Remembering ‘Abbott’s dad’: top 10 Howard era memories

Harriet says:

08:25am | 10/08/10

@Eric ,Ah memories and they wonder why he was thrown out of his seat of Bennelong.

Rosie says:

08:38am | 10/08/10

Oh yes Eric there were the good old days! John Howard did us proud here at home and on the international scene.

I am dreading the sight of Julia Gillard with her boyfriend tagging along when she is representing Australia overseas if Labor wins.

Phil says:

09:40am | 10/08/10

Eric too right. Mind you the authors opening sentence sums up most labor voters (Goldfish). If people could really remember life under Gough, Hawke, Keating and now this bunch of amateurs, they would never vote Labor again.

WIth the libs you got stability. Stability in policy, government, ministers etc. Discipline, sacking if warranted. In labor you get promited the more hopeless you are.

Lets just quickly look at the authors 10 points.
Downward Envy - Hardly, the Paxtons as you mention needed to get off their rusty dusty and get a job. Three generations of welfare cannot be good for anyone, let alone your country. As for 5 kids to 4 fathers neither can that. Many would advocate that the current arrangements dont help enough, but if predominantly labor voters were fair dinkum and got a job, then the amount could be much higher to those that are unfortunate enough to get put off so they can sruvive with dignity in the time of need. Welfare should be a temporary safety net, not a lifestyle option. You want sympathy for wlefare cheats. What planet are you on. Do you also think Dennis Ferguson is misunderstood?
Un-core Promises - You are kidding. This lot has broken more promises in less than 3 years than the previous government in 11. When Howard came to office, he had been deceived by Keating as to the state of the books. Like buying a business to find it has no stock or customers, some things had to change. I would say many non core promises were later bought in albeit in a different state.
Dog-Whilstling - If ilegal immigrants have no regard for our laws now what makes you think they will respect them later. As for companies sending jobs offshore, you need to get with the times. If we cannot be competitive then the jobs will go offshore. Your union mates and yourself are free to purchase the businesses at any time or commence manufacturing but you wont, cause its easier to harp on than do anything yourself. The unions could have bought the division of Pacific Brands which closed, but knew they would not make money but lose it.
Boondoggling - That point is a gee up isnt it. Just remind me which party has members in parliment where the super GP clinics are?
Casino Capitalism - He needed to repay the debt incurred by labor. He did set up funds for this plus put away 40 billion odd for super for public servants. They did no some infrastructure, but your lot has hardly kept that up other than to finish projects started under the libs.
Stomping out Dissent - If you think the ABC is unbiases, then there is a bridge for sale, needs painting though.
Killing off Republic - So what. It went to a referrendum and you lost. Get over it, just like the libs got over 2007.
Refusing to Say Sorry - Agree, but will you and your union mates pay the compensation bill when it arrives.
Environmental Denial - If your lot wants credability on this you would either consider Nuclear, or go ahead with the gas exploration off the central coast. This could power the current coal stations at a minimal cost.
Locking up Unionists - Could you please gove details of 10 unionists locked up in Jail, what they are there for and a copy of the trail notes. After all no unionist has ever been guilty of corruption, using their credit card at brothels, bribery etc.

Brad of Bentleigh says:

07:57pm | 10/08/10

hmmm, funny. I listed a stack of Howards excellent acheivements, and the mods chose to not allow it. Maybe the author is this peice is also a mod? :S

Christian Real says:

09:27am | 10/08/10

Tony of poorakistan
Tony no, Howard hasn’t retired, he is still Tony Abbott’s shadow quietly behind him pulling his strings, Abbott, the puppet and Howard,the puppetmaster , the inseperatable duo.

Macca says:

09:45am | 10/08/10

@Christian, Better to be Howard’s puppet than Bill Shorten’s

TimB says:

09:47am | 10/08/10

Christian Real, you got any proof to back up your claims? Perhaps a random web link. I know how much you like those.

PG says:

10:38am | 10/08/10

As opposed to the Big Buisiness grovellerers who believe the crumbs a few unelected by anybody white men in suits surfing in their own money throw at them is all their fit for.—dont be hard on yourself Andy
lets see points against People Skills hmm

Xenaphobic—sorry mate no matter how hard we try the Mussies and the foreigners aint going home by boat or any other means this is their home as it is the spiks wogs chingas and convicts you know us Aussies—we need them you know to sell and buy things to psst its called an economy

Any body can “Manage”  an economy by hacking on the poor and people who cant fight back but that is the way of the big brave men and women of the Liberal party. Abbot will be a “great” Manager by driving infrastructure to the wall and pork barrelling the wealthy and yes we can wait for the trickle down that never ever happens and when the US slips back into recession—as it will . This time we can go into recession with them as we should—-oh joy Andy oh joy

howy says:

02:09pm | 10/08/10

PG - we don’t need high immigration to have a stable economy and a high quality of life. Switzerland, Austria and Norway have the highest quality of life but these countries have few, if any, immigrants. And these countries have no-where-near as many natural resources as us.

A country can be very successful by just relying on the native birthrate to keep the society going - and as a bonus, the society will remain united going forward. If the native birthrate drop below replacement level, the government is required to change policies to ensure it increase to above 2.1 per woman.

Lucy says:

02:44pm | 10/08/10

Umm, Howy, a quick google tells me that Norway has over 500,000 people who identify as an immigrant - comprising some 12% of the population. Switzerland has one of the highest migrant intakes of any European nation (23% total population), and Austria has 15%.

Not exactly ‘“few, if any”.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_to_Europe

Andy D says:

04:38pm | 10/08/10

Lucy, you are playing with the figures here a bit aren’t you?

Instead of showing the percentage of the population of Norway who are migrants (as defined by being born outside of Norway), which is one of the lowest in Europe at 7.4% you cite the number of people who “identify as migrants” which sounds to me like a decidedly non-arbitrary number and includes those who were not born in Norway AND those who were born in Norway but have parents not born in Norway.

I’m not sure who decided that all Norwegian residents whose parents were not born in Norway “identify as Migrants” but it sounds a bit like a statistical beat up to me. Lets not even start to look at the fact that of the 8 highest contributing nationalities to Norwegian migration 4 of them (including the top 2) are from other European countries.

I don’t fully agree with the facts you cite but kudos for being willing to use facts, far too many argue with ideologies instead of facts these days.

....and PG, forget to take the Lithium today did we?

howy says:

04:55pm | 10/08/10

They’re very low numbers Lucy and they show that there’s no need for mass immigration at all. And these countries also have a fatalistic birthrate.

Ham says:

01:06pm | 10/08/10

Davido, Is it a terrible legacy to disenfranchise hundreds of thoasands of voters? What about the other millions of people? He did get elected four times.
You say he ‘perpetrated the greatest and most flagrant breaches of the separation of state and church ever seen in this country’. What a very dramatic statement, but I do not recall seeing witches burnt in the street or the return of the spanish inquisition.
Also, can you please enlighten me as to how Howard left the economy in tatters? Where do you think all Labor’s stimulus money came from?
Are you really so deranged that you don’t see how prosperous our country was under Howard, or are you mearly an employee of Labor party?

Davido says:

01:40pm | 10/08/10

Forgot something else.

Howard took one of the best conservative parties on the planet and made it a home for racists and the rabid religious right.

Congratulations. Don’t the let door hit you on the way out mate.

antman says:

03:18pm | 10/08/10

Ham, do you understand the meaning of the term “structural deficit”? that’s what Howard left us with. His budgets were reliant on ongoing windfall tax receipts well above historical averages. Once tax receipts fell by around $100 million due to the GFC (most Australian taxpaying businesses are NOT mining companies), the Federal Government was immediately plunged into deficit, stimulus spending or no.

Randal says:

05:05pm | 10/08/10

No antman, that’s what the ALP are relying on to return their budget to surplus, Costello was always very clear on this and structured the budget to pay for itself with any windfalls passed onto the surplus.

This ensures that regardless of less than expected returns the budget would stay in the black and a very effective strategy that saw Australia’s Net Debt retired by 2007.

That’s why Australia had those record surpluses under the Howard government, it is now this government that has changed that game and are now plugging record pricing into the forward estimates to create the case for a return to surplus, any drop in those resource markets and bye bye surplus.

On top of that there is no plan to actually claw back the $90 billion national government they have accumulated over the past 2 years, so this number will peak at 6% of GDP and if the record trading terms do not hold blow out further.

This now is the end of your lesson in actual macroeconomics and it is now back to the shallow end of the gene pool for you and Davido.

Why the hell is nobody watching the High Court? says:

07:43pm | 10/08/10

At least the disenfranchisement issue has partially been reversed.  I’m amazed mainstream media hasn’t picked it up yet: GetUp’s campaign in the High Court to reverse Howard’s rule of “one working day after the election’s called to enrol” has actually succeeded: those sections of the Electoral Act have been repealed as against the Australian Constitution, as of 6 August.  There’s 100,000 people denied enrolment who now can and should go and demand their enrolments proceed.

Macca says:

09:43am | 10/08/10

@Christine, the states look after Crime, not federal. If you are implying that the liberals never provide welfare, than I’m not quite sure what policy to look at that kept Howard in power. Welfare to the masses was about all he ever promised.

And I’m not sure how you could overlook the ALP as dishonest…

iansand says:

11:55am | 10/08/10

Macca - There is a strong correlation between crime rates and poverty.

DocBud says:

12:32pm | 10/08/10

“People that nobody will employ because they do not fit the image of the capitalist businessman’s desired worker.”

Are you nuts, Christine? (your language does suggest a certain irrationality, e.g. neo-fascist). I’m a capitalist businessman (is there any other kind?) and we employ more under 30s than over 30s. Of course, we do have a requirement that people must come to where the work is (Central Queensland), how evil of us.

Ben81 says:

03:59pm | 10/08/10

You should educate yourself on how GST revenue works and the state-federal balance of power and spending responsibilities.  I think you’ll find that in most cases infrastructure spending *is* the responsibility of the states.
Are you saying you don’t have a viable option because nobody is pledging to strip the states of all their powers or abolish them?

The Scarlet Pimpernel says:

10:35am | 10/08/10

I don’t recall Howard’s policies killing any workers. Pink batts, anyone?

Evan Findlay says:

11:44am | 10/08/10

The Scarlet Pimpernel,
War anyone! You had a choice of two under Howard.

Snake Plisskin says:

12:32pm | 10/08/10

Yes Scarlet Pimpernel

Gillard and Rudd were hiding in rooves waiting for shonky tradies who were out to earn a fast and cheap buck and Gillard and Rudd pushed them down a flight of stairs and set fire to the place.

No responsibility could be attributed to the shonky tradie…......

The King says:

12:33pm | 10/08/10

Johnny Howard is the Greatest Prime Minister this nation has had and was welcomed into dressing rooms - nothing like the support of the nation’s leader!
K Rudd was a sport hater/pretender - who else wears a scarf in Qld in February - what an immense tool he is!
And Julia’s faux ‘Bulldogs’ support is laughable!

Brown Nose diplomacy - I think you’ll find the Kruddler had more than his nose penetrating Obama’s date

Christian Real says:

12:50pm | 10/08/10

The Scarlet Pimpinel
The Labor governments policies did not kill any workers, the companies that employed them did by not providing training and ensuring a safe workplace for their workers.
Under WorkPlace Health and Safety Laws it was the responsibility of the companies that employed people to install batts in roofs of houses. to ensure that those they had employed was trained in accordance to the WorkPlace Health and Safety Rules and that their workplace was safe to work in.
Maybe on your assumption to falsely blame the Government, that The former Liberal Goverernment should be held accountable for committing Australia and Australians into a war with Iraq that was based purely on false and misleading information about weapons of mass destruction that no longer existed, and maybe Howard and his former government should also be held responsible for the deaths of innocent Iraqi citizens

The Scarlet Pimpernel says:

01:14pm | 10/08/10

@ Christian

get real. The ALP Government stood back and threw money at anyone who said they could install insulation. With no qualifications.

Furthermore, the rorting started with a certain group importing insulation direct from China - insulation that did not meet Australian design or safety standards. Then there were the unlicensed companies doing shoddy work. Worst of all was when a certain ethnic group well-known for crime and scams, decided that they didn’t even have to install any insulation; just send Rudd and Gillard the invoice, which was promptly paid.

Read my lips - there was NO, repeat NO oversight of the spending of billins of dollars of taxpayer money either in insulation or school halls.

I wouldn’t trust this woman to run a tuckshop.

Oh dear, perhaps that was the wrong analogy.

DocBud says:

01:24pm | 10/08/10

The scheme was administered and funded by the Federal government. The companies effectively sub-contracted to the government so they jointly shared OH&S responsibility. Furthermore, the government should have foreseen that giving away taxpayer’s money in this way had the potential to encourage shonky operators and should have put the necessary controls in place.

KH says:

01:49pm | 10/08/10

Evan - there is a difference between ‘policy’ and shonky operators taking advantage of said policy.  Contrary to popular belief, the ‘government’ can’t possibly vet every man and his dog that starts touting themselves as an ‘insulation contractor’.  Thats what industry bodies are supposed to do.  Further to that, lets not forget the personal responsibility of these ‘home owners’  - you hire a contractor with no qualifications, you get problems.  The ‘government’ can’t make every decision for you - at some point, the buck stops with you.

iansand says:

05:05pm | 10/08/10

I was trying to think of some Liberal funded infrastructure programmes on which workers died.  Because, using the “logic” of many here, Mr Howard and Mr Abbott. would be responsible for those deaths.  Death is, unfortunately, still an inevitable part of construction projects.  My problem with this exercise is that I cannot recall any Liberal funded large infrastructure projects.

Randal says:

05:43pm | 10/08/10

There where plenty of projects Iansand, just not one’s where billions where ripped off the top or people killed, you see we handle things differently in the Liberal Party.

Firstly we don’t waste money on pointless programs and secondly when we do implement them we do so with the oversight they require.

Something your pals at the ALP could do well to practise for the future, it’s what I like to call “dotting the I’s and crossing the T’s” something your outgoing Fiance Minister does not find important, nor apparently does your ageing rocker of an Environment Minister - he still is a Minister is he not, it’s just that I cannot remember seeing him for a while.

To be fair the same goes for their leader, so I am probably being harsh as he deserves the most criticsim as she would “do it all again the same way”. Now if that does not make the nation nervous I am not sure what would!

Snake Plisskin says:

05:54pm | 10/08/10

@Randal

The Iraq and Afghanistan wars have cost us billions and have killed many Australians.

They are both Liberal policy.

Aitch B says:

10:56pm | 10/08/10

@Christian:

You say….. “The former Liberal Goverernment should be held accountable for committing Australia and Australians into a war with Iraq that was based purely on false and misleading information about weapons of mass destruction that no longer existed, and maybe Howard and his former government should also be held responsible for the deaths of innocent Iraqi citizens”.

If that is your belief then so should your beloved ALP government be held responsible. You conveniently and quite disgracefully choose to ignore Rudd’s 100% support at the time. Don’t recall Rudd’s “indisputable evidence” statement in parliament in support of Howard’s decision?

Didn’t think so….....

@Snake…..... and Labor policy too, it seems.

Aitch says:

11:04pm | 10/08/10

Um…. Peter

. You obviously missed Kev wearing a Wallaby scarf while talking to the players. Or indeed a Kangaroos scarf while talking to them.

And you obviously don’t watch the cricket on 9. Guest commentator anyone?

And let’s not even talk about Julia donning Western Bulldogs gear and giggling her way into the rooms after the game for a gold old singalong and cuddle with big bad Barry!

Out of vogue? Hardly…........

Populist? You betcha!!

Macca says:

10:42am | 10/08/10

@Shabang, the ICC condmened Daryl Hair and defended Murali. Using them as a character reference is probably not a good way to attack Australia’s second longest serving PM. Even Roebuck, who was ridiculously opposed to Howard has defended him against the ICC.

More to the point, how may 71 year olds do you know that are currently employed?

Phil says:

10:49am | 10/08/10

He is nearly 70. Would you want to work at that age if you didnt have to. I am sure he is on a few boards, but have no proof of this.

DocBud says:

12:47pm | 10/08/10

Kevvie has a new job:

http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=35567&Cr;=&Cr1;=

The King says:

02:55pm | 10/08/10

The ICC, essentially the ‘Indian Cricket Council’ is against Howard because they want a ‘yes’ man that will do what ever they say, and not a man of honour and integrity that will do what is best for the game.

Evan Findlay says:

11:47am | 10/08/10

With the amount of tax revenue falling in their lap it would be near impossible not to have a surplus. If they cut out the unsustainable middleclass welfare there would have been a sh*tload more! But they had to get themselves re-elected somehow.

Common sense says:

11:57am | 10/08/10

Even though “the puppet” is a Rhodes Scholar with more brains than any one of the Labor supporters who have commentated here.  Can’t they see the rorts & waste with pink batts & the BER?  Blind & dumb -typical Labor.  & Rudd who was called “Dr Death” during his Queensland State Labor Government stint!  By the way, does Peter Lewis not know the difference between “bought and brought”?  Very poor for a journalist.

The Badger says:

02:49pm | 10/08/10

@ Common sense

I have never let my schooling interfere with my education. 
Mark Twain

Realist says:

12:02am | 12/08/10

@ Common Sense.
For someone with the name ‘Common Sense’, you clearly don’t use much. Arguments over Pink Batts is a shameful use of tragedy for political point-scoring. Any educated person knows that Ministers are not involved to such a degree that they can 100% control what occurs on the ground. Therefore ‘common sense’ would dictate that neither Kevin Rudd nor Julia Gillard personally installed faulty insulation. How can such a rort be solely blamed on the Party in power? That’s like arresting John Howard for the Wheat Board scandal.

Evan Findlay says:

01:17pm | 10/08/10

The Scarlet Pimpernel,
Scrapping the bottom of the barrel is the only place to find you. “Soldiers go to war” Brilliant! Nothing gets past you!
And your right, how can you compare an outright lie to the Australian people. A Prime Minister, a deceptive and conniving stain on Australia’s reputation who sent our troops to a war he knew was based on lies so as to please his master G.W.Bush. There is no equal to that sort of disgraceful behaviour.

Davido says:

01:48pm | 10/08/10

Funny how the rabid right never seem to include the AMA in their frankly bizarre and outdated attacks on unions.

TimB says:

01:15pm | 10/08/10

So, baseless conspiracy theories are enough to influence your vote?

Gotcha.

Randal says:

05:25pm | 10/08/10

No scarlettlies, what we expected was:

1. That the Department headed by Garrett would not have registered companies with no background or skills in insulation and ensure this roll out was handled by industry professionals.

2. That when the concerns where first raised, by the industry, unions, fire brigades and State government officials of the dangers of the program, that the department would have implemented a policy that protected home owners from registered government insulation providers by ensuring they met safety standards.

3. That after the first house fires where clearly linked to the insulation, stopped the program initiated a full investigation and ensured that proper procedures where now in place to ensure the safety of people’s homes.

4. After the first death’s and constant and consistent advise that the program was now dangerous, resulting in multiple lost properties and now a loss of life acted to immediately suspend the program pending a full investigation.

But none of that happened, instead ‘fly by nighters’ paid for by the Federal government continued to knock on doors representing the government’s program and lay dangerous and what proved to be fatal insulation.

In fact it took over 12 months, enormous public and political pressure before they acted and shut the program down, too late for the 4 that lost their lives and the hundred’s that lost their homes, for the 300,000 houses currently fitted with useless and potentially dangerous insulation.

You see what we expect from government’s when rolling out billion dollar programs is careful planning with all potential affects assessed prior to the cheque’s being written, and then constant review and should issue’s be evident that can have as devastating effect as the Pink Batt’s program, immediate action to rectify.

Not much to ask in my view, but apparently you are happy to judge a government by lesser standards and I guess that is why you vote Labor as a lesser standard is what they guarantee.

Shane From Melbourne says:

06:54pm | 10/08/10

But, But…... that is advocating individual responsibility…something that both parties hate. The government is supposed to kiss it and make it better. Or at least throw money at it. I could understand if the Liberals were chastising Labor for not blacklisting the individuals involved in shonky insulation installation or ripping off the BER, but to campaign that it is all the governments responsibility and not the individuals or companies involved in the government program is disingenous at best.

Jason CR says:

08:07pm | 10/08/10

@hmmm
Why was Peter Garrett removed from the portfolio again?  Remind me again.

hmm says:

10:47am | 11/08/10

Shane of Melbourne, you say it’s disingenous to not take personal responsibility.  Well you’re just waffling (what the Libs do best).  Explain why please???  We had installation installed prior to the GFC and if there was a problem I would blame the installation company.  Why would anything change just because the government provided funding???  Why do the Lib supporters appear to be the noisy minority?  They are all over news.com and talkback.  That tells me enough about their intelligence.  BTW I have to go as I do have a job, which is better than what the Libs could ever offer me under the GFC.

hmm says:

02:15pm | 10/08/10

TSP - money had to be spent somwhere and what better way to spend it but on infrastructure in our long ignored education system under Howard.  The BER was an overall success and comparing motor vehicles does nothing for your argument.  The Libs voted against the cash splash so effectively they were just sitting on their hands hoping the GFC would just go away.  For the record I may not agree with everything the Labor party does or stand for, but they are far superior in governing ALL of Australia (not just the top end) than the Libs.  Abbott hasn’t a chance of getting over the line.  Look at the latest sporting bets.  They never lie.

Ben81 says:

04:05pm | 10/08/10

“hmm”, you’ve completely ignored the Scarlet Pimpernel’s point and gone off on a tangent.  Any twit knows that quickly shovelling around cash would stimulate the economy, the problem is that it shouldn’t be an excuse to overlook blatant waste, especially when a large proportion of the spending is happening long after the threat of a recession has passed.

hmm says:

04:33pm | 10/08/10

Ben, I did not miss any point from the above post.  I stand by my comment that the stimulus packages were not managed perfectly, however were preferred to sitting on one’s arse and doing nothing (aka Libs).  Keep in mind there will always be whingers in every demographic and sites like this are dumping grounds for the Lib nutters out there.  They appear to be a fairly uneducated lot as a whole.  BTW are you suggesting they just pull the plug on COMMITED spending???  They would then be accused of not following through on core promises.

Randal says:

06:12pm | 10/08/10

What a classic Labor apologist you are @hmmm… Yes they wasted the money you say, the BER program was ripped off you agree… people died and had their houses burnt down by the pink batts program… but come on we had to do something and you evil Liberals would have done nothing… come on only Labor looks after ALL Australian’s and you Liberals are all right wing nutters…

Please give us a spell, programs that waste billions in rorts are not successful, and no, just because some houses actually got half decent insulation does not make that program a success either… Basically the rule is if you get ripped off billons and burn down people’s homes and have death’s from your program, it’s not a success, no matter which way you spin it.

It’s called a lack of initial foresight and then oversight, and when you are rolling out $42 billion in spending you need both to be right on the money with both and it’s not an excuse to say, “yeah but it was a crisis” as governments always are in a crisis of some kind and it is how coolly they handle the crisis to which they should be judged.

For your information stimulus contributed 0.8% of GDP growth out of the 1.7% national growth rate, with almost no impact from the batts or BER - one because it was single targeted abject failure, and the other because of the contract nature of the work the money had not hit the economy.

As for the Liberal’s sitting on their hands, that’s simply untrue and they believed that some stimulus was needed, just not to the size and in the wasteful areas it was thrown, and the growth clearly supports that strategy as the right one.

Ben81 says:

10:58pm | 10/08/10

So you think the waste is acceptable, got it.  I guess i’m just one of those uneducated whingeing Lib nutters who asks questions when taxpayers money is being pissed down the drain.  The alternative is not “doing nothing”, it’s being responsible and not treating the global financial crisis as an excuse to have a spending silly season assuming any usual accountability of the government is forgiven.  Just look at the insulation program as well on the long list of other things, you’d have to have rose coloured glasses on to think we have any sort of value for money from all that.

Shane From Melbourne says:

07:00pm | 10/08/10

You forgot John Howard, architect of the present middle class welfare system. Also responsible for the present baby boom and property bubble. All which will come back to haunt us in ten to twenty years time

Peter Seal says:

09:47pm | 10/08/10

Not a jibe its fact. Your contibution does no more than prove my point that truth is clearly the first and most obvious sad casualty when dealing with history according to Liberals

Ben81 says:

03:12pm | 11/08/10

Pauline Hanson was convicted in a fair trial, the government’s involvement went as far as funding the legal action.  Labor was pretty well ok with all of that too at the time, as long as politically convenient anyway.

Michael says:

06:27pm | 11/08/10

Actually, it wasn’t a fair trial.

It was overturned on appeal as a misconstrued charge from the start.  The Court of Appeal said she should never have been charged in the first place.

Ben81 says:

01:45am | 12/08/10

Yes it was Michael, a conviction being overturned isn’t an unusual occurrence.  And Tony Abbott didn’t prosecute and charge her, just a small detail.

Aitch B says:

11:14pm | 10/08/10

Yeah….. and Keating touched up the Queen!

Dara says:

06:43pm | 11/08/10

I used to buy a kilo of Beluga caviar every week ,now thanks to Rudd and Gillard all I can afford is black Vegemite.
Next time please think about us poor people when you place your votes.
Have little understanding please.I don’t think I can live without my caviar much longer.