Australia's First Female Prime Minister

[Tiapan]

Good post but too simplistic, there are many considerations that were left out.
For example the cost of and extended security measures that it will have to be put in place (created) to guard these deposits both the uranium road and the plutonium. How much would that cost to the country? Were are we going to get the money to process this product ourselves?

We have Pine gap, Northwest Cape, Woomera, Swan Island, Black Mountain and Lucas Heights to mention just a few let alone all our military bases. The proportional cost for security and storage is relatively small. They are all secure restricted zones just try gaining unauthorised access. Next if someone did break in what are they going to do grab a 44 drum of medium waste and out it on the back of the ute? Or are you envisaging a military assault with tanks and gunships? Most will be locked in concrete vaults. I would suggest waste be handled by train as the safest form of terrestial transport and rods shipped by air.

I suppose that it will have to be processed overseas and after the compromise of our weak government it will be the decision of the foreign mining companies. It is a nice dream but only a dream none the less. At least the present problem has been resolved and we just have to wait and see the reaction of the people.
The real issue seem to be the conflict that arouse when the Labor party’s machine replaced the will of the people by of the so called party machine, when I cast my vote I do it for a team not for the party machine of that team, I think that is time for a electoral reform!:shout

I agree 45% of Australians vote Liberal, 45% of Australian svote Labor, 10% decide the vote every time. 1,2 or 3 Independents usually hold the balance of power in the senate. We hear lots about the 2 majors and SFA about the independents thats what I find a little disconcerting; But thats media, thirdly most Australians only decide there final vote after watching 5x 5 mins on the nightly news the week before the election.

The mining companies won the day. It ain’t over yet. Not for a long shot!
I wonder how this back flip is going to set down with the Australian people?
I wouldn’t be surprise if the machine proposes Maradona for MP.:help:

Thats one point of view, I would have said the Australian people won because they now have a few billion more for the country than they had yesterday.

Cheers

 

[Ozzie]

Yep Gillard bravely declared her atheist stance with full respect of others beliefs, and frankly 90% of Australians couldn't care less about her religious convictions. She says shes not going to go around pretending at religious ceremonies and faking it, like so many others that are scared of the religious right eg George Bush.
People very often vote differently for State vs Federal elections. Labor has been in power in most states for over ten years so of course they are stagnating and a change is as good as a holiday. As for federal Gillard will win with an increased majority I suspect. I mean what is the alternative Mr TV Hockey, cant make his mind up Abbot, or silver spoon stuck where the sun dont shine christopher pine, total combined intellect less than your average peanut..

No way Labor will loose federally.

Cheers

Don't you think the size of Gillard's backflap will impact on her re-election chances? I'd expect that the member for Skirt (Pine) would bring that to Abbott's attention shortly in an effort to distract the Leader of the Opposition.

 

[Tiapan]

Don't you think the size of Gillard's backflap will impact on her re-election chances? I'd expect that the member for Skirt (Pine) would bring that to Abbott's attention shortly in an effort to distract the Leader of the Opposition.

politics is always a compromise that's why Rudd is out and Gillard is in. Most Australians are pragmatic enough to realise this. Except Bob Brown

Cheers

 

[Ozzie]

Abbot was being pragmatic when he burnt his speedos. Gillard is in mostly because she is female, her henchmen being pragmatic enough to value that in terms of votes. I disagree with you though that "Most Australians" are pragmatic enough to cast a vote based on prospective ideas proposed by candidates. When it comes to a choice, most Australians appreciate policy spread on a comfortable cushion, whether that be white bread or else nothing. Brown will continue to operate outside no doubt.

 

[emiliano]

We have Pine gap, Northwest Cape, Woomera, Swan Island, Black Mountain and Lucas Heights to mention just a few let alone all our military bases. The proportional cost for security and storage is relatively small. They are all secure restricted zones just try gaining unauthorised access. Next if someone did break in what are they going to do grab a 44 drum of medium waste and out it on the back of the ute? Or are you envisaging a military assault with tanks and gunships? Most will be locked in concrete vaults. I would suggest waste be handled by train as the safest form of terrestial transport and rods shipped by air.

I agree 45% of Australians vote Liberal, 45% of Australian svote Labor, 10% decide the vote every time. 1,2 or 3 Independents usually hold the balance of power in the senate. We hear lots about the 2 majors and SFA about the independents thats what I find a little disconcerting; But thats media, thirdly most Australians only decide there final vote after watching 5x 5 mins on the nightly news the week before the election.

Thats one point of view, I would have said the Australian people won because they now have a few billion more for the country than they had yesterday.

Cheers

No just a terrorist strike, and will be to an ill prepared force or corrupted leaders,
Do you think that Australia is already sufficiently prepare for such a task?
Does Australia have the technology?
How long it will take to set up and how much will it cost?
Who will supply the capital and what will it want in return?
May I remind you that the present situation is unique, if there is a case of a minority party holding the balance of power it will most provably be the greens, and you know their position on the mining of uranium don't you?.
Do you think that Gillard is planing to propose uranuoum mining?

 

[Tiapan]

It can only occur as a majority government enterprize, in this industry security is a superior priority to straight company profit, also military forces and federal security are involved, along the lines of the Lucas heights arrangements. Although I would change the Gun-totin granny guarding the LH facility entrance, last time I was there.

Since the infrastructure would cost around $4-6 billion, I see it as cheap. Yes Australia certainly does have the technology and materials, after all the US and most of the west are happy to share their info with us just as in Canada. It would probably take 5 years to implement including rail and airport facilities. As an infrastructure project it can be financed with super funds with a better return than they are getting presently.

The greens will always sadly vote against it, but as I remember it was labor that opened up the three mines policy. It is easy to confuse this issue with another totally different issue ie whether Australia should generate electricity from nuclear as an alternative to present day coal burning, but as I said that is a totally different question. Labor ends up pretty pragmatic after a few years so I believe it is indeed possible, just look at the Hawke years.

Cheers

 

[emiliano]

It can only occur as a majority government enterprize, in this industry security is a superior priority to straight company profit, also military forces and federal security are involved, along the lines of the Lucas heights arrangements. Although I would change the Gun-totin granny guarding the LH facility entrance, last time I was there.

Since the infrastructure would cost around $4-6 billion, I see it as cheap. Yes Australia certainly does have the technology and materials, after all the US and most of the west are happy to share their info with us just as in Canada. It would probably take 5 years to implement including rail and airport facilities. As an infrastructure project it can be financed with super funds with a better return than they are getting presently.

The greens will always sadly vote against it, but as I remember it was labor that opened up the three mines policy. It is easy to confuse this issue with another totally different issue ie whether Australia should generate electricity from nuclear as an alternative to present day coal burning, but as I said that is a totally different question. Labor ends up pretty pragmatic after a few years so I believe it is indeed possible, just look at the Hawke years.

Cheers

The last and rare inquiry that Australia made was made with Argentine and it was found to be out of our reach. We don’t have the technology or the financial means plus our government has shown weaknesses in the recent negotiations with the mining industry.
Do you think that we can get it for free? How much do you think it will cost?
You are certainly a dreamer, I think that solar, wind ant tide waves are a better and cheaper option. Not free from the green’s opposition but surely better than going nuclear.
PS. Chile another important exporter of mineral is also proposing a raise in the royalties that the mining companies are paying. I wish them luck and fortitude.

 

[Peacewise]

Who runs Australia, the mining corps or the government?
Seems like the mining corps have flexed their muscles and down fell a PM, perhaps they were merely the straw (lol) that broke the camels back though.

 

[darkendless]

Who runs Australia, the mining corps or the government?
Seems like the mining corps have flexed their muscles and down fell a PM, perhaps they were merely the straw (lol) that broke the camels back though.

The miners know Australia can't afford to push them too far. Our GDP will fall through the floor without them. I guess with that in mind they're allowed to make a few demands of their own.

 

[Tiapan]

The last and rare inquiry that Australia made was made with Argentine and it was found to be out of our reach. We don’t have the technology or the financial means plus our government has shown weaknesses in the recent negotiations with the mining industry.
Do you think that we can get it for free? How much do you think it will cost?
You are certainly a dreamer, I think that solar, wind ant tide waves are a better and cheaper option. Not free from the green’s opposition but surely better than going nuclear.
PS. Chile another important exporter of mineral is also proposing a raise in the royalties that the mining companies are paying. I wish them luck and fortitude.

I see no technological problem, in fact I believe I could theoretically implement said system personally. Iran, Canada and North Korea seem to be successful are you suggesting we are technologically less competent? I don't see a logical technological basis for inadequacy. Although I would possibly use quadrapole UF6 separation rather than traditional diffusion centrifuges. As far as weak government goes, the beauty of a democracy is it works well when its result is mediocre, radical changes take time, but they do happen. Having trouble locating the report you mention, however a recent comment on US foreign policy report suggests:

Japan has developed highly advanced nuclear reprocessing operations that would allow the country to move quickly to develop nuclear weapons if the need arose. Australia, Argentina, Brazil, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, South Africa, South Korea, and Turkey are also considering developing commercial uranium enrichment or reprocessing programs.

The nuclear caste system | Turtle Bay

I think we are off OP and should start a new thread where we could discuss things like SILEX in more detail

Cheers

 

[darkendless]

Did anyone else here see a current affair here tonight? Muslims compromising 1.7% of the population complaining about our secular nation and asking for an islamic state. Arrogance and hypocrisy. Fly home if you don't like our paradise, don't bring your crap here and drag us down.

 

[Pegg]

Australia is not a presidential system you do not vote for a Prime Minister you vote for a party and the party chooses who leads it.

thats the part that a lot of people dont understand

there is a lot of people saying how undemocratic the labor party is for ousting the elected PM and they didnt vote for Julia...they dont seem to get that they voted for a party, not a leader lol

 

[emiliano]

thats the part that a lot of people dont understand

there is a lot of people saying how undemocratic the labor party is for ousting the elected PM and they didnt vote for Julia...they dont seem to get that they voted for a party, not a leader lol

Why is it so?
Personally I believe that we are duped, we are made to believe that this is so by the election campaign, you can see their propaganda electoral campaign, Whose reputation is presented? Whose photos?.
Anyway we are going to find out pretty soon how these goes with the public, it will be a good time to think about the republic at the same time.

 

[Peacewise]

If Gillard wins the next election, which I hear is being announced tomorrow, then perhaps we could have a labour pm, who get's knocked up during her term and goes into labour whilst a pm. I'd just so love to read the headline. "Labour PM in Labour"

 

[Madhuri]

Lol!
I want to see: 'Liberals go Liberal'

 

[emiliano]

The election is set for August 21, I thought that the party machine was not going to call an earlier election but they did. Now we won't have to wait very long. I wonder who record is going to be presented, Gillard the minister for Education or Rudd the MP that guarded us of the recession?

 

[Madhuri]

The election is set for August 21, I thought that the party machine was not going to call an earlier election but they did. Now we won't have to wait very long. I wonder who record is going to be presented, Gillard the minister for Education or Rudd the MP that guarded us of the recession?

That's a good point.

Hmm, I'm not sure who I'll be voting for.