- Shaw takes the Ice Bucket Challenge
- Pensioners petition over tough budget
- 'The most effective terrorists yet'
- Telstra faces court over late fees
- 'The figures say it all'
- Biological parents acknowledged in surrogacy law changes
- Julie Bishop to contact Chinese embassy over Palmer comments
- Son given bravery award after saving mother's life
- RSS Syndicate this blog (XML)
What we're talking about
- David THomas on 'The figures say it all' Statistical evidence mounts that the police often do not recruit the sharpest pencils in the box. Seriously. Turn the ... more
- John on 'The figures say it all' This is not about fairness, it is about deflecting responsibility. The camera system should conform to vehicles operating ... more
- Paul on 'The figures say it all' Have a look at the front of any modern bike and you will quickly see why it is not possible to put a front plate on. There ... more
- CHRIS WATTS on 'The figures say it all' i just cannot believe that a simple e tag cannot be stuck on the front of the bike...its so simple, surely... more
- Samuel J on 'The figures say it all' Motor cycles should have front and rear number plates. The notion that front number plates dissect pedestrians is complete ... more
- Mark on 'The figures say it all' All a bit of a joke, here in Europe, bikes get a much larger rear plate... more than double the size. Aussies often hide the ... more
- Richard on 'The figures say it all' If its such a problem why are the Penisula Link cameras facing the front? The fault is in the camera system. more
- Tom Bysen on 'The figures say it all' Why not ban bikes altogether? We can all sit jammed on the freeway, in our 2tonne suv's being safe. more
- John Karmouche on 'The figures say it all' Everyone is barking up the wrong tree. Its not about putting a number plate on a motorcycle- that's the cover story the ... more
- Lukew on 'The figures say it all' Commissioner Gordon Lewis can huff and puff all he likes but this is about the money. Never mind the doubt, why would we ... more
- poppitt on 'The figures say it all' Against the law to ride a bike that does have number plates back and front. Fine them $500 for each plate that is not ... more
- Time for a career change Neil on 'The figures say it all' Gee, it must be almost the 3rd week of the month. Time for Neil to roll out the anti motorcycle vitriol again. The same ... more
- Otto on 'The figures say it all' Anything to justify the cash cows, how many of these thousands of lethal speeding motorcycles actually result in a fatality ... more
- Gazza on Top cop concerned over pokies gang Multiculturalism at its finest more
- dom on Spot the 'ghost'? Sorry the line for popcorn was long... more
- Rory on Spot the 'ghost'? Why do ghosts always have clothes on? I wonder if a tradie has to wear Hi-Viz if they get a ghost. more
- charles on Spot the 'ghost'? I see an elderly lady old white shirt, black hair, pale skin sitting at the top of staircase, peering to the right as if ... more
- Rhees on Spot the 'ghost'? I can see through the railings.Enlarge picture and take a close look, definitely something there.One place i worked at ... more
- Anne of Dallas on Spot the 'ghost'? Well.. I cant see the ghost.. but I did learn something fabulous from one of the readers in comment! "Enlarge for a better ... more
- Joanne on Spot the 'ghost'? Enlarge for a better look. To enlarge the photo if using a computer: press control and the plus button at the same time more
These are the questions I believe Julia Gillard needs to answer
The Gillard government spin has reached a new level, and it is insulting stuff.
First, the government called in a magazine to interview the female ministers only, where they were asked questions about their sex drive amongst other things. Terrific.
Now, the first bloke Tim Mathieson has been trotted out for an interview and he sounds like the old-fashioned wife. If there was a male Prime Minister with his wife like this, there would be screams of outrage.
Tim gets up in the morning, does the Prime Minister’s hair and then sits on the couch watching TV. He regularly pours her bath when she gets home and brings her a cup of tea in the morning.
Imagine if Tony Abbott’s wife said that was how their relationship worked. He’d be portrayed as the old-fashioned sexist with the mousey little wife.
If it was a woman doing that for a man, he’d be sexist. But it is their business, not ours.
It is the spin that annoys me here. More spin. The government has gone out to sell it while the Prime Minister refuses to answer questions that must be answered.
I know this stuff about her solicitor is complex and I know she addressed some questions back in August, but this goes to the credibility of the Prime Minister.
More questions have come up and she refuses to answer them. Her party will force her to do it eventually, but she is dodging and looking bad.
She may have very good reasons and good answers for all the questions, but she cannot have a reason to refuse to answer.
She denies any wrongdoing at all. Fair enough, but yesterday again she refused to answer specific questions. That is not good politics, it looks bad.
So, what are the questions? These are the questions I believe Julia Gillard needs to answer. They have come up mostly through The Australian newspaper and other information that has come out from her former law firm Slater & Gordon.
Question One: In 1995, $5,000 in cash was reportedly paid into your private bank account by the now disgraced union official, Bruce Wilson. Is that correct? If so, why was the money paid?
Question Two: In 1995, you told Slater & Gordon the association you helped set up was in fact a ‘slush fund’ – not for the purposes it was claimed to exist. The union and the authorities did not discover that until 1996. Why did you not tell them when you found out? Was it not your obligation as a solicitor?
Question Three: In August this year you denied having any involvement in the ‘slush fund’ beyond its establishment, but the fund was used to buy a house in Fitzroy where Slater & Gordon says you handled the conveyancing. Is that correct?
Question Four: In 1995, you told Slater & Gordon you could not be sure the ‘slush fund’ didn’t pay for some renovations at your house. But in August this year, you said you were sure it had not. Why? What changed?
Fairly simple questions. We have sent them to the Prime Minister’s office. There are more and more will evolve.
She needs to answer them. To do otherwise damages her credibility and her party.
And the response from the Prime Minister's office?
Any suggestion the Prime Minister has not responded to these issues is false.
I refer you to the Prime Minister's previous comments on these matters, including in August, while overseas recently, and yesterday.
garry @ 802.... Find a new line.
going on about work choices every week shows you have nothing to offer.The Dean Monday 19 November, 2012 - 12:01 PM
@mandy - We must award you Most Gullible Blogger!Ivan@kinnane Sunday 18 November, 2012 - 4:29 PM
The treachery within this government is moving to another level , we are becoming communist.
The people's voice is not heard, dictatorship, deception , the order of the day. Gillard is not above the law, she must be held accountable, their is no respect left for this woman, she is a public servant . A servant of the people, this must not go unresolved, or we ultimately will pay the price.Susan Arcadipane Friday 16 November, 2012 - 10:31 PM
Jan what the hell is a troglodytesa??Please explain.mandy Friday 16 November, 2012 - 8:18 PM
the only question gillard needs to answer is,how long can you keep workchoices/abbott at bay and what can we do to help...garry Friday 16 November, 2012 - 8:02 PM
The Dean, What makes you think I have never met any liberals I worked at 2 Melbourne newspapers and met plenty, I also have been a taxpayer all my working life and that's been a long time and I'm proud to say I certainly don't hang out at centrelink you have some nerve you know nothing about me so how do you like those apples?mandy Friday 16 November, 2012 - 7:51 PM