Victorian Election 2010

[Scoop]

In fact I can't believe people can have a go at him, he has been very gracious in Victory, has not boasted about anything, even when he was applauded on his first day he told his members to cut it out. He has literally rolled his sleeves up and done what he said he will do. He has been a breathe of fresh air as far as I am concerned. Early days and nothing to excited about, but gotta admire a polly who isn't talking himself up and is just getting on with the job.

Yeah, reckon his first week has been pretty solid. Think Ted is working on the old sales theory of "under promise over deliver".

The only thing I don't like is the fact that is that he doesn't like beer.

I am willing to let him and his team live or die on their performance. I want them to outline the problems that we have, set out a plan to fix it and work the plan. What I don't want to hear three years in is how they couldn't fix the problems that were passed down to them.

From this point forward everything is there issue. I don't expect them to get everything right but just be honest about the process.

 

[ZeroGame]

So his election policy about plugging the pipe was something that Labor had already done but he was acting on it anyway? :hihi

Melbourne Water had turned it off temporarily as the way that it works is that they order water quantities in advance to be released from Lake Eildon which then allows them to pump that quantity of water down to Sugarloaf. The only reason that the pipe was shut down in the first place was because the pumping of the water was contributing to an increase of water in flood affected areas. Given the water is allocated for release in advance, that quantity that had been ordered was released from Lake Eildon into the Goulburn River when it was already flooded. Reference here.
Ted has now committed to keeping the pipeline shutdown for at least the next 4 years (his first term, he can't commit to anything past that).

I didn't ask either of you about sour grapes but I will now. How do you come to that conclusion when a) I was against the pipeline in the first place, and b) I didn't have a preference for any candidate or party so didn't vote. What exactly are the sour grapes?

Was referring to all the comments critising Ted on his policy to shut down the pipeline, not you specifically. It is such a pedantic argument to critisise this decision, when nothing has actually happened, just a commitment to not turn the pipe back on, which given the recent rains, is hardly massive news. It doesn't deserve praise or critisism really.

 

[Rosy]

Melbourne Water had turned it off temporarily as the way that it works is that they order water quantities in advance to be released from Lake Eildon which then allows them to pump that quantity of water down to Sugarloaf.

When was this temporarily shut down due to cease?

I have privileged information about the water projects I mentioned and my opinions about Ted mouthing off so early about it aren't "pedantic". I'm certainly not forming an opinion from article based on "The Age believes" and "sources suggested" with a tenuous quote from an opposition MP thrown in for good measure such as the one you linked to.

 

[mb64]

Daniel Andrews get leadership of ALP,this appt will send them backwards.James Merlino would have been a much better choice.

 

[ZeroGame]

When was this temporarily shut down due to cease?

No idea, do you?
However given Labor spent so much money on building it, they'd look pretty stupid (more so) if they turned it off indefinitely. Perfect definition of a white elephant

I have privileged information about the water projects I mentioned and my opinions about Ted mouthing off so early about it aren't "pedantic". I'm certainly not forming an opinion from article based on "The Age believes" and "sources suggested" with a tenuous quote from an opposition MP thrown in for good measure such as the one you linked to.

Fine, rather than just googling the issue to provide some quick references I'll just do what everyone else does and not include anything.
As I said, I wasn't referring to anything you had said, there were plenty of others sticking the boot in over the issue before you. So as I said before, it wasn't directed towards you personally, just a general comment on the criticism of Baillieu's position on the pipeline.

Politicians mouth off, that's their job. Especially as you were against the pipeline in the first place, I still don't see what the big deal is.

 

[Rosy]

However given Labor spent so much money on building it, they'd look pretty stupid (more so) if they turned it off indefinitely.

Disagree about Labor looking stupid for shutting the pipe off indefinately. It was common sense to do. The circumstances had obviously changed with plenty of continued rainfall and dams starting to fill. It would have been a very different situation had the drought continued. I doubt even Ted would have shut it down so quickly if we still hadn't had any rain.

 

[ZeroGame]

Of course they'd look stupid, they spent 750 million building a pipe that got used for 7 months
If the rainfalls didn't come then the city would still be pillaging the water supplies that should have been getting used by the locals and farmers

Water levels were never at a critical level, there was enough to last until the desal plant was built

 

[mb64]

Disagree about Labor looking stupid for shutting the pipe off indefinately. It was common sense to do. The circumstances had obviously changed with plenty of continued rainfall and dams starting to fill. It would have been a very different situation had the drought continued. I doubt even Ted would have shut it down so quickly if we still hadn't had any rain.

Spot on Rosy

 

[Legends of 2017]

so Bumbly loses another election as party leader. Wonder how many of the former government will now retire for 'personal' reasons and cause costly by-elections to be held?

Didn't take long. Another promise not kept by Bumbly. Good riddance you useless prick . Any chance you are going to fork out the cost of a by election from your over-generous lifetime pension/payout? You had an implied contract when you went to the election to represent your electorate, regardless of whether your party won or lost the election. So you want to spend more time with your family? Does this mean you would have stepped down if you WON the election, or would it have been ok for your family to be 'neglected' then?


http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/victoria/brumby-tipped-to-quit-parliament/story-e6frf7kx-1225974192472


UPDATE 10.48am: FORMER Premier John Brumby has quit politics breaking a pre-election promise to stay in parliament regardless of the outcome.
The announcement brings an end to Brumby's 17-year Victorian political career and will force a by-election in his electorate of Broadmeadows.

Mr Brumby said he has no regrets after retiring from politics, and said he is looking forward to spending more time with his family............

 

[IanG]

Oh please he's a lame duck its entirely reasonably to retire.

 

[mld]

Yep. Get over it, there is a new government to keep honest.

 

[Legends of 2017]

Oh please he's a lame duck its entirely reasonably to retire.

I didn't realise it was reasonable to cost taxpayers $300,000 on an unnecessary by election. Yes it is reasonable for him to retire, maybe he should have thought of that BEFORE the election, you know, like maybe get someone in who might want to last the full term? Lame duck? His electorate must have thought so.

Yep. Get over it, there is a new government to keep honest.

I'm prepared to give any government more than a few weeks in power before criticizing it.
At least bumbly is true to form, even when not in government, he unnecessarily wastes taxpayers money.

I'm just pissed off at the arrogance of pollies when they lose power and spit the dummy and leave with their extremely generous taxpayer handouts. bumbly, bracks (although he didn't lose an election) kennett,kirner

 

[mb64]

Oh please he's a lame duck its entirely reasonably to retire.

Agree,no point in him going on

 

[Legends of 2017]

Sorry, I'm just trying to get around this 'lame duck' theory. In what way is he a lame duck? Can't he represent his electorate? Did he need to be premier to represent his electorate? He seemed to have no trouble being his electorate's representantive BEFORE he fell into the premier's position, didn't he? I would have thought it would be the opposite of being a 'lame duck' in that he can now fully represent his electorate without worrying about if the hard hat was the right size or the safety vest was visible enough or if the photographers got the right angle. Guess it's just me ???

 

[Tiger74]

Agree,no point in him going on

Absolutely.

Past leaders just bring the legacy of their former leadership with them, and it's a pain in the ass for both the new PM/premier, and the new opposition leader.

Better to get a fresh face in who it looking forward rather than back

 

[MB78]

I would have thought it would be the opposite of being a 'lame duck' in that he can now fully represent his electorate.

I agree with this.

But the reality is this would be no longer enough for his ego and hard to stay motivated if you lose the burn in your guts.

Also the party would not make it easy for him to stay.

The annoying thing is now he was cost $300,000 in a by election. And $1,000,000 plus each year in flights, staff, offices and drivers etc for being the ex Premier.

 

[IanG]

I didn't realise it was reasonable to cost taxpayers $300,000 on an unnecessary by election. Yes it is reasonable for him to retire, maybe he should have thought of that BEFORE the election, you know, like maybe get someone in who might want to last the full term? Lame duck? His electorate must have thought so.

If he won he probably would have stayed the whole term, are you really saying you can't see the difference?

Sorry, I'm just trying to get around this 'lame duck' theory.

To the party. He'd probably be a lightning rod for opposition to Daniel Andrews, he's like a bad reminder of their loss. Having him around does the ALP no favours.

 

[poppa x]

If he quits now then his pension etc is based on his pay rate as Premier.
To go on would eventually mean his pay rate being based on that of a back bencher.

2c.

 

[Legends of 2017]

If he won he probably would have stayed the whole term, are you really saying you can't see the difference?

To the party. He'd probably be a lightning rod for opposition to Daniel Andrews, he's like a bad reminder of their loss. Having him around does the ALP no favours.

I can see the difference. However being a politician, he is being deceitful to the end (and this isn't just directed to him, but with all pollies in government who go to elections, only for them to lose power, then use the old 'spend more time with the family excuse). I mean seriously, I would have more respect if someone put their hand up BEFORE an election and say 'If my party doesn't win government, then I'm going to quit. Wouldn't like it, wouldn't happen, but would have more respect for them because at least they are being honest. If they win power, wouldn't that mean they would be spending less time with their family? Wouldn't they know that before going to the voters?
Anyway, I'm just having a *smile* because I don't like it when this happens. I still say that if pollies want to do that, fine, but pay the cost of the by election out of your funds, parliamentary pension, payout etc

If he quits now then his pension etc is based on his pay rate as Premier.
To go on would eventually mean his pay rate being based on that of a back bencher.

2c.

True, didn't think of that. Geez, he's costing us more in retirement than when he was 'running' the state ;D

 

[Tiger74]

If he quits now then his pension etc is based on his pay rate as Premier.
To go on would eventually mean his pay rate being based on that of a back bencher.

2c.

This is wrong. His pension status is unchanged, as he is still a former premier, and entitled to the office and travel allowances any former premier receives in retirement. Going to the backbench does not forfiet these entitlements