Employment agencies and the unemployed

The ABC's Four Corners has recently investigated the fraudulent and corrupt activity going on in job agencies like ORS and not for profits such as the Salvation Army.  It was alleged that ORS filled out forms fraudulently in order to gain government funding.  Several job seekers were featured as being disgruntled and disenfranchised.  They were concerned that ORS and Job Services Australia simply didn't really care about placing them in employment.  There was reference at the beginning of the story to generational unemployment in areas like the South Australian town of Elizabeth where Holden's factory is situated.

There are a few questions this report does not actually ask.  It blames the agencies for people's inability to find jobs and it blames the lack of jobs for unemployment.

Let's look at a few things.  I will however acknowledge that there are shortages of jobs in some areas and in some industries work simply does not exist.  This being said, if there are not jobs in a particular area or industry there are actions you can take to ensure you are more likely to find a job.

1. Relocate to a place where there are jobs.
2. Undertake study to develop skills that will make you more attractive to employers.
3. Take casual employment until you can find permanent employment.
4. Apply for as many jobs as you can.

Without sounding like a mouthpiece for the Government, if there are not jobs where you are living then look at relocating to a place with better employment prospects.  Before you say, it's not that simple, it can be.  When I was working in Auckland I, and the entire department I were in was given notice that it was going to be sold to the competitor so I made plans to relocate and begun applying for jobs in Sydney before I moved across.  In the end i was able to get a transfer to Sydney in my current job while I looked for other jobs.  I know other people who have been back and forth between cities, myself included since 2008, until they found employment. While this is not an option for everyone, technology does make things a lot easier.  While once upon a time you would have had to physically attend an interview, people can now be interviewed via Skype.  Maybe Centrelink and job agencies should look into providing computers so that people can do this and apply for jobs in other locations.

Undertaking study is a no brainer really.  If you have an education you're more likely to have the communication skills required to undertake employment and will be more likely to have the intellect to adapt to different situations.  By having an education employers will see you as better prepared.  This education could also be in terms of experience.  While this is not possible for everyone, the more skills you have, the better.  For example, if you're a qualified journalist those skills can probably be transferred to copywriting or public relations.  If you are in sales then you could become a customer service representative/professional and vice versa.  If you have been a team leader or manager in one industry then it's probable that you could become a manager in another area.  Do you see what I'm saying?  You can simply transfer your skills.  In today's economy this is essential.

Nobody wants casual employment.  Casual employment is tough.  I was casually employed all of last year and it was a nightmare.  There were times when I didn't know when I was going to be working beyond that particular shift and cases where I'd only find out I was working that day.  Still, casual employment is better than no employment and it is much easier to find employment while you are employed.  If you can't find casual employment then work for free to have something on your CV and to gain new skills.

When watching the Four Corners report there was one thing that was very clear to me, and it's entirely possible that some of the story was not told so there may be some people who are in fact doing what they can to get jobs.  Four Corners made it appear like some of the job seekers were only relying on the agencies and that they were effectively being told they were useless.  The solo mother, if she was given some positive reinforcement could go into customer service or modelling.  The man who had an accident worked out so he could become a personal trainer.  The one question that the report did not answer was, why weren't the agencies looking outside of the square?  And the other question, were the unemployed job seekers looking for employment elsewhere?

I'm not saying it's easy if you're caught in a cycle of poverty but it appeared to me like the people interviewed were quick to blame the Government and the job agencies without expecting the job seekers to take any responsibility themselves.  There is certainly more to the story, and instead of employment agencies sending people on silly courses that won't help, why aren't people being taught real skills to gain employment?  When I was in school we would have careers days, do these still happen?

There's more to the story and the job seekers must take some responsibility for their situation rather than just blaming the Government.

Sorry NZers, when you think that manslaughter is okay but opinons aren't you're xingjiao tu bou!

I try not to blog about rubbish or get involved in what's happening in reality television but I'm on a long train trip right now from Newcastle back to Sydney so figured instead of sleeping I might as well use the time productively. 

A couple of weeks ago New Zealand's second season of X Factor started and there are two things that have captured my attention.  I won't dwell on the first one because in all honesty it's really not that noteworthy.

As you all know by now, contestants audition in front of the producers and then the judges before  making it through to boot camp.  You may or may not recall Steve Broad from the second season of NZ Idol which screened in 2005.  He came third overall in the season.  Following that he didn't really stay in the spotlight and worked for The Edge radio station while studying before going back to Invercargill to become a teacher.  This year he decided to audition for the X Factor, and made it past the initial rounds.  He is in boot camp now.  As someone who has heard him sing live at church and knows him personally, he deserves the break, HOWEVER, as a viewer /media commentator/blogger it seems a little strange that NZ has literally run out of new talent and has to recycle old talent.

That incident isn't what's got me really annoyed though.

It was revealed a few days ago that the producers and judges had allowed someone who is guilty of manslaughter through to boot camp.  Shae Brider revealed to the judges he'd been around when someone was killed but didn't declare he actually played a part. 

This has become controversial.  Reading Facebook posts people say the guy's done his time and to forgive him.  Well I'm sorry New Zealand but it isn't that simple.  This guy was involved in taking another person's life and there is no way he should be forgiven and given a second chance for that.  What's even more astounding about this entire thing is that NZers appear to be okay with the concept and action of murder, yet if someone has opinions and dares to have a personality that's suddenly not allowed. 

So my question is this:  NZers in what crazy world do you think a manslaughter conviction is okay but having opinions, which hurts nobody isn't?  Shouldn't it be the other way around? Well suffice to say NZ, you've once again proved your retardness.

Credit reporting needs to change to include positive behaviour too

A credit file is basically a report card for adults.  It details previous financial history such as loans you've taken out, credit applied for, address and employment information.  All credit reporting agencies such as Veda and Dun & Bradstreet give people a score.  In Australia the score ranges from 0-1200.  600-800 is most common.  

Different calculations are used when determining a credit score.  

35% - Payment history - In order to maintain a good credit rating you must make sure you pay all your bills on time.  Credit reporting across the world has become much tighter following the 2007-08 crash and now includes defaults on utility bills of 60 days or more.

30% - Credit utilisation - You should aim to only use 30% of the credit you have available and should not max out your credit cards or overdrafts.

15% - Length of credit history - The longer an account is open the better as it proves you can maintain long relationships with credit providers.

10% - New credit - Opening too many accounts at one time can adversely affect your credit rating and could increase the likelihood of a default.  This will make you look unattractive to lenders.

10% - Credit mix - Lenders like to know that you can reliably pay back loans with instalments and use revolving credit wisely.  If you can use different types of credit then you'll be deemed less of a risk and increase the chances of obtaining credit from banks as opposed to greasy loan sharks who often have much tighter lending criteria in that the loan terms are shorter.

Currently only negative history is recorded on your credit file.  Credit reporting agencies only report defaults and inquiries.  They do not report when a debt has been paid off in full so if you have bad credit but have changed your ways it is very hard to improve your credit score.  People should be rewarded for prompt payment.  You could potentially have a bad credit history but be ahead on bills and payments which are not recorded, therefore the full picture is not being shown and lenders are only receiving half the story.

In addition, credit reporting agencies do not currently collect savings data and habits.  It may be that you save money regularly but this isn't recorded so again, you look like you'll be a high risk to lenders.

Credit histories are only a snap shot of ones financial habits but they don't show the good behaviour.  If the bad behaviour is being recorded then shouldn't the good behaviour be recorded as well?  If you take out a personal loan wouldn't it be good if lenders knew if you paid that bank on time or even early?  Take someone who has a gym membership?  If they are ahead on their payments doesn't that show budgeting and that they are reliable?

Why do we live in a society fixated on punishing bad behaviour but not rewarding good behaviour?  Credit files affect so much of our lives that it's essential that financial institutions and real estate agents see the full picture rather than just the negative aspects.  It's currently very unbalanced.

If you suspect you have bad credit you can go to Veda and request a free copy within 90 days of being declined for credit for free.  If you'd like to obtain it quickly then expect to pay between $69.95 and $119.95.  If you want to track changes regularly then you should ensure you get the $84.95 12 month subscription and then you'll receive updates during the course of the year.  You will get two reports and a credit score updated every month so you can track how you're going and reduce your risk profile.

Daily Stock Review - 18 February

It's not often I blog about specific stocks but today the ASX has been very interesting as we come into Dividend Season.  To save you the time I've compiled a short list of stocks that you should be watching, not necessarily stocks to invest in, stocks to watch.

Toll Holdings:
Toll is Australia's leading freight firm and has operated for 126 years.  Their head office is in Mascot and today Japan Post announced a takeover plan.  This saw the price increase from $6.08 at yesterday's close of business to $8.95 today.  That's an increase of 47.20% according to Commsec's share trading application.  Japan Post would look at paying $9.04 per share according to reports today.

Seven West Media Group:
Media is a volatile sector, and Seven West has posted a loss of $1 billion.  Surprisingly, the market didn't respond negatively.  In fact the shares peaked at $1.475 at close of business today, however, overall, there was no change and they closed at $1.42.

iSentia Group Limited:
iSentia is a media monitoring business which first listed on the ASX in June 2014 after acquiring Australian Associated Press' media monitoring arm in May of last year.  Today they posted that they were ahead on financial targets and would be paying out a dividend of 3.1 cents per share.  The market was excited at hearing this news and the share price went up from $2.87 at close of business yesterday to $3.05 today.  It reached a high of $3.12.  Last year iSentia was listed on the ASX at $2.45.  This stock is definitely one to watch as it is a media intelligence business that basically has no competition within the Asia Pacific region.  As CEO John Croll reiterated today, iSentia's business strategy is a combination of acquisition and diversification within the media intelligence sector.

I'll bring you more sharemarket updates as there are noteworthy developments.

The importance of political engagement in Australia

Let's talk about political participation and engagement shall we?  Earlier in the week we discovered just how ignorant Australian voters were because instead of focusing on policy they focused on criticising Prime Minuter Tony Abbott and leadership.  As you can imagine Twitter went absolutely nuts with comments from the public.

On one side you had the pro Liberals talking policy. On the other you have people criticising Abbott and his Government saying they weren't being fair.

ABC personality Leigh Sales interviewed Abbott on Monday night, if you could call it that and she wasn't interested in policy at all.  All she cared about was attacking the democratically elected Prime Minister.  Abbott tried to talk policy but she kept interrupting.  This is the exact same thing that happened last May when Treasurer Joe Hockey was delivering the budget.  Instead of hearing him and listening to him the mainstream media journalists had cotton wool in their ears and thought that the Medicare co payment would be paid by everyone.  They ignored facts.  The fact is that the truly poor will not pay.

The fact people didn't register this shows the poor level of political engagement in Australia.  It shows people don't take politics seriously.  Do people not comprehend that every single decision government makes effects us and if we don't have our say we won't be represented.

This means that policies will not help us.  Now the poor wax lyrical about how the rich don't pay enough tax but for example, 10% of $1000 is less than 10% of $100,000 so whatever way you put it the wealthy will always pay more tax.

Without political engagement we end up in a situation where the media doesn't report what's happening because nobody's interested.  If they're not reporting what's important how can we participate as citizens?

Political participation is a gift, without which we have no voice.  Some people throw that away.  That basically gives a metaphorical finger to Aboriginals and women who had to fight for the vote.  Did you know it took 18 years of campaigning before women in Australia had the right to vote?  The 600,000 NZ citizens paying taxes who live in Australia permanently don't have that right.  We can't join a party.  We can't donate and we can't have our say.  Businesses and interest groups can.  This is a contradiction. They are not citizens.  If they can pay taxes and participate why can't NZ citizens?  This goes against western democracy and human rights.

Next time you don't care about politics, spare a thought for those who can't even vote.

Unethical media behaviour over trying to unseat a legally elected Prime Minister

Today the Liberal Party decided 69-31 that they did not want to have a leadership spill.  As you can imagine the mainstream media is still having a field day with this with headlines such as "why Tony Abbott can't survive this" and other tripe.

I understand activism in journalism because I myself do it but in this case, like on so many occasions the mainstream media are still missing the point.  They still don't understand and they still don't seem to care.

The problems started when Treasurer Joe Hockey delivered his budget on election night but like the Delta Goodrem song, nobody listened.  They had cotton wool in their ears.  They'd made their minds up.    They decided they wanted blood.  That they wanted the government to be out.

It's not okay that this type of "reporting" continues.  It's one thing if Abbott had committed a crime.  It's another thing if he was acting illegally but disagreeing with what someone does isn't reason to undermine the democratic process.

Prime Minister Abbott doesn't have six months.  He actually has 18 months.  That's when the next election is being held and that is when judgement day falls.  Not a moment beforehand.

The mainstream media must have a very flexible moral compass but trying to undermine democracy goes against the fundamental belief that journalism should be in the public's best interests.

Political messages are not commodities to be sold.  They effect the public.  We're talking a country's future and the mainstream media just don't understand that.  Nor do Labor Party MPs or the backbench.

The Liberal Party tried to convey their message but the mainstream didn't care.  They didn't questions.  They simply didn't do their jobs.  They decided to put their own opinions above others.

Why have elections if the mainstream media are going to undermine democracy and try and unseat a sitting Prime Minister?  It's incredibly unethical and beggars belief.  You can't unseat a sitting PM who hasn't acted unlawfully.  You are however allowed to write to MPs and you are allowed to vote on Election Day.  We hold elections once every three years, not when the media want to create the news rather than reporting it.

I'm disgusted, especially when you consider NZ citizens in Australia can't even vote.  It is so disrespectful to us.  It's disrespectful to our ancestors who fought for the vote and it's disrespectful to the public who vote.

Australia - Argument for the Monarchy

Forgive me for this blog post being two weeks too late.  On Australia Day there was somewhat of a debate about the Australian monarchy and if we should remain part of the Commonwealth.  At the time I was on the side of, the Commonwealth works so why change it for change's sake.  I've never been a firm monarchist.  I don't particularly care for the royal family or royal subjects.

However, my views have changed in recent days and I am now a firm monarchist and supporter of remaining part of the Commonwealth.

You see, since former Prime Minister Kevin Rudd's tenure as Prime Minister, Australian politics has been unstable with Julia Gillard overthrowing him, and then Rudd doing the same back to Gillard.  Current Prime Minister Tony Abbott was elected on the 7th of September 2013 by the Australian public.  They voted for him, for a three year term, to lead the country.  They did not vote for the Liberal Party under anybody else's leadership.

I just want to reiterate we have a three year electoral term which has not been respected since the Howard years.  The Australian Parliament is not an after school casual job.  It is supposed to be treated with honour and integrity.  Until the Rudd years it was.  We haven't had stability since 2007, nor have we had politicians who truly care about Australia.

On Tuesday, as you all know by now Malcolm Turnbull is contesting Prime Minister Tony Abbott for the leadership which is completely disrespectful to the Australian public.  The Australian Government voted this government in for three years, not 18 months.  They also did not vote for Malcolm Turnbull to take the party to the next election.  They are not in opposition.  They are in government and it is not right to throw out a sitting and fairly and legally elected Prime Minister.

If there has ever been a stronger cause for the monarchy this is it.  We need an independent and impartial party to step in and have the power to dissolve the Government should they not serve the best interest of the public.  If Prime Minister Tony Abbott does not keep the Prime Ministership after the leadership spill motion on Tuesday then the Governor General, Peter Cosgrove needs to exercise his right to dissolve the Australian Government and to go back to the polls.

The Prime Ministership, and I cannot stress this enough is not a position to be treated like an after school job.  It's meant to be treated with honour and integrity, which sitting Prime Minister Tony Abbott does, however the backbenchers have run scared.

A spill would be giving the finger to the voting public.  It would be to completely disregard democracy and the only answer would be to go back to the polls 18 months before the next scheduled election.

Without the Monarchy there wouldn't be this independent body and we could very well become a dictatorship, and I don't know about you, but that is not the Australia I want.  I want an Australia that respects what happens on election day and doesn't turf leaders out mid term.  That's okay in opposition, though not brilliant, but when you're in government you should no better as you've been entrusted with the responsibility of running the country.

We can no longer say the monarchy is irrelevant because as recent circumstances have shown it is highly relevant, and regardless, even if the spill is defeated on Tuesday the discussion won't end because the Libs are now split down the middle into two camps, Abbott, and Turnbull.  The only way to truly fix this situation is for the Governor General to dissolve the parliament and call for a fresh election.

More commentary on the Liberal Party leadership

I don't like writing about petty political situations.  I always try to hold this blog to a higher standard then hearsay and rumours.  I try to focus on the real issues - the real issues because the budget deficit and the upcoming "murders" of Myuran Sukumaran and Andrew Chan in Indonesia  I try to write about employment and immigration policy.

That is not possible at the moment because the Australian mainstream media is not letting the Liberal Government led by Tony Abbott govern.  They don't seem to understand that state and Federal politics are not one in the same.  They fail to understand that when people go to the polls on election day they vote for a team to lead until the next election, not until the media decides they should be out.

The sad reality is that the majority of voters are uninformed and get their political information from the media.  If the media isn't treating voters as citizens and only treats politics as a boxing match how are people supposed to do what's right for the country?

I'm going to be fair and balanced, as much as I can in this blog, despite being a Tony Abbott supporter.  The mainstream media would argue that Abbott made the following mistakes:

1. The wink.  Hey guess what folks, men wink.  It's not a crime.
2. The planned $7 Medicare charge when you see a doctor.  The Liberals were not given the chance to explain that this would only affect those who can actually afford to pay the $7, the mainstream media didn't speak to people willing to pay the fee.  Let me tell you, I'm willing to pay $7.  I'm even willing to pay $10 if it means we don't have to increase an excessive fee, and can someone tell me why those who can pay shouldn't pay?
3. The ABC/SBS cuts.  Do we need objective reporting?  Absolutely.  I back the ABC but SBS could afford to be cut.  Should regional news be cut?  Definitely not.  However, journalism doesn't pay the bills.  I'm actually surprised that the mainstream private media spoke out against these cuts when it would actually be in their best interests.  SBS could be cut though, so I have to back the Prime Minister on this but we do need a public broadcaster.
4. The knighthood.  Who cares?  This doesn't affect us and took up way too much air space.

The issues the media is focusing on are actually non issues in my book.  What Aussies DO care about is national security and getting the budget back in the black.  That is why they were voted in, in the first place.  They were voted in to repair Labor's mess and that means making tough decisions.  People were used to being spoon fed under Labor and now that the Coalition wants to repair the mess the media won't let them.

I don't want the Liberals to change leader and the reason is two fold: one, the Liberals shouldn't lower themselves to Labor's poor standards, and furthermore when Labor voted out Julia Gillard I was just as disgruntled about that.  There is no reason to sack Tony Abbott from within the party.  The reality of the matter is, he did what neither Communications Minister Malcolm Turnbull, nor former Liberal leader Brendan Nelson did, he took the Liberals to a victory in 2013.  It's almost as if that's been forgotten.

Prime Minister Tony Abbott did make a mistake on paid parental leave but primarily because it wouldn't address the issue of childcare that parents face.  Treasurer Joe Hockey articulated this much better on Friday when discussing childcare on Joe Hockey.  He wants women to be in the workforce and wants to enable that.  I genuinely believe the Liberals are committed to building a stronger Australia, an Australia that would be destroyed under Labor's rule should they gain power once again.

Prime Minister Tony Abbott, like any Prime Minister will face periods in their tenure when they are unpopular.  You can only please some of the electorate some of the time, but Abbott has done, and will hopefully be given the chance to continue, doing a brilliant job.

You see, it's not about what we want.  It's about what is best for the nation.  As the Liberals have said, if you have a household budget issue, you must cut spending or increase your income.  Raising taxes goes against the Liberal ideology so that means cutting spending. 

I think people in Australia have forgotten how lucky we are to live here and that in order to maintain our standard of living some tough budget measures must be introduced.  People need to stop being self centred and start thinking about the greater good.  The greater good is not a free ride for people who can pay.  Why shouldn't people pay for a service they use?

Most importantly, people need to get behind Tony Abbott and support him.  He rightfully earned the Prime Ministership, nobody else did, and I cannot stress this enough, it's not a position to be taken lightly or treated like an after school job. 

We cannot keep on going through Prime Ministers.  That's not democracy.  We can't keep on electing parties and then having things change when the going gets tough.  It makes a mockery of the entire system and demeans people's votes. 

I sincerely hope the Liberals start thinking about the country and stop being self centred like Luke Simpkins and other disgruntled backbenchers (who, when you think about it now, they're lowly backbenchers for a reason) because if they don't, they're giving a free pass to Labor to win in 2016, and that would be devastating for the country.  What's to say a new leader wouldn't be attacked by the media?  I'm willing to put money on them being just as harsh because they can't handle that the Labor Party and their mates lost in 2013.

Some would say that the Federal Liberal Party is hurting state Liberals but state and federal politics are not the same.  There are different issues, different people.  It's like council isn't the same as state politics.

I wish people in Australia would take politics more seriously.  This isn't some sports match we're talking about.  We're talking about a nation's entire future here.

Backstabbing backbenchers need to be sacked

I want to preface this by saying I am right wing however I cannot vote in Australian elections due to reforms introduced by John Howard in 2001.

Prime Minister Tony Abbott has called a leadership spill for Tuesday to put this childish propaganda to rest.

We saw unstable Government under Rudd - Gillard - Rudd.  The media got a taste for disposing of PUBLICLY ELECTED Prime Ministers.  

Malcolm Turnbull must be sacked on Tuesday after Abbott wins or after the motion is defeated.

The media must also grow up and realise this isn't an after school job.  

Prime Minister Tony Abbott has delivered on his electoral promises - carbon tax, asylum seekers, trying to improve the economy.

This is an absolute disgrace and is giving the finger to the Australian voter.

The Australian media are full of immature journalists.  I use that term loosely because they're just trying to create the news.

Australians you should all be very ashamed as should the immature and selfish backbenchers.  You should also be really ashamed that you think politics is a game and that the Prime Ministership shouldn't be earned.

Well my dear readers, Tony Abbott won the 2013 election, NOT Malcolm Turnbull or Labor.  So remember that and stop being selfish morons.  Think of the country.

The media unseated Rudd, Gillard and Rudd again, what's to say they aren't just trying to sell more papers at the expense of our stability.  A new leader will only go through the same issues.

The Liberal Party Leadership: The contestants

Before I go any further with this blog post, I want to say that I completely back Prime Minister Tony Abbott and I think that the Prime Ministership should not change hands like a casual position a fifteen year old does while they're paying their way through school or an 18 year old through university.  However, of course, we have to be realistic and look at the possible contenders should a spill arise.

Joe Hockey:
Hockey is Shadow Treasurer.  He first represented North Sydney in 1996 and has served in several capacities.  He's been Minister for Employment & Workplace Relations, Manager of Opposition Business, Minister for Small Business & Tourism, Minister for Human Services and currently serves as Treasuer.  A very senior MP, Hockey has a breadth of experience that could come in handy if he was to contend the position of leadership.  He has previously contested the coveted title but in 2009 did not receive enough votes so it went to Abbott.  Hockey is 49 years old and a family man.  He's faced some controversy, most notably releasing the budget on the day of the Martin Place terrorism incident.  He knows the Government books inside out and could easily make the transition.
Likelihood: 7/10


Scott Morrison:
Scott Morrison is a very controversial figure within the Liberal Party having previously been Minister for Immigration.    He was a strong Shadow Immigration Minister and when he served as Immigration Minister made some tough calls.  He is now Social Services Minister and is being criticised by those on the left side of politics for slashing and reforming welfare.  Given these issues, although he would be a strong Prime Minister he's not marketable enough and just wouldn't lead the Liberal Party to victory in 2016.  He is too firm which swing voters wouldn't like given the heavy reliance on middle class welfare.
Likelihood 4/10.

Julie Bishop:
Ms Bishop is Foreign Affairs Minister and has served in Parliament since 1998.  She is deputy leader of the Liberal Party, a position she has held since 2007.  She's held several portfolios under both Prime Ministers John Howard and current Prime Minister Tony Abbott.  She says she is not interested in the leadership.  There is a the small issue of her gender.  Anyone who recalls even 5% of former Prime Minister Julia Gillard's tenure would know that Gillard was horrendously criticised by the media for being a woman.  Bishop is a former Minister for Women's Affairs and no doubt she would face the same criticisms.  She would also face problems because she doesn't have children so what would she possibly know about childcare and paid parental leave given it's an issue she's never had to face.  She is a very strong Foreign Minister, so why would you move her from that position?
Likelihood: 4510

Malcolm Turnbull:
Currently Malcolm is Communications Minister and the MP elect for Wentworth.  He previously held the leadership between 2008 and 2009.  Turnbull is a supporter for the Republical Movement.  The Daily Telegraph reported in 2009 that he wanted to join the Labor Party in 1999, and was even approached by Bog Hawke.  He is a moderate Liberal and really belongs in Labor given his views on certain topics.  He would do the Liberals a disservice if he ever became the leader again.  He is a failed leader so having failed once, what's to say he would succeed?  

Likelihood: 2/10.

As you can see although there are a few capable MPs only the current Prime Minister Tony Abbott has the strength of character and intellect to lead the country.  Abbott is a principled man who stands by his belief system and rarely he will back down.  He backed down on paid parental leave, which was previously his trademark policy.  Given he heavily tore into Labor over their leadership woes Abbott won't be going without a fight.  He is also the only one who could take the party from a loss at the 2010 election to a win at 2013.  That has to be commended.  Abbott still, as he admitted this week does have a lot to learn about being Prime Minister.

All in all though, Abbott is the best person for the job and to sack him internally would be disasterous for the Liberal Party.  The only MPs who don't see that are rogues like Arthur Sinodinos and Mal Brough (who you may remember from the Peter Slipper scandal back in 2012).

It's a shame the media let the children run the show

Rudd - Gillard - Rudd.

The Labor Party was a circus.

Now the media seems to have joined the Circus and are acting like absolute clowns over the Prime Ministership.  Abbott is not going anywhere.

We need a code of conduct for reporters and a standard of ethics they must abide by or they must face fines.

Half the electorate is ignorant and don't know their right from their left.  

When the media report on silly games they don't have the public act as informed citizens and it's embarrassing.

Two men face the firing squad in Indonesia and the media doesn't even care.  They're too busy acting like kids throwing their toys out of their cot.

It's a sham.

Instead of reporting garbage can the media let the adults get back to governing and focusing on foreign affairs and the economy.  That's what they were elected to do after all.

Elections and democracy - Australia doesn't know what democracy is anymore

This is going to be a short post and then I'm opening up the floor to you.  You can comment on this blog, which is an absolute rarity.

The media for the last week or so has been trying to create a leadership spill within the LNP saying Prime Minister Tony Abbott should stand aside. 

He is the Prime Minister.  He was fairly elected.

If there is a leadership spill it undermines the entire democratic process and makes us a dictatorship.  The election is only 18 months away.  Are people really so shallow that they can't wait another 18 months?

Yes the Queensland result last night was appalling but state and federal politics are not one in the same.  At a Federal level there are different issues.

It is time people were educated and learned the difference between the two otherwise why even have state politics and councils? 

The media don't seem to understand that Prime Minister Tony Abbott was elected by the PUBLIC.  Any leadership spill would not be controlled by the public and would make us no better than North Korea or any other nation with a dictatorship.

People need to go back to school and learn what democracy is. 

This isn't it.