Jump to content
Guest Gollywobbler

What would happen if....???

Recommended Posts

Guest Gollywobbler

Hi All

 

Watching from the UK, the Election looks like 2 possible Immigration programme outcomes to me.

 

1. Australia keeps a Labor Government but replaces Evans as the Minister for Immi.

 

2. Australia changes to the Coalition, possibly with either Philip Ruddock or Kevin Andrews taking up their historical jobs again as Minister for Immi.

 

Either way, it appears that Andrew Metcalfe is likely to be moved sideways out of DIAC and that he would probably be happy to depart from a department that has turned into a poisoned chalice to work for.

 

I'm trying to look ahead, to see what possible changes could happen.

 

I'd be very interested to know what other people think, please?

 

Many thanks

 

Gill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest36187

Or Option 3:

 

If no `deal` can be reached Australians go back to the voting polls and its all to play for!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who ever is in-charge please keep things in order and don't let people suffer both financially and mentally.

If you cant get your immigration program straight please have a look at other immigration programs around the world I bet you will learn a lot.


Visa:176 - Skills Assessment: ACS 01-Dec-2008-Sponsorship: WA Granted 20-May-2009 - Applied 176 :2-Sep-2009 CO Allocated: 16-Mar-2011, Medical Requests:27-Jan-2012 Medicals done: 2-Feb-2012 Visa Granted : 9-Feb-2012 Citizenship Application applied = 9th June 2016 Approved= 27th July 2016

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its funny when I was in the UK because the immigration process was so long and painful I assumed that all of Australia knew about our struggles.

 

They really dont. The only time immigration as been mentioned as far as I can see was when they were talking about stopping " boat people"

 

And there was an interview with someone from WA to say that there is a huge shortage in skills and that the Government needs to address it ( no s**t Sherlock! )

 

So not sure what will happen whoever gets in but it will be interesting to find out:biggrin:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Joanne

Please have lots of Green tea (Jasmine),soups and panadol you will be fine :)


Visa:176 - Skills Assessment: ACS 01-Dec-2008-Sponsorship: WA Granted 20-May-2009 - Applied 176 :2-Sep-2009 CO Allocated: 16-Mar-2011, Medical Requests:27-Jan-2012 Medicals done: 2-Feb-2012 Visa Granted : 9-Feb-2012 Citizenship Application applied = 9th June 2016 Approved= 27th July 2016

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Gollywobbler
Or Option 3:

 

If no `deal` can be reached Australians go back to the voting polls and its all to play for!

 

Hi Joanne

 

I discounted your Option 3, partly because it seems to be a very unpopular thought out in Oz. The idea met with equal disapproval when it was mooted by the pundits in the UK in May 2010.

 

Also, I was reading the Aussie newspapers on-line early today. Malcolm Fraser used to be the PM of Australia (ages ago, I think.) Apparently he has studied Constitutional Law in the UK and in Oz. According to Mr Fraser, the proper constitutional route is that the sitting PM is allowed to form a minority Government if s/he so wishes. Such a Government might not last for more than a week before a vote of No Confidence forces another General Election but it seems that there is no constitutional requirement to have a working majority before one tries to form a Government.

 

That idea would have been impractical and stupid in the UK because the gap between the numbers of seats on each side was too wide. There would have been a No Confidence vote the day after opening a new Parliament.

 

It seems to be much closer in Oz, though. Andrew Wilkie seems to like the idea that a vote from him alone could bring the Government down. Julia Gillard might decide to run the risk of keeping Mr Wilkie on side, I suppose.

 

Cheers

 

Gill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What would happen if....???

 

2. Australia changes to the Coalition, possibly with either Philip Ruddock or Kevin Andrews taking up their historical jobs again as Minister for Immi.

 

I would cry in my coffee :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They have been on the news all day saying if they did have another Ballot it would cost $130 million and how everyone was hoping it wouldnt happen as it was too expensive.

 

 

I dont know about everyone else but I get the impression that world wide people are losing interest in politicians, while I understand why, I do think this is a grave situation and everyone needs to be very concerned!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
They have been on the news all day saying if they did have another Ballot it would cost $130 million and how everyone was hoping it wouldnt happen as it was too expensive.

 

 

I dont know about everyone else but I get the impression that world wide people are losing interest in politicians, while I understand why, I do think this is a grave situation and everyone needs to be very concerned!

 

What do you think is going to happen?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2. Australia changes to the Coalition, possibly with either Philip Ruddock or Kevin Andrews taking up their historical jobs again as Minister for Immi.
This would be a best option. Yes that is true that option 3 is unpopular in OZ. All the three independents are stressing on no early elections.

 

Here are few links to the statements by independents..

1..http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/08/25/2992970.htm

 

2. http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/08/25/2993448.htm


HRC|496|30.08.07|Occup-Public Relations Profess|Ack -24.1.08|C.O.-20.10.09,11-05-2012|Med-09.09,06.12|PCC-09.09,15.05|Job veri-3.09.09|Grant-Got it Finally... on 18-June-2012:biglaugh:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What do you think is going to happen?

 

 

Because at the moment all there is, is apathy. Whilst not voting or voting a protest vote is valid, it then leads the world open to extremist views. Passionate people vote, dispassionate people dont. I think that could be scary.:eek:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This would be a best option. Yes that is true that option 3 is unpopular in OZ. All the three independents are stressing on no early elections.

 

Much rather option 3 than option 2 :biggrin: Ruddock and Andrews both displayed dodgy morality and ministerial judgement IMO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest JK2510

Whatever the outcome. There is now an urgent need to get the visa system working fastly and smoothly. It has been almost 1 year since the states were affected by sept 23rd changes and apart from the CSL list very few applicants have received visas.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Gollywobbler
Because at the moment all there is, is apathy. Whilst not voting or voting a protest vote is valid, it then leads the world open to extremist views. Passionate people vote, dispassionate people dont. I think that could be scary.:eek:

 

Hi Catherine

 

I agree completely. My impressions in the UK are:

 

1. The lot of them are completely dishonest and they are all lying, so it doesn't really matter what they say;

 

2. They are all completely incompetent as well - they just each make a complete hash of the job in different ways;

 

3. All of them are ideological, political pygmies with nothing in particular to say and no real ideas about anything;

 

4. All of them yap on the whole time - they are too "in one's face" because they never shut up;

 

5. I'm so bored with the whole thing that I'm inured to the idea of a rubbishy Government.

 

I suspect that quite a few Aussies might feel the same way.

 

Cheers

 

Gill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest36187

A lot of people voted for `the lesser of 2 evils`.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Gill,

 

Frankly, I would rather have another election than have the whole process of government being held to ransom by one or more "independents".

 

At the end of the day it is tweedledum and tweedledee between the major parties as both of them have the sense not to frighten the economic horses too much.

 

Unfortunately I suspect it will boil down to one of the independents having the gift of government in his sweaty palm and with that absolute power will come the temptation of naming his own price regardless of the consequences. I also suspect the temptation to pay whatever is demanded will prove too great for the careerist politicians.

 

I don't know how much you've read about it but there is a massive amount of fairy dust being tossed around at the moment.

 

A sensible migration policy is the furthest from any politician's mind.

 

Now, more than ever, it is all about power and the abililty to direct community resources to their own pet projects.


Les Mighalls BDS LLB(Hons) LDS FACLM, MARA Reg. No. 0639714

Migration Assistance Australia

www.migrationassistance.com.au

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In an ideal world, the leader of both parties would be shot.

 

Then the parties have a week to decide a new leader, and another election.

 

(with a massive swing into the blue, and get rid of all the champagne socialists and watermellons)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Gollywobbler
A lot of people voted for `the lesser of 2 evils`.

 

Hi Joanne

 

Which is exactly what I did in the UK. I thought all 3 of the main parties were talking rubbish and that none of them could be trusted to keep their word about anything.

 

I abhorred and despised Brown and the shockers running the Labour Government show under Brown. I despised their crazy "programme of ideas," too.

 

I didn't like the look of the Lib-Dems either so I decided that the Tories were the lesser of the 3 evils, plus I'm a natural, traditional Tory in any case.

 

Now that Cameron (the Tory) is in power, I think he is useless but I don't think that any of the others would be any better.

 

I certainly voted for the "least worst" and I suspect that the trouble with modern politics is that there doesn't seem to be anything else. :no:

 

Cheers

 

Gill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Gollywobbler

Hi Les

 

A sensible migration policy is the furthest from any politician's mind.

That is exactly what I noticed when I read the Australian this morning. The List of 7 Departmental Secretaries that the Independents want to talk to did not include Andrew Metcalfe, I noticed. Considering the vast number of column inches that have been devoted to:

 

  • irregular martime arrivals;
  • International Education; and
  • what skills (if any) Australia needs to attract

Metcalfe seems to have escaped the grilling that, personally, I'd want to give him.

 

None of them actually care about other people's lives, I suspect.

 

Very depressing, I find it.

 

Cheers

 

Gill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I dont know much the politics and even the tricks of Oz politician, but all i can say for the moment am just WISHING and PRAYING for RIGHT PERSON to take over, so immi can fulfill the ever green DREAMS of thousands of souls from all over the world... :yes:

 

Everyone goes through struggles and pains in the long journey to Oz... Wish you all success and stay positive.... Soon our dreams will come true

 

Thanks


Rebekah * waiting for online system to be up and running to apply for 887...... :yes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi Joanne

 

I discounted your Option 3, partly because it seems to be a very unpopular thought out in Oz. The idea met with equal disapproval when it was mooted by the pundits in the UK in May 2010.

 

Also, I was reading the Aussie newspapers on-line early today. Malcolm Fraser used to be the PM of Australia (ages ago, I think.) Apparently he has studied Constitutional Law in the UK and in Oz. According to Mr Fraser, the proper constitutional route is that the sitting PM is allowed to form a minority Government if s/he so wishes. Such a Government might not last for more than a week before a vote of No Confidence forces another General Election but it seems that there is no constitutional requirement to have a working majority before one tries to form a Government.

 

That idea would have been impractical and stupid in the UK because the gap between the numbers of seats on each side was too wide. There would have been a No Confidence vote the day after opening a new Parliament.

 

It seems to be much closer in Oz, though. Andrew Wilkie seems to like the idea that a vote from him alone could bring the Government down. Julia Gillard might decide to run the risk of keeping Mr Wilkie on side, I suppose.

 

Cheers

 

Gill

 

Gill, Malcom Fraser was Prime Minister some time ago -after 1975 and the big constitutional issue with Whitlam being sacked. I have come to respect him in his old age as he really has turned into an elder statesman and someone of principle. He actually resigned a few mths ago from the Liberal Party because he felt it had become too conservative and not small 'l' liberal and he did not like the racist overtones in the statements made about boat people. He also thinks Abbott is all over the place. See this article:

 

Malcolm Fraser Quits Liberal Party | Former Prime Minister


Sandra Maxfield LLB (Hons), BA

www.eurekamigration.com; Lawyer admitted in Victoria, Australia & New York, USA. MARN 1066311

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Independents constituents are demanding they go with coalition

 

However most people me included do not want a handful of mps holding a gun to the head of the government.

 

As I have said before its immaterial in a way it would be much better to go with Julia as the greens will control the senate and the labour party is more likely to get legislation through. This is looking at it from an Australian perspective.


Petals

:ssign15:taking no prisoners :wink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
As I have said before its immaterial in a way it would be much better to go with Julia as the greens will control the senate and the labour party is more likely to get legislation through. This is looking at it from an Australian perspective.

 

But then after another term of the champagne socialists and watermellons, Australia will be in a much worse state. Massive debt, massive government, everyone poor.

 

Reds spend it, tax you and drag everyone down to the bottom.

Blues save it, encorage you and make you stand on your own two feet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Has anyone actually taken a look at the published policies and statements of intent from the Australian Greens?

 

These are the people who will control the Australian Government through the Senate next year, unless Labor and the Liberals join forces to stop them.

 

If the Greens control immigration you can kiss goodbye to any skilled migration. All they really want to allow for is refugee entry and family re-union.

 

Read this:

 

Immigration and Refugees | The Australian Greens


Les Mighalls BDS LLB(Hons) LDS FACLM, MARA Reg. No. 0639714

Migration Assistance Australia

www.migrationassistance.com.au

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Gollywobbler

Hi Les

 

I hear you but my impression is that the triumvirate of the 3 Independents seem to think that they will be in charge of the Aussie Government's policies from now on.

 

The whole thing looks like a farce to someone sitting thousands of miles away. I think that Abbott has done exactly the right thing in telling the three Independents to behave. God knows why Gillard is playing pussy-foot with them. Their idea seems to be that every Aussie voter voted for the three of them to be in charge of mucking everyone else around.

 

I think that Australia needs to deal with those 3 or the parliamentary machine will simply become paralysed, it seems to me?

 

My gut-instinct is that another General Election is likely to be the only way out of the muddle. I suspect that next time, the constituents of the 3 Independents would vote for their preferred main parties sooner than discover that they have elected 3 men who are nothing but a nuisance to everyone if they get half a chance.

 

Cheers

 

Gill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×