Running scared: PM Gillard can’t face the music

Via Andrew Bolt, Aussie PM Julia Gillard shut down the first Question Time of 2012 after around half an hour. Usually, Question Time lasts a lot longer; three times longer*.

Bolt ponders whether she was trying to avoid former PM (she knifed him) and possible usurper Kevin Rudd grabbing the limelight (again).

Personally, I wonder whether she was avoiding a no-confidence motion that, if successful, could end her government.

Reasons for a no-confidence motion:

  • introducing a carbon (dioxide) tax she promised she wouldn’t
  • elements within her office inciting a mini race riot based on false rumours
  • breaking her pokies reform deal with Independent Andrew Wilkie
  • breaking her Tasmanian logging deal with the Greens
  • promoting Peter Slipper, a man due to be dumped by his former party because of so many question marks hanging over him, to the Speaker’s chair
  • being a ranga

*Corrected from “hours”; it’s typically an hour and a half

    • Catching up
    • February 7th, 2012

    The PM did not do anything unusual today. Question time is finish after 20 questions or at 3.30. It does not subtract time for tributes etc.

    It was closed down today at 3.30. (It might have been 3.29)

    Mr. Hockey was angry at this decision. So upset that his tantrum led to him being sent to the sin bin,

    I am sure the the Opposition was to late in moving standard orders for a censure motion which only waste time of the parliament.

    I am sure we will get one tomorrow,

    Mr. Abbott also accused the PM of being a coward when she left the chamber after question time.

    It is not normal for the PM to remain for MPI.

    Mr. Bolt is lying when he says something unusual happens.

    They will have to do better than this.

    • Nothing unusual? Bolt is lying? Wrong. It is you who are mistaken.

      From Wiki:

      Convention allows the Prime Minister in the House, and the Leader of the Government in the Senate, to terminate question time by asking that “further questions be placed on the Notice Paper”. This is not a formal motion but an indication that, even if further questions were asked, ministers would not answer them since they are not compelled to do so. It is possible in this way to prematurely terminate question time, although this is rare in the House and essentially unheard of in the Senate. During the Keating Government, the Prime Minister attempted to limit the number of questions asked in a way the Liberal Opposition disapproved of. To protest the change, the Opposition made random quorum calls through the afternoon for every question they felt they had been denied that day.[3] In the House, question time is generally scheduled from 2pm to 3:30 pm on every sitting day…

      Oh, but it finished at 3:30 just like it’s supposed to. Well, technically yes.


      Question time was short because its start was delayed almost an hour by a condolence motion and a parliamentary address – apparently you don’t send Her Majesty a note or a letter or a text – congratulating the Queen on her diamond jubilee.

      You appear to be one of the few Australians watching who were fooled by this obvious evasion.

      No one’s begrudging her for paying tribute to Sir Zelman Cowan and Pete Veness, or indeed for her tribute to the Queen on her Diamond Jubilee, but it shouldn’t have taken anything like an entire hour.

    • The Wizard of WOZ
    • February 8th, 2012

    First up, love the new colour scheme mate. Only downside is the flash when I go to another page.

    As for the Red Witch attempting to delay her imminent demise: One doubts the faceless men will allow the evil joke they have saddled us with to destroy the ‘labor brand’.

    I hope its not Kev, as he may actually win (and possibly even do a half decent job), but the consequences of another party apparatchik getting the keys to the lodge will doom us all to being merely a mine for our socialist betters (ChiComs).

    After all, there are so many more of them than us, is it not our duty as humans to provide to their needs?

      • The Wizard of WOZ
      • February 8th, 2012

      P.S. Congrats to Liz and that funny bloke for 60 years of matrimony.

    • Merilyn
    • February 8th, 2012

    Been thinking about the farce that is going on in the media about the so called “leader-ship”tensions between Rudd and Gillard and have come to the conclusion that we may be taking our eyes off the main game, while we are watching one hand we are not watching the other hand, and we should as this government could be bringing in policies that we don’t know about.

    So back to watching BOTH HANDS people. If Rudd really wanted to he could bring on a vote at any time in the Caucus and he has not done so. Why? Playing with Julia’s mind? Revenge, yes but why take so long if he was really determined unless it is all a game, and that is not beyond this group, to take the people’s minds off as to where the real action is. [This is just my opinion].

    • Hope you’re wrong.


    • Sean of Deer Park
    • February 8th, 2012

    A long time ago, on a Blog far away (Bolta’s); I suggested Kevin 0Lemon wasn’t quite up to the job and too on the nose for even ALP voters to support at the next election. Gillzilla was the right person for the job to seem a viable option. I talked about the ALP’s “seeming, not doing” mentality that Bolta liked. At the time, I agreed with Bolt’s deductions, generally speaking. Though, my personal experience set off alarm bells this would not turn out well for democracy.

    As it turned out, the “whatever it takes” mantra was set in motion and somehow, against all odds, an unelectable government retained office.

    I predicted at the time, Gillard, would steamroll her policies through parliament and lie to the people to get her own way. The woman has form in this regard. I also suggested at the time Rudd would attempt to return and be seen as the knight on a white horse and come back just in time for the subsequent election, to again trick the voters into a false sense of security. I believe the ALP have been planning this scenario since day dot.

    Merilyn is right to point out we need to keep our eyes on that other hand, the one behind their backs with fingers crossed.

    Hopefully, voters are more engaged at this point. All the signs show they are; the polls, the demise of the Left at State level, the lies, the downturn in the economy, the wasteful spending, the debt, the attacks on freedom… voters are very nervous, regardless of their political leaning.

    The best thing we can hope for is a change in government, ASAP. The ALP must then go away, get its shit together and clean out the riff-raff with new blood and rebuild trust in its own ranks before these people do any more damage to our Country than they already have.

    Collectively, most Australians have already decided they have No Confidence in this particular government. Bring on the motion in the house and test the theory.

    Please, make it stop before the Carbon (dioxide) Tax becomes reality. I worry we will be subject to legal contracts akin to the Desal Plant in Victoria. Contracts the next government will have a hard time reversing. I am certain they will reverse them, but at what cost to the taxpayer? The next government also needs to seriously consider separating Unions from Superannuation schemes, but that is a story for another day.

    (geez, what a rant!) 😆

    • The next government also needs to seriously consider separating Unions from Superannuation schemes…

      Yeah, why is it that not even 20% of the full-time workforce is unionised, yet unions control to some degree almost everybody’s Super?

      That ain’t right.

        • Sean of Deer Park
        • February 8th, 2012

        My understanding is Superfund money is quietly invested in “green” schemes and one sided political donations. Hence, the huge investments which are made at the direction of management of the Superfund’s, ie. the unions. Similar bad investments are made by local councils with ratepayers money. It is a worry that peoples “nest-egg’s” are potentially at risk and explains why the Unions support “Green” initiatives and government policy on “climate change”. Super is not very transparent at all. I have been reluctant to contribute to Super for this very reason. I don’t trust the promises made will ever come to fruition.

        The “baby-boomers” are now retiring, yet their contributions over the years are not enough to support them long term. This was not the plan sold to them at commencement of Super Policy. Once they have exhausted their Super, they will end up on a pension anyway. This is not the plan sold to them in their working life. Imagine if the money they put into super was paid to them as real wages. The smart ones would have been in a much better position financially, in my opinion.

        It is telling, employees really don’t get to see where their wages are being invested. “Industry Superfund’s” claim there are no fees in advertising campaigns, this is false advertising. The “secret” fee structure needs to be exposed. Super members should receive detailed explanation of where their money is invested and where it goes. Right down to the last dollar and percentage. Instead, they are presented with grandiose “projections” and little detail as to how the Fund comes to such figures.

        It seems to me, Super Funds are the Unions greatest cash cow and influence for government policy because of the large amount of cash available for investment and management fees. It would be worth investigating how many Union superiors are the chiefs of Superannuation Funds; as a matter of interest, if nothing else.

      • Merilyn
      • February 8th, 2012

      Sean don’t know if you saw this on Tim Blair’s blog, strange we haven’t seen the remarks made by Clive Palmer to Tony Jones elsewhere in the Media. Carbon Tax, “We’ll be challenging it in the High Court before April this year.”

        • Sean of Deer Park
        • February 8th, 2012

        Yes, I did see that, Merilyn. I should have ranted about that, too. 😆

        It gives me hope our weak government, collectively, will be out smarted by the courts. Palmer will be our saviour, given the high court challenge if successful. As it should be. Realistically, it shouldn’t have to come to this. Palmer shouldn’t have to spend money on what should be rational governance in the first place.

        I guess the problem, as it always is, highlights the need to keep politics separate from the law. Our law has become far too married to government intervention. This is not what the Westminster system promoted or intended. In my opinion, the left have hijacked the judiciary to a large extent and we need to fix that particular inconvenience.

      • Merilyn
      • February 8th, 2012

      It is good to have a rant, you let off some steam that way, [it is better than kicking the dog or the cat}. See below about Tim Blair’s post on Clive Palmer and the Carbon Tax, should have put it on here, drat

    • mabba
    • February 8th, 2012

    How long is Joe Hockey suspended for? Will he be in the chamber today?

    • He was suspended for an hour, so he should get at least half an hour in there today. Interesting that Slipper gave him no warning as is usually the case.

        • mabba
        • February 8th, 2012

        Will be interesting then to see what’s brought on while Hockey is out today- esp. as
        (a) the govt. reckons they’re on about the economy (?!?)
        (b) less time for a no-confidence motion

          • Sean of Deer Park
          • February 8th, 2012

          What really gets to me, Mabba, is the fact the very first item of business at question time yesterday, should have been a motion of no-confidence. Why let the government continue unopposed in the first place? Hockey should not have had to opportunity to be ejected in the first place.

          To me, it makes the coalition look full of hot air and not serious about bringing about change. I mean, what are they waiting for??? Seriously! I feel like they are all (political parties) playing political games. It is unacceptable and beyond contempt. The people want an election and the coalition need to drum this as reality until the cows come home. Enough of the game playing.

          Strike while the iron is hot, is my motto. Dragging all this out is not in Australia’s best interest. Every day the opposition lets this slide, is another day of disaster. Bring it to a head, once and for all. Give the voters something to be cross about and go to an election. I can not understand why the coalition is being so weak; with such good reason to go for the jugular.

  1. No trackbacks yet.

Surely you're thinking something...

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: