Will the Abbott government actually govern?

Keep that in mind, because using "your" thinking, Abbott is not responsible for any outcomes of his Governments policies.

 

Abbott is not responsible for the employees of private contractors. He is not in my opinion responsible for the actions of the contractors themselves, there are departments that are in place, that have been created for such things.

If a contractor decides to hire an untrained employee and send him onto the job without training, how is the Prime Minister to even know, yet alone be responsible. Have we really gone that bad, that we are not willing to take responsibility for our actions.

 

This is not about politics like everyone is making out. It's about responsibilities, same as if you hire an electrician to rewire your home, and he has a labourer who is unskilled and untrained to do the work and your house burnt down it would not be your fault.

 

Who is responsible for overseeing the Government Departments that are suppose to ensure that contractors are acting responsible? Are not Ministers responsible for overseeing Government Departments? Who then is responsible for overseeing Ministers to ensure they are acting responsible in their duties? The Prime Minister is he/she not?

I suppose in your mind - the green fairies in the bottom of your garden are responsible.

I'm laughing my nut off. You say you owned many businesses, but yet you cannot even understand or contemplate the most basic business command structure. I hope you were not suggesting a business is a lemonade stand in a front yard when you were a kid.

 

Using my thinking I would ask, why we never had a Royal Commission i helping to wrongfully
attack and invade another country, which we had no relation to - Iraq.
But that is another story, and hardly answered by Adolf Abbott....
Regards

 

Stanley Bruce should have been held responsible for the deaths during the construction of the harbour bridge!
Ben chiefly should have been held responsible for the deaths of the those 121 men during the construction of the snowy river scheme.

Robert Menzies should have been responsible for deaths and injuries during the construction of opera house.

In fact the prime minister should be responsible for the hundreds of road fatalities per year and deaths from alcohol and drug fuelled violence and gang related deaths!

The list goes on......as you can see it was just a massive beat up by phony and Murdoch! Laws were in place and the reason why employers are being sued. But it was kev's fault!........okay then, it was kev's fault!

 

I see you are very passionate about the war in Iraq, and so am I. Write to Shorten and make your feelings known about the war, and ask him to commission a Royal Commission into the reasons why Howard took Australia to war against Iraq with so many Australian lives lost, because of his actions.

I believe we should never have been involved, and Howard was just being Bush's puppet.

 

If Prime Ministers are not responsible for Senior Ministers; and Senior Ministers are not responsible for their individual portfolio Government Departments; and Government Departments are not responsible for the contractors they employee; and the contractors are not responsible for their employees; then WHO is responsible for what, in your opinion, for Government works programs - like the home insulation scheme?

 

Shows a complete ignorance of the concept of "safe work method". To attempt to make the above comparisons with laying conductive foil over electrical wiring, speaks volumes in itself. The ignorance of armatures, in even the simplest of procedures such as this, should never be allowed to get to the planning and implementation stages. Practices such as this, laying conductive foil over electrical circuitry, then dodging around for a scapegoat, belong in a sitcom, not real life.

It is difficult in the extreme, if not impossible, to discuss this issue with someone incapable of grasping the magnitude of executive incompetence required to allow something as basic as laying conductive foil over electrical circuitry.

 

The second time a totally agree with you, what the fukk is going on????????

Anyway, some time ago I wrote the the UN headquarter as well as the Australian UN office, asking for answers to the questions you mentioned above and some others in the same context.

Despite given my full name and address, I never received a reply!

Could it be that the UN doesn't want an outcome for the real reasons of the Iraq War? Or are they too afraid to take the USA on?

I will keep your suggestion in mind....

Cheerio

 

We also felt it was our duty to write to the UN Human Right Commission, and asked them for an overview to the reasons why the UN allowed a sovereign country like Iraq was invaded based on speculation surrounding unsubstantiated lies. Considering the facts, that a senior UN weapons inspector told the media prior to the Irqa invasion that his investigations concluded: that Saddam Hussein did not have weapons of mass destruction, and more than likely Saddam Hussein never did have any weapons of mass destruction.

Unfortunately, after correcsponding with the UN three times and within three years, we never recieved a response or acknowledgement to our communications. We have also written to consecutive Australian Government, including the Greens Party requesting a Royal Commission into Australia's involvement & circumstance in the Iraq war, but we recieved the same response as we recieved from the UN - complete silence.

I believe the UN realise they are antiquated, useless, toothless tigers, and anything they do, or try to do, could be instantly "vetoed" by the USA, who are permanent member of the UN.

It begs the question. "What relevance does an organisation like the UN have, when a permanent member can "veto" block any decision or action of the other 193 member states." That represents a dictatorship, not a democracy within that organisation.

 

Yeap,
we have this one in common.
Still, despite this disappointing experience with the lack of response from the UN I believe the world needs an organisation like the UN. It is far better to talk and talk and talk, because when talks end, war starts.
Unfortunately, it didn't help Iraq. Another bombing today, another 30 people killed. It looks like this country was far safer under its tyrant then it is now, liberated.....
Regards

 

We have an Iraqi mechanic at our Albury business, who fled Iraq just before the war began, and speaking with him and his family is a bloody eye-opener concerning the war with the USA lead UN forces. He came from Bagdad, and was not politically involved with any particular faction.

He told us that about 12 months before the war began. Saddam Hussein started an intense political campaign of information, by informing the Iraqi people that the US petrodollar was keeping their country in poverty, and that he intended to move the sale of Iraq oil from US petrodollars to Eurodollars instead. He went to say, that Hussein was negotiating the oil currency exchange with some high ranking official in London, but the person he was dealing with turned out to be untrustworthy, and as a recourse to the action, Hussein started to get unexpected visits for US officials and threatening demands to cease his objectives. Then the US began their smear campaign by saying that Hussein was physically abusing his people; had stockpiles of chemical weapons and weapons of mass destruction - none of which were ever proven.

In hindsight, what this person was saying makes complete sense about why the US with their control over the UN invaded Iraq and displaced Saddam Hussein with another one of their puppets hoping to control. Look what the US controlled UN did to Gaddafi, when Gaddafi started to move away from US petrodollars, and just recently look at what the US is doing to Russia, because they with China are moving away from US petrodollars. The US controlled UN could invade small countries like Iraq and Libya under a pretence, and they knew the countries did not have the capability of resisting, but with a country like Russia able to fight back, they needed another strategy - try and destroy its economy by rumour and innuendo

Apparently, we have all been given a very false impression by our US controlled western media that the Iraq people hated Saddam Hussein, but nothing could be further from the truth. Its very easy for the US to plant their operatives into country to demonstrate a biased view, or promise people within that country powerful positions, if they act and behave in a certain favourable way towards the invades and against the countries leader.

When you take away all the "smoke 'n' mirrors" stuff and political intrigue, its very pre-school politics, and I am surprised at why more people have not woken up to what the US has done, and why they keep doing it.

 

CD,
there is a lot of truth in your last response....
Cheerio

 

Of course it will go nowhere. The only reason for it is to score political points and to remind people just how inept the ALP was. Pretty pointless waste of money for me, but if anything comes of it such as regulation on how government does things then it was worth every penny, I just don't think it will make any difference in the long run.

 

Interesting post. There were always huge suspicions that was oil based motives.

 

Suspicions!! I think deep down we all knew it was about oil.

 

I wish for the life of me, one of you geniuses would explain to me how, someone who hires a contractor to do a job, now by very definition a contractor is not an employee, but an entirely different entity that is contracted to take perform a task/job. To my way of thinking, a contractor has a degree of separation, that is the entire point of using contractors, then the mechanism to how the job is finished is within certain guidelines is up to the contractor. I am presuming most of us at some time have used a contractor. Say an electrician, you make a verbal, sometimes written contract. He will do a job, he is the electrician, he knows the technicalities, the science, the safety etc. We in hiring an electrician do have the obligation to ensure the electrician is licensed, it is he who signed or made the contract with you, but are we responsible for ensuring that all his apprentices, tradesmen and labourers are trained and qualified? To my mind no, and I am sure if the electrician hired an unqualified employee that caused my house to be burnt down, I would be able to sue the electrician. Am I wrong???

I will also put this same question to my brother who is a lawyer.

 

His words ring true in my ears every time I hear about the USA invading another small country based on lies, rumors, and innuendos. They specially ring true, when independent media release reports and evidence that these countries were previously trying to move their economy away from the United States controlled petrodollar. He, and his family were very interesting to talk too.

 

Ok, just for the so educated people

If you hire a contractor BY LAW it is YOUR responsibility to ensure that contractor is licensed, certified and carry the correct insurance. Also if the parties are NOT certified BY LAW you have ( as the principle) due care to provide insurance and safety. So in your little scenario of an electrician, if you higher an unqualified electrician and he or somebody else dies due to his work (including anybody he hires to assist) then YOU are liable for that death. If the so called electrician does not follow safety standards and correct procedure, YOU as the principle can be held liable.

Now you say in your little rebuttal "To my way of thinking, a contractor has a degree of separation, that is the entire point of using contractors, then the mechanism to how the job is finished is within certain guidelines is up to the contractor. I am presuming most of us at some time have used a contractor." This is assuming that the contractor is licensed and certified to do the job. HOW DO YOU KNOW??? You have not bothered to look at their credentials and frankly you are giving the government a free pass because of this assumption. ANYBODY CAN CALL THEMSELVES A CONTRACTOR.

Yes, due entirely to the fact you already assume these contractors are licensed and certified. You have not even bothered to check to see if they are because you seem to think that a contractor MUST be. Again they do not… Anybody can call themselves a contractor, it is up to the person who employs their service to ensure they are certified and licensed.

Ask you brother the Solicitor (this is Australia not America). BUT be sure to point out that NONE of your contractors are certified and licensed.

 

Garry Garry Garry, your entire argument is based on your assumption my contractor is not certified and licensed, you state that in your last statement but Garry .... I DID CHECK

so your little show of superiority was unnecessary.

 

No my entire argument is based on the fact that the Insulators are NOT licensed and certified and the fact you have stated prior that it is not your responsibility to check (or the governments) as the principle. ALSO you are prepared to give the ALP government a free pass due to this. The fact is you just trying to be an apologist for the ALP due to party politics. The fact I missed your little line, Oh I bow to your higher education.

Just to educate you on the requirements of insulators... There is still NO requirement for them to be licenced and certified, which is one of the complaints of the one of the families of those who died.

 

Insulation has been installed for over 50 years. It is very simple, not a very complicated job. I suppose a ten minute talk would cover all you needed to know. People like yourself, people that take no responsibility for their actions, it is always someone else's fault. .... Mother: "Alright, who started the fight?" Little Garry: "Johnny did mummy, he hit me back" ... We even need to do a TAFE course, get certified, pay for a red card, then you are fully qualified to hold a "Stop-Slow" sign.

You would have us smothered in regulation, courses for this and courses for that, licensed lawn mowing, licensed trolley collectors, certified letter box delivery persons lol.

Why don't we look at the reality, a greedy person put in an application, they hired someone with very little sense, he accidentally killed himself, very sad, very preventable, but not the Prime Minister's responsibility.

There has to be a point where the responsibility belongs to YOU, this was way past that point.

 

OH and as you prefer NOT to read the post before you reply, I never, NEVER, NEVER said that we do not need to check, I actually said it IS OUR OBLIGATION to check. It IS OUR OBLIGATION TO CHECK.. Get the message I said it so you are just blowing hot air as usual. TAKE RESPONSIBILITY Garry.

 

and saying I am just an apologist for the ALP shows you know nothing about me, shows you have never really read my posts, shows that you just shoot your mouth off without a spark of thought.

- - - Updated - - -

and saying I am just an apologist for the ALP shows you know nothing about me, shows you have never really read my posts, shows that you just shoot your mouth off without a spark of thought.