TOPIC:

swan42 wrote:

Beasley Hutton wrote:

gtrxuone wrote:

Beasley Hutton wrote: The original Narrows Bridge was built in the late 1950s, it opened in 1959.

BH there was two Wa Premiers in the 1950's.They both done about 5 years each.
Sir Ross Mclarity LNP 1950-55..,,,,,Albert Hawke ALP 1955-59.
They probably both contributed to the building of the Narrows.

Speaking of bridges GTR how magnificent is the Matagarup Bridge especially at night when all lit up...another WA icon from the Barnett era!

Seriously BH? Laughable.

42 are you suggesting the Matagarup Bridge is not a magnificent finished product, wonderful design, brilliantly coloured when lit up at night, gives the many folk who use it a view of the Swan River and City/EP not previously viable for many and just a marvellous new asset for the people of WA and visitors to our great state???

Beasley Hutton wrote:

swan42 wrote:

Beasley Hutton wrote:

gtrxuone wrote:

Beasley Hutton wrote: The original Narrows Bridge was built in the late 1950s, it opened in 1959.

BH there was two Wa Premiers in the 1950's.They both done about 5 years each.
Sir Ross Mclarity LNP 1950-55..,,,,,Albert Hawke ALP 1955-59.
They probably both contributed to the building of the Narrows.

Speaking of bridges GTR how magnificent is the Matagarup Bridge especially at night when all lit up...another WA icon from the Barnett era!

Seriously BH? Laughable.

42 are you suggesting the Matagarup Bridge is not a magnificent finished product, wonderful design, brilliantly coloured when lit up at night, gives the many folk who use it a view of the Swan River and City/EP not previously viable for many and just a marvellous new asset for the people of WA and visitors to our great state???

BH perhaps you can go through the progress of the bridge from the time a contract was signed until it was built. Maybe explain whether there were any delays.

swan42 wrote:

Beasley Hutton wrote:

swan42 wrote:

Beasley Hutton wrote:

gtrxuone wrote:

Beasley Hutton wrote: The original Narrows Bridge was built in the late 1950s, it opened in 1959.

BH there was two Wa Premiers in the 1950's.They both done about 5 years each.
Sir Ross Mclarity LNP 1950-55..,,,,,Albert Hawke ALP 1955-59.
They probably both contributed to the building of the Narrows.

Speaking of bridges GTR how magnificent is the Matagarup Bridge especially at night when all lit up...another WA icon from the Barnett era!

Seriously BH? Laughable.

42 are you suggesting the Matagarup Bridge is not a magnificent finished product, wonderful design, brilliantly coloured when lit up at night, gives the many folk who use it a view of the Swan River and City/EP not previously viable for many and just a marvellous new asset for the people of WA and visitors to our great state???

BH perhaps you can go through the progress of the bridge from the time a contract was signed until it was built. Maybe explain whether there were any delays.

Who bloody cares 42?!
No doubt there were similar initial issues with the Sydney Harbour Bridge, Opera House, Docklands etc but all long forgotten now.
You would have to be a pretty sad person to continually bemoan the great assets recently built in WA just because it was all done under Colin Barnett and the Libs!
It is now built, looks and is magnificent and is a great asset to the state of WA for generations to come.

swan42 wrote:

DD wrote: Because your mob get spooked easily by the polls and yes both sides are as bad as one another in that regard. They (Labor) if they win government won't go to the next election with Shorten as PM if the polls show they are headed for defeat. Albo, Bowen and co will be crunching the numbers and working the phones in no time.

What is your point about past Prime Ministers? Trying to deflect and make me look silly? I'm not a, student of politics nor a historian like a few people on here so what's your point?

DD my point is that (silly) Billy McMahon deposed Gorton a sitting PM.

With respect to your assertion that Shorten would be replaced as PM is predicated on Labor winning government and then the polls going south post the election is unlikely in the extreme given what is likely to be the result in the next Federal election.

What do you think of the proposal that there will only be 10 sitting days leading up to the election in 2019? Is Morrison trying to hide from being held accountable by Parliament.? If there is only going to be 10 sitting days, why doesn't Morrison call an election now?

Why should he? Your boy should be relieved and deep down inside I'm sure he is because Morrison kicks his arse every day. Your bloke is just a grandstander with a bag full of lollies to hand out at election time. This country can't afford another Labor government and people are fools who let your mob back in.

Concise, and to the point:

"Australians are outraged that this Government is too scared to turn up to Parliament, with the Parliament just sitting — after it rises next week — for 10 days in the next eight months. The rest of Australia doesn't get to take months and months off work when it feels scared about coming to work, so why is the Prime Minister insisting on a part-time Parliament?

"I have wondered what would happen to members of the CFMEU if they ran an industrial action campaign and proposed this in the lunch shed one morning: 'I have a great idea. Let's only go to work for 10 days in the next eight months.' They would probably be sacked. Indeed, this Government would like to put them in jail. But it's one standard for the Morrison ministry and another standard for the workers of Australia.

"The part-time parliament, however, points to a bigger issue. This is a Government that has simply ceased to govern. Not only have they given up governing but they have given up pretending to govern. They have no agenda and no legislation. They are just being swept along by the currents of hate and division in the river that is the Government Coalition ranks."

Well said Bill.

ps it is the government which holds the bag with all the lollies. The country is still recovering from all the lollies Howard and Costello frittered away with gay abandon in 2000 - 2007.

DD wrote:

swan42 wrote:

DD wrote: Because your mob get spooked easily by the polls and yes both sides are as bad as one another in that regard. They (Labor) if they win government won't go to the next election with Shorten as PM if the polls show they are headed for defeat. Albo, Bowen and co will be crunching the numbers and working the phones in no time.

What is your point about past Prime Ministers? Trying to deflect and make me look silly? I'm not a, student of politics nor a historian like a few people on here so what's your point?

DD my point is that (silly) Billy McMahon deposed Gorton a sitting PM.

With respect to your assertion that Shorten would be replaced as PM is predicated on Labor winning government and then the polls going south post the election is unlikely in the extreme given what is likely to be the result in the next Federal election.

What do you think of the proposal that there will only be 10 sitting days leading up to the election in 2019? Is Morrison trying to hide from being held accountable by Parliament.? If there is only going to be 10 sitting days, why doesn't Morrison call an election now?

Why should he? Your boy should be relieved and deep down inside I'm sure he is because Morrison kicks his arse every day. Your bloke is just a grandstander with a bag full of lollies to hand out at election time. This country can't afford another Labor government and people are fools who let your mob back in.

DD let's start with some facts which may be a foreign concept for you. During the most recent upheaval in the leadership debacle within the Liberal Party the Liberal Party closed down the House of Representatives for the day. The Liberals could not even organise a leadership coup without affecting the workings of the House of Representatives.

Fact number 2: the current Newspoll shows a 45-55 Coalition-Labor 2pp.

Fact number 3: Scott Morrison has decided that there will only be 10 sitting days in 2019 prior to the Federal election. If Morrison is so good and Shorten is so bad, why would he restrict the number of sitting days? Why would Morrison not try to have the greatest exposure by maximising rather than minimising the number of days parliament would sit prior to the election?

Fact number 4: the ALP have been releasing their policies for many months.

Fact number 5: Scott Morrison, John Howard et al were VEHEMENTLY opposed to the RC into the banks and the ones in Parliament voted against it consistently.

In summary, you and the Liberals may have a born to rule mentality that is no longer believed and followed by the Australian voters.

jackspratt wrote: Concise, and to the point:

"Australians are outraged that this Government is too scared to turn up to Parliament, with the Parliament just sitting — after it rises next week — for 10 days in the next eight months. The rest of Australia doesn't get to take months and months off work when it feels scared about coming to work, so why is the Prime Minister insisting on a part-time Parliament?

"I have wondered what would happen to members of the CFMEU if they ran an industrial action campaign and proposed this in the lunch shed one morning: 'I have a great idea. Let's only go to work for 10 days in the next eight months.' They would probably be sacked. Indeed, this Government would like to put them in jail. But it's one standard for the Morrison ministry and another standard for the workers of Australia.

"The part-time parliament, however, points to a bigger issue. This is a Government that has simply ceased to govern. Not only have they given up governing but they have given up pretending to govern. They have no agenda and no legislation. They are just being swept along by the currents of hate and division in the river that is the Government Coalition ranks."

Well said Bill.

ps it is the government which holds the bag with all the lollies. The country is still recovering from all the lollies Howard and Costello frittered away with gay abandon in 2000 - 2007.

JS they already have form on this: during their leadership coup, they failed to turn up for a day in the House of Reps.

Beasley Hutton wrote:

swan42 wrote:

Beasley Hutton wrote:

swan42 wrote:

Beasley Hutton wrote:

gtrxuone wrote:

Beasley Hutton wrote: The original Narrows Bridge was built in the late 1950s, it opened in 1959.

BH there was two Wa Premiers in the 1950's.They both done about 5 years each.
Sir Ross Mclarity LNP 1950-55..,,,,,Albert Hawke ALP 1955-59.
They probably both contributed to the building of the Narrows.

Speaking of bridges GTR how magnificent is the Matagarup Bridge especially at night when all lit up...another WA icon from the Barnett era!

Seriously BH? Laughable.

42 are you suggesting the Matagarup Bridge is not a magnificent finished product, wonderful design, brilliantly coloured when lit up at night, gives the many folk who use it a view of the Swan River and City/EP not previously viable for many and just a marvellous new asset for the people of WA and visitors to our great state???

BH perhaps you can go through the progress of the bridge from the time a contract was signed until it was built. Maybe explain whether there were any delays.

Who bloody cares 42?!
No doubt there were similar initial issues with the Sydney Harbour Bridge, Opera House, Docklands etc but all long forgotten now.
You would have to be a pretty sad person to continually bemoan the great assets recently built in WA just because it was all done under Colin Barnett and the Libs!
It is now built, looks and is magnificent and is a great asset to the state of WA for generations to come.

BH the bridge was not built during the time of the Barnett government. In classic Trumpesque like fashion, you simply choose to ignore the budget blow-out regarding the bridge. You ignore the asbestos and water contamination at PCH. You ignore the water contamination at the ridiculously and anachronistically named "betty's jetty" development.

You ignore Barnett's failure of losing our triple AAA credit rating during the mining boom. You ignore Barnett's singular failure to develop rail infrastructure during his government and don't even try to reconcile this failure by mentioning the Forrestfield line. From Charles Courts decision to close the Freo line; tricky dicky's bizarre decision to try to build the Mandurah line to go via Oats Street;and to close the Midland Workshop, it is inherent in the Liberal Party's DNA not to develop public transport.

swan42 wrote:

DD wrote:

swan42 wrote:

DD wrote: Because your mob get spooked easily by the polls and yes both sides are as bad as one another in that regard. They (Labor) if they win government won't go to the next election with Shorten as PM if the polls show they are headed for defeat. Albo, Bowen and co will be crunching the numbers and working the phones in no time.

What is your point about past Prime Ministers? Trying to deflect and make me look silly? I'm not a, student of politics nor a historian like a few people on here so what's your point?

DD my point is that (silly) Billy McMahon deposed Gorton a sitting PM.

With respect to your assertion that Shorten would be replaced as PM is predicated on Labor winning government and then the polls going south post the election is unlikely in the extreme given what is likely to be the result in the next Federal election.

What do you think of the proposal that there will only be 10 sitting days leading up to the election in 2019? Is Morrison trying to hide from being held accountable by Parliament.? If there is only going to be 10 sitting days, why doesn't Morrison call an election now?

Why should he? Your boy should be relieved and deep down inside I'm sure he is because Morrison kicks his arse every day. Your bloke is just a grandstander with a bag full of lollies to hand out at election time. This country can't afford another Labor government and people are fools who let your mob back in.

DD let's start with some facts which may be a foreign concept for you. During the most recent upheaval in the leadership debacle within the Liberal Party the Liberal Party closed down the House of Representatives for the day. The Liberals could not even organise a leadership coup without affecting the workings of the House of Representatives.

Fact number 2: the current Newspoll shows a 45-55 Coalition-Labor 2pp.

Fact number 3: Scott Morrison has decided that there will only be 10 sitting days in 2019 prior to the Federal election. If Morrison is so good and Shorten is so bad, why would he restrict the number of sitting days? Why would Morrison not try to have the greatest exposure by maximising rather than minimising the number of days parliament would sit prior to the election?

Fact number 4: the ALP have been releasing their policies for many months.

Fact number 5: Scott Morrison, John Howard et al were VEHEMENTLY opposed to the RC into the banks and the ones in Parliament voted against it consistently.

In summary, you and the Liberals may have a born to rule mentality that is no longer believed and followed by the Australian voters.

So far you have given me nothing except penalty rates will be restored. Hit me with the rest of Labor's policies because I'm not hearing them in parliament. When was the poll you rave on about? After the Victorian election? Firstly results in state elections have Jack shit to do with federal elections, if they did then whoever is in power federally would be right across the country in every state.


It's a long way away the next federal election. I suggest you and Buffalo Bill both cool your jets.

Considering many hate the Vics this topic eventually got off the tracks ( as usual).. Who cares what other states do. Most states have inhabitants who dont care about others.