Jealous Julie

I have always said that to be a member of the Liberal party, it must be a pre-requisite for one to take nasty, vicious pills.

If so, Julie Bishop has obviously overdosed.

I have also said that Ms Bishop the younger, is the most nasty, vicious woman in Parliament. Her spiteful cat calling across the Chamber during Question Time is legendary and extremely unbecoming of a fellow woman Parliamentarian.

I thought Ms Mirabella was bad enough but Ms Bishop trumps even her.

Now we have Ms Bishop’s recent interview in the Tasmanian newspaper, The Examiner, as absolute proof that her spitefulness and jealousy has now reached a new low.

Kicking someone when they’re down.

(http://www.examiner.com.au/story/1727119/gender-game-low-politics)

Taking a page out Abbott’s book maybe.

(http://www.theage.com.au/news/federalelection2007news/abbott-adamant-over-banton-stunt/2007/10/31/1193618926085.html)

Ms Bishop, in her interview with the Gazette, has sought to blame the victim of Abbott’s vile, aggressive, bullying, seditious attacks during the three years of the hung parliament.

(http://www.independentaustralia.net/2013/politics/the-arsonist/)

Quote:  “She had the most powerful position in the country. She was the most powerful elected representative in Australia and yet she chose to play a victim instead of face up to her own incompetence and misjudgments and miscalculations.”

Oh Ms Bishop – how very wrong you are – and how dare you try to turn yours and Tony Abbott’s constant vile, vicious verbal and visual attacks on Ms Gillard as her fault.

You, Ms Bishop are no shining light yourself.

Let me remind people of the sort of woman you are.

(http://www.independentaustralia.net/2013/politics/blue-murder-at-wittenoom/

In the 1980s, working under her married name Julie Gillon, Bishop was deeply involved in some of Slater & Gordon’s biggest asbestos cases.

Lawyer Peter Gordon told Australian Doctor magazine in 2007: “We had to fight even for the right of dying cancer victims to get a speedy trial. I recall sitting in the WA Supreme Court in an interlocutory hearing for the test cases involving Wittenoom miners Mr. Peter Heys and Mr. Tim Barrow. CSR was represented by Ms. Julie Bishop (then Julie Gillon). (She) was rhetorically asking the court why workers should be entitled to jump court queues just because they were dying.”

(http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/opinion/julie-bishops-time-as-a-solicitor-for-asbestos-miners-is-under-the-spotlight/story-e6frezz0-1226518743163)

(http://www.independentaustralia.net/2013/politics/blue-murder-at-wittenoom/)

You, Ms Bishop, sort to deny workers dying of workplace asbestos disease, a quick resolution to their court case. What a low act.

Ms Bishop has also sat back, smirked or glared with her infamous death stare, without once offering a comment of disgust at her Liberal Party colleagues appalling sexist attacks on Ms Gillard, nor or a sisterhood word of support.

Bill Heffernan’s “deliberately barren” comment of Ms Gillard “won” the 2007 most sexist comment award. Something LNP MP’s are no doubt very proud of.

(http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/remark-voted-the-most-sexist-of-2007/2007/11/13/1194766619713.html)

(Ms Bishop herself has no children, lives with her partner, Peter Nattrass, himself a notorious former Mayor of Perth.)

David Farley, CEO Australia Agriculture Company and LNP supporter, referred to Ms Gillard as “an unproductive old cow”

(http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/remark-voted-the-most-sexist-of-2007/2007/11/13/1194766619713.html)

Abbott himself, with his deliberate sly comment re the Labor Government reducing the baby bonus “I think if the Government was a bit more experienced in this area, they wouldn’t come out with glib lines like that.”

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-opinion/abbott-baby-remarks-hit-barren-political-ground-20121023-283ir.html#ixzz2crH0QP7f

Grahame Morris, former Chief Adviser to John Howard said, “Prime Minster Julia Gillard should be kicked to death”

(http://www.independentaustralia.net/2012/politics/prominent-liberal-says-gillard-should-be-kicked-to-death/)

Steve Ciobo, LNP Gold Coast MP for Moncrieff, said of Gillard “Labor MP’s want to “slit her throat”.

(http://www.independentaustralia.net/2012/politics/prominent-liberal-says-gillard-should-be-kicked-to-death/)

Tony Abbott, Sophie Mirabella, Bronwyn Bishop, Indigenous WA MP Ken Wyatt, the young and impressionable National Party MP Wyatt Roy and other LNP MP’s also proudly stood in front of “Ditch the Witch” and “Bob Brown’s bitch “ signs.

Image

Where was Ms Bishop after these loathsome comments and photos were made public? Was she out there describing this vile, sexist behaviour as totally unacceptable?

No.

NOT. ONE. SINGLE. WORD.

Her silence only indicated her complicity in agreeing with these ugly, gutter, sexist tactics.

This is a woman whose loyalty gene has been stretched beyond belief – almost like an old pair of undies of which the elastic has well and truly gone and they are now falling down around her ankles. Firstly, runner up to Brendan Nelson. Then Malcolm Turnbull. Now Tony Abbott.  Every time the LNP has stabbed another leader in the back, there was Nurse Bishop pulling out the knife, patching up the wound of the man she had just declared her undying loyalty to – at the same time giving a wink and a nudge and declaring her new found love and loyalty to the next conservative white male in a blue tie.

Ms Bishop can switch her dysfunctional, erratic loyalty on and off like a light switch.

But, regardless, she will always be the LNP bridesmaid.

For as much as she would have dearly loved it, Julie Bishop will NEVER, EVER be Australia’s FIRST female Prime Minister. Nor, will she ever be the second or the third female Prime Minister.

She is also hardly likely to even be Australia’s first female ACTING Prime Minister because under the dodgy Coalition minority Government arrangements, that mantle goes to the Leader of National Party (and God forbid if Barnaby Joyce wins New England he could well be Acting PM whilst Abbott flits off overseas for all those meetings he once said Labor PM’s should never take.)

Julia Gillard also delivered for the Australian people two of the most progressive reforms in our political history – Better Schools reform, Disability Care reform… things that you Ms Bishop, would probably never even have thought of let alone deliver.

So, Ms Bishop, you are in no position to critisise Julia Gillard.

Because Julia Gillard will always have the title that you so desperately craved and are now so insanely jealous of.

Australia’s FIRST female Prime Minister.

Give that one the death stare Ms Bishop. Still wont change anything. You will still and always be – the second hand, constantly recycled bridesmaid of the LNP.

…and by the way Ms Bishop (to borrow from USA Democrat Senator LLoyd Bentson 1988)

“You are no Julia Gillard.”

 

Advertisements

Labor’s Regressive Policy

Some days the Prime Minister and the Labor Party make you so damn proud you want to shout it from the rooftops. 

Last week for example, when our strong and inspiring Prime Minister ripped Tony Abbott a new one and called him out for the sexist bully he is.

It was a day all Australians, regardless of whether you like or support the PM or not – a moment in political history – no one will forget in a hurry.

It makes so many of us Labor supporters proud when the Prime Minister announces new wide sweeping progressive reforms like the NDIS, Carbon Pricing, Aged Care reform and the Gonski Report. Progressive Labor Party reforms akin to the Whitlam Governments Medicare and University reforms.

But on that very same day last week, without very much fanfare, the Labor Party passed – with the help of the Coalition – a continuation of a Howard Governments policy to reduce the income of single parents. 

The Single Parent Pensions Bill is one of the most regressive policy platforms ever introduced by a Labor Government.

 This Bill, by reverting the Single Parent Payment to Newstart allowance once the youngest child turns 8, reduces the income support of a single parent by up to $100 per week, in some cases more.

That said – it is a slight improvement on the similar policy the Howard Government introduced in 2005 and effective July 1 2006 whereby Supporting Parent payments reduced to Newstart allowance when the youngest child turned 6!

It is designed to coerce single parents back into the workforce.

Now I fully understand that there are many single parents in our society who do not attempt in any way to seek work regardless of the age of their children. But these people – both women and men – are in the minority.

Some are relatively uneducated, have very poor social and employment skills and even if they did have reasonable skills, many live in rural areas where employment vacancies are almost non-existent.

On the other hand, there are many single parents living in the city where rents are exorbitant; transport costs; after-school care costs are an added financial burden.

Taking away up to $100 per week, reduces a single parent’s ability to seek work or re-training and to function as a healthy, happy parent.

The stress that is going to be added to their daily struggle is going to be enormous.

I believe there should be “carrots” not “sticks” to encourage single parents into the work force. 

Encouragement should be given to single parents to gain skills by returning to school, through our TAFE system (although now the Bailleau/O’Farrell/Newman Governments have slashed funding to TAFE’s that is going to be so much harder as well) or to enroll in a University.

How a single parent will be able to afford to do that now their income will be reduced by up to $100 per week is questionable (especially given the funding slashes to TAFE’s).

How will someone without a car manage? 

How will someone without extended family support manage?

How will someone who already pays exorbitant rent manage?

What if they can’t get a job for months/years on end no matter how hard they try?

What about those single parents who don’t receive any child support at all? (and there are thousands of them)

Were these questions even considered when this legislation was being considered?

Whose idea was this to crucify struggling single parents even further? 

If the Government is so desperate to find an extra $700m over four years ($175m per year) why then didn’t they have the courage to finally attack the rort that is negative gearing, a wealth creation system for wealthy people?

It is true that some people only understand money as a motivation to do anything.

But instead of taking money away from single parents that they use for their everyday living costs, why not offer incentives akin to the baby bonus?  If Governments can offer a baby bonus handout and provide extremely wealthy private schools with huge publicly funded handouts, why can’t they come up with a policy that is more “carrot” and less “stick”; where single parents are encouraged to succeed, not threatened and deprived of vital dollars with which to raise their children on a daily basis.

Those who will scream the loudest about “lazy single parents” are the very same people who will still put their hand out for every subsidy at every opportunity. I have never seen or heard of anyone saying “No thanks, I don’t need the baby bonus” or a wealthy private school say “No thanks, we don’t need taxpayers money to build a new rowing course or swimming pool”…. “let the Government keep it for other more worthy causes.”

I expect this sort of policy from Conservative Governments as it is par for the course for them but not from a Labor Government.

A very wise person once told me that “Governments, in the race to be the ‘best economic manager’ make decisions from a economic rationalist point of view, and in doing so lose all humanity and compassion.  Saying they are “good economic managers” is rhetoric Governments of both persuasions bang on about all the time. The real challenge in being a good economic manager is implementing socially responsible policy that is passionate and well managed.” 

This is not socially responsible policy.

It is cruel, heartless, regressive policy that will put many single parents further under the poverty line.

I want to see policy that will assist and inspire single parents to aspire to better opportunities. 

This does not do that.

I would expect it of Conservatives but not the ALP.

(As an aside – I am yet to hear Tony Abbott give a commitment in blood to wind back this policy. Seems as far as Mr. Abbott is concerned, it is an outrage to tax multi-billion dollar mining oligarchs and put a price on big polluters spewing filthy toxic waste into our atmosphere, but its ok to reduce the income of some of the poorest, most struggling people in our society.)