution was implemented in its entirety the boats stopped.

And do you think that this will work if reimplemented? Even if certain aspects couldn't be reimplemented?

You may have missed when I said earlier that TPVs alone did not stop them.

Ah yes, I see it now, a throwaway line in a statement where you admit you're wrong without admitting that you're wrong.

Nor have I yet to see (or locate) any evidence that TPVs are a pull factor either (again, which part of the document shows they do?).

The evidence behind that was in the post with all the links that you didn't bother to look at.

Speculative at best. Others speculate that it won't be a problem.

And these others are?

And even if it were they can legislate for it which is what Gillard wanted Abbott to do. Only problem was that Abbott was not comfortable with Malaysia and as such wouldn't go along with it - and fair enough too.

Right, because the Malaysian solution is so much worse then Abbotts plan which involves forced return. It's not like that will cause any deaths.

Or maybe he doesn't like the idea of 4000 actual refugees coming into this country.

You may also be interested to note that four of the seven judges specifically mentioned Nauru in their ruling effectively saying that their Malaysia ruling did not impact on Nauru.

Which judges?

And again you are arguing a position I do not take. It is not the refugees that concern me, it is babies dying on the rocks.

Well then perhaps you would be able to make your point a bit better if you weren't spending your time with all the inflammatory language.

To someone who happens to read what you say they would get the impression that you only care about these people as long as they don't come here.

Nope.

So why do you ignore push factors?

But is there a difference under international and/or Australian laws?

Yes. An asylum seeker is one who claims to be a refugee but their status hasn't been determined yet. Oh, and claiming asylum isn't illegal.

Again, please show me.

I already have, but you decided to say that the despite the data suggesting otherwise it isn't the case.

And you overestimating them and underestimating the effectiveness of the PS. Have you had a look at the numbers when the Pacific solution was implemented and then dismantled?

No, I clearly have never looked at the numbers of arrivals from 2002 to 2008. In fact I don't believe they exist. /sarcasm

Tell me why pull factors are greater than push factors.

The problem of deaths was all but fixed with the PS, this meant that the deaths at sea stopped also. Anything that happened prior to the Pacific solution was unfortunate. If we were to blame a government we could say they didn't come up with the solution quickly enough; if you want to take that line we could blame the Liberals. Sure.

How about that it's their fault because they wouldn't allow the women and children to reunite with their fathers/husbands because of the TPVs?

After the PS was dismantled, yes, Labor (and the Greens?) are largely responsible for giving the people smugglers back their market. The boats will now keep coming and that too is a problem of Gillard's making and the reason why she is in the trouble she is now: Dead woman walking.

Quite frankly I don't believe the market ever went away. This talks of Australia turning away a boat with 14 people in 2003. How many more boats were turned away during the time of the PS that we didn't get to hear about?

 

[wombatwal]

Malcolm Turnbull remains well ahead of both Tony Abbott and Joe Hockey as preferred Liberal leader.
On the downside for the Coalition, Mr Abbott's personal ratings fell to their worst levels since he became leader.

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/national/boos...ek-of-chaos-20111016-1lrma.html#ixzz1b1P7K4FZ

ABA ABA
​

 

[a_unique_person]

I don't. I could only speculate: Perhaps the people smugglers had already sold their passages, and these were the backlog so to speak.

You appear to arguing a point I haven't made in that TPVs alone stop the boats. They don't; as I said earlier the entire package that is the Pacific solution was responsible for virtually stopping the smuggling business.

The legal advice to the government is still.

Nauru is out as an option because of the High Court judgement.
Nauru won't work because most people who go to Nauru still eventually come to Australia. It only worked to the extent that the Government of the day dragged out the internment for year, but they couldn't do it forever, because the mental health issues were too extreme.