Anthony Albanese - How long? -2-

[The Punter]

Does the defection of Matt Kean from the Liberals to be the head of the Climate Change Authority bring back memories for people who were born before 1975 of a big political story broken by Laurie Oakes, who was the chief political writer for the then Sun newspaper in 1974 that Vincent Gair, who was the leader of the now-defunct Democratic Labor Party, had accepted an offer from Prime Minister, the late Gough Whitlam, to be the ambassador to the Republic of Ireland. The DLP expelled Gair from the party, the then opposition leader wanted to force a vote of no confidence in Whitlam, only to be caught short when Whitlam announced a federal election, which was held on the same day as the Windy Hill brawl in 1974.

No.

 

[QuietB]

Does the defection of Matt Kean from the Liberals to be the head of the Climate Change Authority bring back memories for people who were born before 1975 of a big political story broken by Laurie Oakes, who was the chief political writer for the then Sun newspaper in 1974 that Vincent Gair, who was the leader of the now-defunct Democratic Labor Party, had accepted an offer from Prime Minister, the late Gough Whitlam, to be the ambassador to the Republic of Ireland. The DLP expelled Gair from the party, the then opposition leader wanted to force a vote of no confidence in Whitlam, only to be caught short when Whitlam announced a federal election, which was held on the same day as the Windy Hill brawl in 1974.

The disdain the Liberals have for the moderates in their own party is quite something.

I haven't hear the term "broad church" used for a while.

 

[NSWCROW]

bump

 

[Johnny Bananas]

Fatima Payman, take a bow. Thank you for putting what is right above what the party demands, and voting for the recognition of Palestine even if it costs you your party endorsement. That took courage

Albanese and Wong, hang your heads in shame for voting against the recognition of Palestine. Never again claim to be supportive of the Palestinian cause, you weak frauds.

 

[skipper kelly]

Speaking of which, they announced today they're giving the incoming GG, who is a devout Republican and believes that Australia Day is invasion day, a $209,000 pa pay rise for the 5 year duration of the role. Apparently it's because she doesn't receive any other pensions like ex-military, political or judicial GGs have.

Ar the end of her term, she will receive a pension for life which will be 60% of the $704,000pa salary she is too receive.

Just another reason to hate all of these campaigners.

I don't ever remember hearing that someone like Peter Hollingworth received a huge pay bump as I would image a person from a religious background wouldn't be in receipt of an existing, large pension.

Just another public sector leech.

 

[QuietB]

Just another public sector leech.

This is the explanation - seems reasonable.

"It is a pretty important job. It’s the representative of the head of state, with a significant role under our constitution. From what I understand, the pay is pegged to and related to what the chief justice of the high court receives. They are both pretty important roles.

The second point to make is previous governors general have had military careers and have been able to access military pensions. The new governor general, Samantha Mostyn, won’t be able to do that, so there is an element of that in it as well. We think it’s pretty fair."

 

[TheEscapeClub]

This is the explanation - seems reasonable.

"It is a pretty important job. It’s the representative of the head of state, with a significant role under our constitution. From what I understand, the pay is pegged to and related to what the chief justice of the high court receives. They are both pretty important roles.

The second point to make is previous governors general have had military careers and have been able to access military pensions. The new governor general, Samantha Mostyn, won’t be able to do that, so there is an element of that in it as well. We think it’s pretty fair."

Reasonable to a halfwit maybe.

$704,000 a year for 5 years. She's 59 this year, will be finished the role by 64 and then will receive a pension of $420,000 for life from that point on.

She will be the representative of our head of state in a system that she doesn't believe in and wants gone.

She won't be able to access a military, parliamentary or judicial pension because she has never done any of those roles. She would however have plenty of super from her very successful civilian career.

Zero integrity from someone who could afford to show some integrity, especially if as reported she negotiated it before she agreed to accept it.

I wonder if Hollingworth got a rise because he didn't have a military pension?

 

[QuietB]

Reasonable to a halfwit maybe.

$704,000 a year for 5 years. She's 59 this year, will be finished the role by 64 and then will receive a pension of $420,000 for life from that point on.

She will be the representative of our head of state in a system that she doesn't believe in and wants gone.

She won't be able to access a military, parliamentary or judicial pension because she has never done any of those roles. She would however have plenty of super from her very successful civilian career.

Zero integrity from someone who could afford to show some integrity, especially if as reported she negotiated it before she agreed to accept it.

I wonder if Hollingworth got a rise because he didn't have a military pension?

Important people get paid lots of money - who knew

 

[skipper kelly]

This is the explanation - seems reasonable.

"It is a pretty important job. It’s the representative of the head of state, with a significant role under our constitution. From what I understand, the pay is pegged to and related to what the chief justice of the high court receives. They are both pretty important roles.

The second point to make is previous governors general have had military careers and have been able to access military pensions. The new governor general, Samantha Mostyn, won’t be able to do that, so there is an element of that in it as well. We think it’s pretty fair."

No. Just a government leech. Poor thing won't have access to a military pension.

 

[CM86]

This is the explanation - seems reasonable.

"It is a pretty important job. It’s the representative of the head of state, with a significant role under our constitution. From what I understand, the pay is pegged to and related to what the chief justice of the high court receives. They are both pretty important roles.

The second point to make is previous governors general have had military careers and have been able to access military pensions. The new governor general, Samantha Mostyn, won’t be able to do that, so there is an element of that in it as well. We think it’s pretty fair."

It does seem reasonable. But you need to remember three very important factors.
1. She's a woman.
2. She has hinted at supporting Indigenous people. Even just at the bare minimum.
3. She's a woman.

 

[CM86]

Speaking of which, they announced today they're giving the incoming GG, who is a devout Republican and believes that Australia Day is invasion day, a $209,000 pa pay rise for the 5 year duration of the role. Apparently it's because she doesn't receive any other pensions like ex-military, political or judicial GGs have.

Ar the end of her term, she will receive a pension for life which will be 60% of the $704,000pa salary she is too receive.

Just another reason to hate all of these campaigners.

I don't ever remember hearing that someone like Peter Hollingworth received a huge pay bump as I would image a person from a religious background wouldn't be in receipt of an existing, large pension.

Good news, chump.

I've 'heard it suggested that' they can cover the cost with the money they got back from Morrison's alleged bribe to Hurley to sign off on all of his hidden ministry appointments.

What a relief, hey?

I mean, it was $4million a year for the scam. What's the amount you're complaining about for this woman? $200k a year?

Labor cancels $18m grant to controversial foundation endorsed by governor general

David Hurley had discussions with Scott Morrison about leadership program that later received one-off funding before it was operational

www.theguardian.com

 

[spinynorman]

Fatima Payman, take a bow. Thank you for putting what is right above what the party demands, and voting for the recognition of Palestine even if it costs you your party endorsement. That took courage

Albanese and Wong, hang your heads in shame for voting against the recognition of Palestine. Never again claim to be supportive of the Palestinian cause, you weak frauds.

Any Labor backbencher worth a damn should line up to publicly support her before Albanese kicks her out of the party (for voting for party policy).

 

[Gough]

Good news, chump.

I've 'heard it suggested that' they can cover the cost with the money they got back from Morrison's alleged bribe to Hurley to sign off on all of his hidden ministry appointments.

What a relief, hey?

I mean, it was $4million a year for the scam. What's the amount you're complaining about for this woman? $200k a year?

Labor cancels $18m grant to controversial foundation endorsed by governor general

David Hurley had discussions with Scott Morrison about leadership program that later received one-off funding before it was operational

www.theguardian.com

If it's the price to pay for stopping the Vice Regal being a top up for a military pension then it's money well spent.

 

[JackOutback]

To be honest, I don’t think a ceremonial job where everything from accommodation to living expenses is covered needs $500,000, let alone another $200,000 more.

Likewise, if you’re getting paid $500,000 a year and receive a lifetime pension of $420,000 a year after, you’re not in need of ‘topping up’ some perceived slight in earlier pay/pensions. You’re set for life.

And I say that as a lifelong bleeding heart SJW.

 

[Rotayjay]

Fatima Payman, take a bow. Thank you for putting what is right above what the party demands, and voting for the recognition of Palestine even if it costs you your party endorsement. That took courage

Albanese and Wong, hang your heads in shame for voting against the recognition of Palestine. Never again claim to be supportive of the Palestinian cause, you weak frauds.

The problem is: supporting this motion will likely cost Payman dearly, but do absolutely nothing towards actually implementing a two-state solution in the Middle East. A symbolic motion in the Aussie parliament won't even rate a mention over there.

 

[CM86]

To be honest, I don’t think a ceremonial job where everything from accommodation to living expenses is covered needs $500,000, let alone another $200,000 more.

Likewise, if you’re getting paid $500,000 a year and receive a lifetime pension of $420,000 a year after, you’re not in need of ‘topping up’ some perceived slight in earlier pay/pensions. You’re set for life.

And I say that as a lifelong bleeding heart SJW.

As a fellow bleeding heart SJW, I'd argue that if her total commonwealth remuneration is just going to be on parity with the male currently in the position, then I support it.

If Hurley was in some positions and roles that set him up with other commonwealth income that may not have been available to women due to inequality, etc this is a positive thing.


Sure, we can argue to get rid of the position. But then we should be 'attacking' the current GG who is currently getting that remuneration, rather than pre-emptively attacking the person who isn't even in the role yet.


And maybe we could get a few more Aussies upset with the possible Morrison/Hurley corruption, and the embarrassing abuse of power Hurley and his wife would use in official acts.

I just think rather than getting outraged at the yet-to-happen WHOMAN!! situation, lead by the Fordham types, we should ensure steady control of the narrative to make sure our morals and values aren't used against us in our race to be virtuous.

 

[10571z]

This is the explanation - seems reasonable.

"It is a pretty important job. It’s the representative of the head of state, with a significant role under our constitution. From what I understand, the pay is pegged to and related to what the chief justice of the high court receives. They are both pretty important roles.

The second point to make is previous governors general have had military careers and have been able to access military pensions. The new governor general, Samantha Mostyn, won’t be able to do that, so there is an element of that in it as well. We think it’s pretty fair."

Haha that’s reasonable to you? My gosh this country will cop anything

 

[Johnny Bananas]

The problem is: supporting this motion will likely cost Payman dearly,

I'm sure she knew that and did it anyway, because her principles mattered more to her than re-election. That's a rare trait in a politician, especially a Labor politician.

but do absolutely nothing towards actually implementing a two-state solution in the Middle East. A symbolic motion in the Aussie parliament won't even rate a mention over there.

That wasn't the point. Very little that we do here changes anything materially in Palestine. The point was to show once and for all whether Labor really cares about Palestinians. Yesterday proved they don't, they're just stooges of the Zionist lobby, and Payman refused to be a part of that.

Her vote was necessary to show pro-Palestinian voters (especially fellow Muslims) that the major parties don't automatically have to take the side of the Zionists, it's a choice they're actively making. That encourages Pro-Palestinian voters who normally always vote for Labor, to not reward their actions yesterday and instead choose an alternative outside the major parties.

So will it cost Payman dearly? Yes. And it will cost Labor dearly too if they expel her. And that might actually cause some real change within Labor on the subject of Palestine. Payman following the party line like a good little token Muslim would have made sure everything stayed exactly the same. I'm proud of her for refusing to be a token.

 

[Rob R]

I'm sure she knew that and did it anyway, because her principles mattered more to her than re-election. That's a rare trait in a politician, especially a Labor politician.


That wasn't the point. Very little that we do here changes anything materially in Palestine. The point was to show once and for all whether Labor really cares about Palestinians. Yesterday proved they don't, they're just stooges of the Zionist lobby, and Payman refused to be a part of that.

Her vote was necessary to show pro-Palestinian voters (especially fellow Muslims) that the major parties don't automatically have to take the side of the Zionists, it's a choice they're actively making. That encourages Pro-Palestinian voters who normally always vote for Labor, to not reward their actions yesterday and instead choose an alternative outside the major parties.

So will it cost Payman dearly? Yes. And it will cost Labor dearly too if they expel her. And that might actually cause some real change within Labor on the subject of Palestine. Payman following the party line like a good little token Muslim would have made sure everything stayed exactly the same. I'm proud of her for refusing to be a token.

They won't actually do anything to her.

It is quite possible the whole piece was stage managed (if not the response will be) so the ALP could try and capture votes from both ends noting pro Palestine voters would never have gone Lib anyway if it was an issue that was important enough to change their vote which would only be a very small number.


On SM-A125F using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Johnny Bananas]

They won't actually do anything to her.

They very well might not, because it's atrocious PR among Muslim voters to expel a Muslim Senator over a cause like this. The issue for Labor in that case is the precedent it sets. They've kept their party discipline for over a century by having dire consequences for crossing the floor. If that goes away, then more MPs will challenge the party and dare them to expel them, seeing as they'd have already shown that they wouldn't on at least some occasions.

It is quite possible the whole piece was stage managed (if not the response will be) so the ALP could try and capture votes from both ends

I'm not sure how that works. Voters might be easily misled by scare campaigns, but they're still smart enough to realise that Payman is only one rogue Seantor of Labor, and all the rest of them voted against the need to recognise Palestine. Only a chump would keep giving their primary vote to Labor if that issue is important to them, and Payman will not be on the ballot anywhere outside WA.

noting pro Palestine voters would never have gone Lib anyway

The danger for Labor isn't that they'll vote Liberal, but that they'll vote Greens or independent, or leave Labor off their Senate vote.

if it was an issue that was important enough to change their vote which would only be a very small number.

What polling are you using to come to this conclusion?

Even if that were true, it's more problematic than you might think, because the groups that typically care a lot about Palestine are pretty concentrated, in either the inner city (social progressives) or a select number of outer suburbs (Muslims). So that adds up to being a big threat to a Labor seat that contains both of those areas and groups, and is at risk of falling to the Greens. That fits the description of the seat of Wills. This vote puts Labor at a greater risk of losing it.

Given how slim Labor's majority is, and the likelihood of them losing a few marginal seats to the Liberals, Wills could mean the difference between a majority or minority government. That's significant.

 

[TheEscapeClub]

If it's the price to pay for stopping the Vice Regal being a top up for a military pension then it's money well spent.

The military pension is their super, they earned it.

She has super too, she just won't be able to access it in line with legislation.

In 1991 the Defence force removed the option of a DFRDB pension from all new recruits. Under the DFRDB scheme you received a pension for life after 20 years service. For those that enlisted before 1991, they had the option to remain with DFRDB or to roll over onto the new one which we are all on now.

The ex-military people that have been in the role of the GG recently I suspect would have all been on the old DFRDB scheme. They all probably did at least 40 years service.

I wonder how it works with someone like Quentin Bryce, does she get the state pension for being the Qld Governor and the federal pension for being the GG, or does she get whichever is the greater of the two?

 

[TheEscapeClub]

William Deane took into acct his pension from the judiciary and had his salary as the GG reduced accordingly.

Gen. Michael Jeffrey donated his military pension to charity whilst he was GG.

If a retiring GG is in receipt of another pension then their pension for being GG will be reduced accordingly.

 

[Gralin]

Every time someone not suitable according to Murdoch gets the job of GG they bring up the numbers

its elites paying elites for life no normal person has access to the job and the compensation is ridiculous but hey that's the world we live in

they don't care about it being like that they only care the "wrong" person in their mind has access to it

a woman who isn't on their side on every political issue is twice the wrong person

 

[The Punter]

"no normal person"

Good grief...

 

[Carn The Berries]

Any Labor backbencher worth a damn should line up to publicly support her before Albanese kicks her out of the party (for voting for party policy).

The ALP have already made noises that she won't be expelled for the party. I can't see Albo pushing for it, he's got enough issues on his plate with Israel, would be a very dumb move.

Whether that emboldens others to follow suit... I doubt it...