When friends are enemies and enemies friends

Fairs fair says:

02:28pm | 17/09/10

The event was cancelled, as most of us already know, because of threats of violence, nothing more or less.

Well done, Port. Very mature. Very democratic.

Julie is a troll and a fraud.

Troy Hampton says:

02:46pm | 17/09/10

Fairs fair - Wrong, that was a beat up by the local paper, untrue. It was as Julieofportmacq said because of hostile questions, not threats of violence as you have mistakingly said. Oakeshott himself came out and said he recieved no threats of violence.

Nuff said says:

04:43pm | 17/09/10

Oh really.

The Australian today says

“Mr Oakeshott was to appear at the event, “An Audience with Rob Oakeshott”, tonight in his home town on the NSW mid-north coast but it was postponed because of a series of threats fielded by a local newspaper.

The newspaper organising the event, the Port Macquarie News, postponed the forum yesterday, citing safety concerns.

The newspaper’s general manager, Janine Buesnel, said it had become apparent that “there are some people who plan to use the night as a chance to vent their rage at Mr Oakeshott”.

Threatening telephone calls were also fielded by staff at the forum’s proposed venue, the Port Macquarie Panthers.”

Wayne Fehlhaber says:

05:58pm | 17/09/10

JulieofPortMacq.  :  Quite right Julie , Oakshott is on the nose with his largely conservative electorate , and he is on the nose with the rest of conservative voters in Australia . Once Oakshott realised the Speaker’s position carried a $238,000 Salary , staff of three , lavish offices and an entertainment account , he changed his mind on Gillard’s offer of a position.
Now he is in her pocket and rewarded for his turncoat tactics.
At our expense of course.
Harry Jenkins should remain as Speaker because he was accepted by both sides of the House.

Carnegie says:

10:45pm | 17/09/10

@Nuff Said,

Don’t beleive everything you read in the paper!
Rob Oakeshott has a team of friendlies at Port News and they are being exposed for what they are! Oakeshott himself as admitted that there was no threat to him! The event was cancelled because they couldn’t find a Dorothy Dixer among the 300+ questions submitted.

Carnegie says:

09:23am | 18/09/10

I’ve had 2 failed attempts at informing this debate, how about this time I simply provide the punch “journalists” with a couple of hints:

Look at the composure of the boards of a local Port Macquarie surf club & rugby club. Compare that list to local Independent members & candidates in upcoming state election & also management of local papers.

I won’t say any further for fear of further censorship!

LapDog says:

10:26am | 19/09/10

Diddums!

Kordez says:

04:09pm | 17/09/10

I lol’d.. =)

BarbaraT says:

06:56pm | 17/09/10

Maybe that’s how their attracting him to the role.  He thinks the ‘Speaker’ in the job title means he gets to speak all the time.  Something he just loves to do.

TimB says:

03:56pm | 17/09/10

How is it a backflip? The whole point of that reform was to allow the Government to appoint a speaker from its own party without sacrificing a vote advantage.
If Labor appoints one from the crossbench then they aren’t disadvantaged in numbers, so there is absolutely zero reason for Tony to give up one of his own votes.

MDMConnell says:

06:17pm | 17/09/10

TimB’s right on the money. Labor backing Oakshott would mean that it doesn’t have to give up one of its own MPs but forces the Coalition to give up one of theirs. How is that in the spirit of “reforming Parliament” and “holding the government more accountable”?

Ditto giving the Speaker a deliberative vote. How is giving a government one extra vote than they had before “making the government more accountable”?

There was a theory going around that Oakeshott was always going to support Labor and was deliberately trying to make things difficult for the Coalition in Opposition with these reforms. I dunno how true that is, but giving the Labor party all these extra boosts in a close Parliament sure isn’t doing much to dispel the idea.

Kelvin says:

10:07pm | 17/09/10

I they make Oakeshott the speaker he should really be paired with a fellow independent like Tony Windsor - not a member of theCoalition so as to give her highness yet another free kick in front of goal.

Both oakeshot and Windsor have already had too much to say in this parliament so taking them both out of play would be a good result.

MarK says:

11:13pm | 17/09/10

“So the real story here appears to be Abbott trying to do a “back-flip”  No

The real story is about a puppy….look it is a puppy….

Likely Unquite says:

08:24pm | 17/09/10

On reflection I,m abandoning the call for umpires,give the job to the Governor General,this works because kingmaker Shorten has to obey his mum in law and Abbott being a staunch monarchist will of course respect the Queens appointment. What are the speaker,s other responsibilities anyway,raffles,bingo or karaoke nights.

Wayne Fehlhaber says:

06:04pm | 17/09/10

nosthow :  There’s hope for you yet matey.
I’ve posted the required forms , just fill them out and return by mail .

Sez oo says:

02:54pm | 19/09/10

What, Garfield Barwick?

He dead, mon.

BlackAdder says:

07:26pm | 19/09/10

Nice one,  SO!

Seriously though. That is the whole problem with such a proposal - how on earth could a good ‘un get “impartially” picked from such a skewed set to start with?

Look at ‘em.  Barwick, Kerr, Einfield, just to start with. Bloody rogues, all. And if two of ‘em are now safely well dead, the now disgraced survivor was only caught out loooong after his own retirement.

And then,  who would do the picking?

Nup. Won’t do, at all, at all.