In the wake of the resignation of two NSW Liberal MPs over corruption allegations, the prime minister has said the “problem” was the former Labor NSW government banning property developer donations in the first place.

Hunter Valley MPs Tim Owen and Andrew Cornwall stepped down from parliament last week over revelations at the Independent Commission Against Corruption (Icac) they accepted money from property developer Jeff McCloy. Donations from property developers were illegal at the time.

Questioned on talkback radio about the damage the revelations were doing to the Liberal party, Tony Abbott said: “The problem was that the former state Labor government, because of a predicament it found itself in, introduced laws banning donations from developers.”

“Who exactly is a developer? That can sometimes be a difficult question. [They] also introduced legislation to limit the total amount of donations and political parties need to raise money,” he told 2GB on Monday morning.

--------------------------

Who exactly is a developer? A hard question? BOLLOCKS. TONY... That is very turdy of you to ask this...

 

The increase on the excise on petrol would soon be offset for the RICH by the reduction in the tariffs ON LUXURY CARS...  The RICH are already laughing their head off...

 

From Victoria Rollison

Dear Joe Hockey,

Back in 2012, when you said the age of entitlement was over, I was so relieved. I was relieved that highly-paid politicians like Tony Abbott would no longer think it acceptable to charge tax-payers for personal book tours. I was relieved that filthy rich politicians like Malcolm Turnbull, and like yourself, would put an end to ethically-suspect rental schemes, where your tax-payer funded Canberra housing allowance is paid to your spouses for investment properties they have cleverly put in their names. Which you will no doubt benefit from once again when they sell. I was also relieved to hear that this sense of entitlement would also be finished for the families of rich politicians, when the likes of Tony Abbott would say it was not acceptable to accept a secret scholarship for his daughter’s education. Nor a refund on a non-refundable deposit paid on a rented flat without proper due diligence that any other non-entitled member of the public is in no position to demand. Nor lavish trips to the Melbourne Cup to hob-knob with celebrities which even you can no doubt see is not in the public interest and therefore not an entitlement that should be charged to the tax-payer. Because these are the best examples I have ever seen of a sense of entitlement which is so entrenched and seemingly innate that it’s like an incurable disease that seems to have no end. So again, congratulations on declaring an end to it.

And oh how I wish I could leave this letter here. But I can’t. And you know why I can’t. Because I am mistaken. I am not mistaken that you wish to end the age of entitlement. What is clear is that you do in fact want to end what you call entitlement. The problem is, your definition of the problem of entitlement in our culture, and my definition, are completely different things. From the budget you’ve handed down, and from your recent statements about poor people’s spending habits on petrol (which no one misinterpreted, you really should own your mistakes Joe), it’s clear that you think entitlement is our community’s idea of rights. Rights to quality education. Rights to quality healthcare. Rights to a clean and sustainable environment. Rights to a social safety net when things go wrong. Rights to live in a community where it’s possible to be born poor, but to better our circumstances through hard work, encouragement and support from those around us. All these rights are what you call ‘a sense of entitlement’ aren’t they Joe? And aren’t these rights the things you would ideally like to end?

read more: http://victoriarollison.com/2014/08/19/an-open-letter-to-joe-hockey/

 

 

Only 5% of Australians nominate Joe Hockey as Australia’s best recent treasurer, including just 10% of Liberal voters – meaning he ranks last among the four treasurers polled.

The survey emerged as Labor targeted the treasurer with every one of its questions during parliamentary question time on Tuesday, using Hockey’s own various explanations and arguments as he has sought to sell his unpopular budget over the past three months.

Peter Costello topped the Essential Media poll, nominated as the best treasurer by 30% of respondents, including 54% of Liberal voters, followed by Paul Keating (23%, 12% of Liberal voters) and Wayne Swan (8%, 3% of Liberals). More than one in three (35%) said they “didn’t know” when asked who had been Australia’s best recent treasurer.

Despite the faltering budget sales pitch and the fact that much of the budget appears unlikely to pass the Senate, Tony Abbott insists the Coalition will demonstrate it is an “outstanding” reforming government.

read more: http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/aug/26/joe-hockey-is-australias-least-popular-recent-treasurer-poll-suggests

 

 

One has to remember that JOE ISN'T AN ECONOMIST AND will not pretend to be ONE...  Thus he has NO IDEA about what he is doing in a job that demands a reasonably high training in economics, a great degree of social issues understanding (Joe has no a single idea beyond his religious beliefs) and politics (in which Joe is a grand-master of burning bullshit)...

F for flunked.

 

 

Joe Hockey has not hired author and satirist David Hunt as speechwriter, contrary to reports, according to both parties.

The treasurer met with Hunt, writer of the humorous historical book, Girt: the Unauthorised History of Australia, and the two had “discussions” but no contracts were signed and no hires were made, a spokeswoman for Hockey told Guardian Australia.

The clarification comes despite comments made to Fairfax that Hunt “is being engaged for his writing skills” and that Hockey believes Hunt “will be a great person to work with.”

The spokeswoman did not deny a job offer to Hunt was made, but said the office had not hired anyone as speechwriter.

Hockey has been under pressure in recent weeks over public statements he has made while trying to sell the controversial federal budget.

In response to the media reports that he had been hired as a speechwriter, Hunt tweeted on Wednesday morning, confirming that he had met with Hockey but that was as far as the meeting went.

“I met with @JoeHockey. We had a coffee and a chat. I liked him. I also liked the coffee. I am not his speechwriter, or indeed anyone elses.”

read more: http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/aug/27/joe-hockeys-office-denies-satirist-david-hunt-speechwriter

------------------------

 

 

The Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry has stood down its chief economist over allegations he posted wildly offensive comments on his Facebook account, including one referring to a childhood picture of Treasurer Joe Hockey as "a fat little bastard".

Burchell Wilson, who has developed important elements of the ACCI's economic agenda and has become a vociferous public opponent of the renewable energy target since he joined the organisation in 2009, was stood down on Thursday by the group's chief executive, Kate Carnell, after the alleged postings surfaced.

They include rants against the disabled, refugees, Muslims and Mr Hockey.

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/chamber-of-commerces-burchell-wilson-stood-down-over-joe-hockey-facebook-posts-20140828-109n3d.html#ixzz3BhANfFvz
-----------------------
Hopefully Mr Wilson knew economics far more than Joe Hockey, who ISN'T AN ECONOMIST... This fact needs to be pointed out over and over again: Joe is a rabid whatever ideologue for the neo-fascist capitalists, but he ISN'T AN ECONOMIST.
See image above and toon at top...

 

According to Andrew Bolt, we're all wrong. We have — and we unreservedly apologise for it — misquoted Joe Hockey when he talked about the excise. Thank You Andrew for reminding us that Joe actually said:

 

"The people that actually pay the most are higher income people, with an increase in fuel excise. ... The poorest people either don’t have cars or actually don’t drive very far in many cases."

 

---------------

Gustaphian: I totally agree with Joe Hockey on this one... I remember in central Australia, circa 2003, this family of 12, packed in a station wagon, travelling from town to town (well, they were two little villages with about twenty houses max about a hundred kms apart to the east and about 700 kms to the west) in search of enlightenment or a job, whichever came first.

 

Had they been rich, they would have consumed more petrol because they could have afforded three cars.

 

And they already were considerate enough then about this global warming thingy by not running the air conditioning inside the vehicle. They kept the windows opened mostly because young Nollalana could not fit entirely in the car though the ambient temperature in the shade was around 45 degrees Celsius. The closest "city" was about 800 kilometres as the crow flies and about 15 breakdowns in a car that had seen its best days in 1972, on roads reminiscent of a tin-shed rusty covering. Of course they had to carry full petrol cans just in case, because the nearest and only Avgas petrol station was in their own village, 200 kms to the north. And they were singing...

 

My apologies, dear Joe.