|
Post by Banjo on Sept 1, 2014 9:25:02 GMT 7
I find that a personal response from politicians does not mean a lot. The only Senator I ever exchanged a few personal emails with and seemed quite interested in us and asked a few pertinent questions is now the assistant minister for Social Security.
|
|
|
Post by hypoman on Sept 1, 2014 10:38:22 GMT 7
i just emailed her and sent a copy of my submission and some other info. every little bit helps.... good work D&K,and the rest of the team, thanks for the heads up!
|
|
|
Post by dougandkas on Sept 1, 2014 12:04:52 GMT 7
thanks hypoman... happy to help..
|
|
|
Post by richard on Sept 2, 2014 1:21:08 GMT 7
Frankly, I wouldn't be averse to only being paid for four weeks. I can manage to save up and run my finances around not having any income. But as a gay man, these changes are utterly devastating to me. The government will only allow additional time if you have "immediate family" overseas. That's great for heterosexuals, but just completely ignores the fact that there are other definitions of family in the world.
My best friends in Europe are my only family. The only ones that care for me. The only ones that want me around. But according to the government, that family isn't good enough. Yet again, I'm not valid to this government.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 2, 2014 4:28:46 GMT 7
Frankly, I wouldn't be averse to only being paid for four weeks. I can manage to save up and run my finances around not having any income. But as a gay man, these changes are utterly devastating to me. The government will only allow additional time if you have "immediate family" overseas. That's great for heterosexuals, but just completely ignores the fact that there are other definitions of family in the world. My best friends in Europe are my only family. The only ones that care for me. The only ones that want me around. But according to the government, that family isn't good enough. Yet again, I'm not valid to this government. >:DSorry, off topic! I just couldn't help myself. As a heterosexual man I know exactly where you are coming from! Family is family. Although being a step father, not legally but morally, as I am the only dad my daughter has known in her two short years. And yes I was there from the beginning, with all the current surrogacy bullshit involving Austalians, legal adoption will be a bigger nightmare here now than ever before. Being not legally married, as I'm far too young for that and it only complicates certain matters and also not being of Asian extraction, I now find I also have no immediate family as well, so am twice now, not only an invalid but also invalid with our government. The barstards don't discriminate richard. That'd be illegal. Cheers bear.
|
|
|
Post by Banjo on Sept 2, 2014 7:27:52 GMT 7
As I just posted else where, the government considers every decision with an eye to retaining power. They look at anything they judge to be less popular causes with mid level taxpayers and legislate accordingly.
Think the aborigines are getting too much money? Pow... take that. Gays or older single guys overseas at the taxpayers expense? ... A sure winner (we all know what THEY are up to). The list goes ever on.
|
|
|
Post by roxane on Sept 2, 2014 8:25:05 GMT 7
Frankly, I wouldn't be averse to only being paid for four weeks. I can manage to save up and run my finances around not having any income. But as a gay man, these changes are utterly devastating to me. The government will only allow additional time if you have "immediate family" overseas. That's great for heterosexuals, but just completely ignores the fact that there are other definitions of family in the world. My best friends in Europe are my only family. The only ones that care for me. The only ones that want me around. But according to the government, that family isn't good enough. Yet again, I'm not valid to this government. Sorry, but I have to clarify that. Yes, one criteria to get additional time is immediate family. But there are other criterias for which most people would not qualify, and that is that the immediate family member has to either have a unforeseen accident or a heart attack for ex, which put him / her into life threatening situation, and that would qualify for extension, the other one is the acute family crisis, an illness for ex. deteriorating so badly that the person is in hospital in critical condition. So having an immediate family doesn't give you much advantage at all.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 2, 2014 8:29:08 GMT 7
As I just posted else where, the government considers every decision with an eye to retaining power. They look at anything they judge to be less popular causes with mid level taxpayers and legislate accordingly. Think the aborigines are getting too much money? Pow... take that. Gays or older single guys overseas at the taxpayers expense? ... A sure winner (we all know what THEY are up to). The list goes ever on. yes the liberals are saying everyone is getting too much money except themselves and the wealthy who are the ones who are really hogging the taxpayers money
|
|
|
Post by roxane on Sept 2, 2014 8:30:16 GMT 7
tomorrow her speech First Speech in the Senate around 5:15pm, posted on FB Really looking forward to tomorrow WEDNESDAY September 3 as I deliver my First Speech in the Senate around 5:15pm. Thanks for your support and your encourgement to date. If you would like a transcript feel free to contact my wonderful staff via senator.lambie@aph.gov.au or in Tassie (03) 6431 2233 www.facebook.com/jacqui.lambie.9?fref=nfWould she mention anything about DSP? can we get a transcript?
|
|
|
Post by roxane on Sept 2, 2014 13:20:03 GMT 7
|
|
|
Post by Banjo on Sept 2, 2014 14:01:29 GMT 7
The abolition of the mining tax was one of the key election promises, the Libs would claim it was part of their mandate but Palmer still got a number of concessions.
They also promised to leave pensions alone so when it comes to the vote on that then we will see.
|
|
|
Post by roxane on Sept 2, 2014 14:35:13 GMT 7
The abolition of the mining tax was one of the key election promises, the Libs would claim it was part of their mandate but Palmer still got a number of concessions. They also promised to leave pensions alone so when it comes to the vote on that then we will see. which one? OAP and DSP? or just OAP? and which part? Sorry, but I don't trust them. we'll see what's she's up to in her speech tomorrow I'll bet she won't mention DSP. I sent her an email to request the transcript as she said on her FB page we can ask it, but no reply yet.
|
|
|
Post by immiadvice on Sept 2, 2014 14:37:43 GMT 7
There is no point. It doesn't matter what the Palmer United party do or the greens. Fact is the ALP will support the changes to portability so it will pass the Senate.
Their argument will be that there are already provisions for UP for the disabled with no work capacity. For those with some work capacity they can finance their overseas trips themselves.
No amount of submissions or petitions or anything else will get them to change their minds because of a few bad eggs fraudulently claiming dsp to fund their Bali surfing holiday.
|
|
|
Post by Banjo on Sept 4, 2014 7:21:31 GMT 7
|
|
|
Post by Banjo on Sept 4, 2014 7:48:36 GMT 7
|
|