2013 Election Year Party Policies- Liberal

[tigersnake]

I think that is fair enough in a way, I think this idea that oppositions should throw out fully formed policies without the benefit of public service assistance to develop and cost them is a bit unrealistic.

I suppose it would be nice for voters to know beforehand if they are the ones that will be on the receiving end of the tough decisions though.

Depends what your definition of fully formed is. Both parties know how everything works. Policies that are thereabouts, in the ball park, is the what people reasonably expect. Tweaking at the edges after getting in is fine and normal practise.

Everything is on the record. Governments typically shuffle funds around a bit, a bit of creative accounting, but its always easily deciphered by politicians and public servants.

 

[mld]

Well duh.

:-\

 

[Brodders17]

Why should his policies come out right now.

I agree that all thetime he should be telling us what needs to be done and what they will be concentrating on, but I disagree they have to announce how they are going to do it, all the time.

Closer to the election thats when they need to do that, not yet.

agree with that. the labour preoccupation with full lib policies fully costed is over the top.
IMO what the Libs should clarify soonish, and they have a little, is a timeframe for policy announcements and costings.

 

[Baloo]

Wasn't the idea of the opposition policies getting costed a Howard initiative ?

 

[Liverpool]

agree with that. the labour preoccupation with full lib policies fully costed is over the top.
IMO what the Libs should clarify soonish, and they have a little, is a timeframe for policy announcements and costings.

I'm guessing we'll know more after the May budget...as this will change the economic landscape somewhat and give the Libs some idea of how much money they have to play with (if any).

 

[Tigers of Old]

I don't often agree with Julie Bishop but she's right that women can't have it all. Neither can men.

http://www.perthnow.com.au/news/julie-bishop-says-women-cant-have-it-all/comments-e6frg12c-1226574610501

 

[MB78]

I don't often agree with Julie Bishop but she's right that women can't have it all. Neither can men.

http://www.perthnow.com.au/news/julie-bishop-says-women-cant-have-it-all/comments-e6frg12c-1226574610501

I agree as well. We all have to make sacrifices in our personal lives and working lives.

 

[Rosy]

What's the point of Julie's article? That describes life for everyone. What she describes might apply to her personally but who is she to judge other peoples' lives? She's seemingly not qualified to know what it's like to have kids and career. The circumstances would differ for every individual.

 

[Liverpool]

I don't often agree with Julie Bishop but she's right that women can't have it all. Neither can men.

http://www.perthnow.com.au/news/julie-bishop-says-women-cant-have-it-all/comments-e6frg12c-1226574610501

I also agree, in particularly that its for both men AND women.

Julie Bishop speaks sense as she made choices that meant her career flourished at the expense of having kids....and that shows some sacrifice and responsibility.
Its a pretty sensible and forthright comment from her, I think.

 

[Tigers of Old]

What's the point of Julie's article? That describes life for everyone. What she describes might apply to her personally but who is she to judge other peoples' lives? She's seemingly not qualified to know what it's like to have kids and career. The circumstances would differ for every individual.

Of course circumstances differ for every person/family but I think she's simply offering her opinion on a topic that doesn't get talked about anywhere near enough.

Whether you agree with her or not it's good that these issues are coming to the fore.

There's something very unhealthy in modern Western society IMO where women feel the need to be superhuman and have a family AND a career.
That they have a career and family is fine but men on the flipside have not really been embraced by the vast majority of society as home carers and often struggle to know where they fit in society when put out of work.

So the whole of western society is now built around 2 parents working fulltime just to make ends meet and something gives.
Often that's parenting with kids being directly affected which sees us with many of the issues we're facing in todays society.

No we don't want to send mothers back into the 50s but I would certainly like to see society embrace the notion of having one parent working whilst the other manages home life and their children's welfare.

My time in Thailand was interesting regarding this and they had a model I thought worked as well as anything we've currently got.
Both parents went out to work FT when they were young and strong enough to do so and the grandparents basically raise the children.
However without tarring all with the same brush most GP in modern society only see their kids fairly infrequently as they enjoy their retirement savings.

 

[Rosy]

I also agree, in particularly that its for both men AND women.

Julie Bishop speaks sense as she made choices that meant her career flourished at the expense of having kids....and that shows some sacrifice and responsibility.
Its a pretty sensible and forthright comment from her, I think.

The comments Ms Bishop, 56, married Perth property developer Neil Gillon in 1986, but they split after five years. She had expected to have children, but said the circumstances didn't arise. I've never been through a grieving process and now I wouldn't, because what's the point?" she said. "I'm in my mid-50s, I'm not having kids, there's no point lamenting what was or what could have been suggest more to me that her lack of children was because the cards didn't fall that way following a split with her husband rather than a career choice. She didn't indicate her career would have been less had she been a mother.

 

[Rosy]

Of course circumstances differ for every person/family but I think she's simply offering her opinion on a topic that doesn't get talked about anywhere near enough.

Whether you agree with her or not it's good that these issues are coming to the fore.

There's something very unhealthy in modern Western society IMO where women feel the need to be superhuman and have a family AND a career.
That they have a career and family is fine but men on the flipside have not really been embraced by the vast majority of society as home carers and often struggle to know where they fit in society when put out of work.

So the whole of western society is now built around 2 parents working fulltime just to make ends meet and something gives.
Often that's parenting with kids being directly affected which sees us with many of the issues we're facing in todays society.

No we don't want to send mothers back into the 50s but I would certainly like to see society embrace the notion of having one parent working whilst the other manages home life and their children's welfare.

My time in Thailand was interesting regarding this and they had a model I thought worked as well as anything we've currently got.
Both parents went out to work FT when they were young and strong enough to do so and the grandparents basically raise the children.
However without tarring all with the same brush most GP in modern society only see their kids fairly infrequently as they enjoy their retirement savings.

Tony Abbott couldn't have come out with those kind of comments because he has a high profile career as well as kids. Julie would know that there are successful female politicians who are mothers. Is she suggesting they or their children are handicapped by that? Ita Buttrose is an example of a very high profile career woman who has managed to be successful and raise a family.

I never had my children babysat. If I worked they were there with me. That was my choice and my priority. I have a good friend whose husband raised the kids while she followed her career aspirations. I have family who did that as well.

I find the picture you paint of grandparents very sad. It's certainly not the perception I get. We mind our grandchildren while their parents work. I am honoured to so so. Their other grandparents are the same. It's not a grandparent's duty though and at times their life has to come first. I know a lot of people who rely on grandparents babysitting while they go to work. I meet them each time I take my granddaughter to the park. If granparents want to "enjoy their retirement savings" then good luck to them. Each to their own.

I reckon Julie's comments are for political gain. Julia Baird summed it up for me in The Drum

When I asked Bishop for ABC's Sunday Profile in 2006 what she thought of the constant focus on the fact that Labor leadership contender Julia Gillard did not have children, she responded:

I am waiting for the day when commentary about politicians focuses on their abilities, their beliefs, the strategies that they put forward, the policies that they believe in rather than the fact that they are a woman or indeed a man, and I think we need to get away from that novelty factor female politicians seem to attract because as I've pointed out, there are many women in Parliament now.

Hear, hear. We're all still waiting for that day.

 

[tigergollywog]

Ms Bishop had expected to have children, but said the circumstances didn't arise.

Did anyone tell her she has to take her undies off?

 

[Willo]

Did anyone tell her she has to take her undies off?

Not sure about that, but plenty of women choose to remain unmarried or not to have kids, it's their personal choice, refer to our current PM.
Some women marry but are unable to have kids and choose to prioritise their career. Nothing wrong with that either.

 

[tigergollywog]

Not sure about that, but plenty of women choose to remain unmarried or not to have kids, it's their personal choice, refer to our current PM.
Some women marry but are unable to have kids and choose to prioritise their career. Nothing wrong with that either.

agree. I have days I wish I had been unable to have kids earlier. The only career i regret not prioritising was CHF for Richmond, but growing 15 cm combined with the other work required (improving my kicking, marking, tackling, running, endurance and timing) would have been all-consuming. Nothing wrong with that either.

 

[Liverpool]

Not sure about that, but plenty of women choose to remain unmarried or not to have kids, it's their personal choice, refer to our current PM.
Some women marry but are unable to have kids and choose to prioritise their career. Nothing wrong with that either.

I know mate...and Julie Bishop simply stated her position, how she ended up in the position she finds herself, and that she believes women can't have it all.

To get criticism for stating an opinion is a bit rich, especially when that opinion is pretty fair, if you ask me.

Women can't have it all but seeing that this thread about the Liberal party policies, then its good to see that the Libs have a plan to try and at least make it easy as possible to raise children and keep a career going.

The paid parental leave policy is far superior than the ALP one in many respects and it will be interesting to see if Gillard/ALP do a Kevin07 and start 'copycatting' to try and nullify it.

 

[Tigers of Old]

Each to their own.

No doubt and your POV is just a perspective of your own situation just like Bishop's. No better or worse.

BTW I certainly didn't paint all GP's as the same.

 

[Rosy]

No doubt and your POV is just a perspective of your own situation just like Bishop's. No better or worse.

I wasn't tryign to be better by giving some examples that it doesn't have to be as Julie said. If she was referring to her own situation fair enough but she generalised in regard to women. Julie Bishop mightn't be able to have it all but other women, and men, might be able to.

Ms Bishop said she agreed with a US academic who argued it was impossible for women to have top careers and be mothers unless they were rich, self-employed or super-human.

"I'm in the Anne-Marie Slaughter school - women can't have it all," Ms Bishop said. "They can have plenty of choices, but at the end of the day, they choose something which means they can't have something else."

People can have top careers and be parents. Many do, women included.

 

[tigergollywog]

People can have top careers and be parents. Many do, women included.

Youde have to ask their kids Rosy. I tend to think a high powered career and engaged parenthood are mutually exclusive. Course there are super people who are exceptions, but the kids of heavy-hitters I know never really saw or knew the heavy hitting parent.

 

[Rosy]

Youde have to ask their kids Rosy. I tend to think a high powered career and engaged parenthood are mutually exclusive. Course there are super people who are exceptions, but the kids of heavy-hitters I know never really saw or knew the heavy hitting parent.

Yep but we're talking parents rather than women as Julie is. Tony Abbott has the women in his household speak for him and paint a picture of a happy family life. That could equally be achieved in a family where the roles are reversed and the woman is the high powered career person. Kevin Rudd seems to have a nice, happy family too in a situation when both he and Therese are high profile professionals.

I'd like to know what Ita Buttrose's kids think. She's one of the highest profile women in Australia and she's always indicated family was her priority.

Agreeing it was impossible for women to have top careers and be mothers unless they were rich, self-employed or super-human doesn't consider reversed traditional roles where the father might stay with the kids, or grandparents, or work fitted in around school hours, or dinner time etc.

High powered career people can still provide kids with a better, balanced upbringing and lots of quality time compared to some stay at home parents.