RSL takes aim at Abbott

Font Size:

The Returned Services League (RSL) has taken aim at Prime Minister Tony Abbott for his government’s proposed changes to index veterans’ payments to match the rate of inflation rather than the higher rate of average male weekly earnings.

Nearly 300,000 military pensioners and war widows would be affected by the changes to veterans’ pensions – a decision the RSL believes will threaten the quality of life and the dignity of those who fought for our country.

And whilst Mr Abbott, who is in Turkey for the ANZAC centenary at Gallipoli, met with the RSL last month to discuss the changes, he refused to back down on the decision to match veterans’ pensions to CPI, and has since held back the public release of documents which explain how the changes would affect ex-servicemen as well as the ones left behind by the fallen.

Ahead of Treasurer Joe Hockey’s second budget, veterans groups are using the ANZAC commemorations to remind the government to support the veterans who have defended Australia.

Veterans groups, including the RSL, the Federation of Totally and Permanently Incapacitated Ex-Servicemen & Women (TPI), the Defence Force Welfare Association and the Alliance of Defence Service Organisations have been working hard to change Mr Abbott’s mind, claiming:  “The budget measure will have a detrimental effect on the quality of life of those in the veteran community whose only source of income is the service pension. To qualify for the service pension, veterans must have had qualifying service, which by its definition implies that the veteran faced danger from the enemy and was prepared to pay the ultimate sacrifice.”

“It’s all very well to commemorate the fallen – and we support the centenary commemorations – but we have to fully support the living as well,” said TPI national vice-president Pat McCabe.

According to McCabe, veterans’ payments are a form of compensation under law that compensates them for their sacrifice, and should not be treated simply as a form of welfare payment.

Earlier this week, TPI wrote a letter to Mr Abbott refreshing his memory of a statement made by former Prime Minister Billy Hughes in 1917: “We say to them, ‘You go and fight and when you come back we will look after your welfare’ … we have entered into a bargain with the soldier, and we must keep it!”

“It’s that bargain they have broken,” Ms McCabe said.

Read more at Sydney Morning Herald.

Opinion: Haven’t they sacrificed enough?

It seems that Woolworths and co aren’t the only ones cashing in on the ANZAC centenary – only this time the protagonists are justified. And whilst the ANZACs are ‘fresh in our memories’, there is no better time for veterans groups to lobby on behalf of those who have sacrificed their lives for our wellbeing.

In a statement made by Mr Abbott at Gallipoli Barracks in Brisbane earlier this week, he said that while the troops were supporting Australia overseas, Australia would support their loved ones back home.

“We will support them on your behalf, as you support us,” he said.

It’s all well and good to make these claims as part of a farewell to soldiers, but what of their welfare upon their return?

The changes to veterans’ payments are expected to save around $65.1 million from 2017, but, as with the Age Pension and other welfare payments that will be thrown into the same basket, will progressively erode veterans’ income as each year passes. And if the government can work out the annual savings created by cuts to military pensions, it would be interesting to see if it knows how much it would save by cutting back on the very generous pensions and payouts of the politicians who sit at home enjoying the protection provided for them by our servicemen and women.

Whilst we may not all agree on the where and why of our soldiers’ participation in wars and ‘police actions’ around the world, we can all agree that they should be well compensated for their incredible service and bravery whilst defending our way of life back home. This is just another idiotic example of how Mr Abbott and co, in order to find savings for their bottom line, will take from those who need it most instead of targeting their corporate cronies and well-to-do constituents.

What Mr Abbott needs to remember when rubber-stamping this decision is that the soldiers fought for the way of life of the common Australian citizen – not just the wealthy. Why should our soldiers and the loved ones of the fallen have to sacrifice their dignity for the government’s bottom line, when they have sacrificed so much already? It’s time to show some class, Mr Abbott. Go on – surprise us …

What do you think? Do you feel that finding savings from the pockets of our brave soldiers and war widows is justified? Does $65.1 million in savings justify this decision? Would you feel better if these savings were received by reducing benefits to corporations, politicians and the wealthiest two per cent?

Join YourLifeChoices today
and get this free eBook!

Join
By joining YourLifeChoices you consent that you have read and agree to our Terms & Conditions and Privacy Policy

Written by Leon Della Bosca

Leon Della Bosca is a voracious reader who loves words. You'll often find him spending time in galleries, writing, designing, painting, drawing, or photographing and documenting street art. He has a publishing and graphic design background and loves movies and music, but then, who doesn’t?

Contact:
LinkedIn
Email

132 Comments

Total Comments: 132
  1. 0
    0

    Good Luck to all our Men and Women of the Armed Forces you all deserve the best pay for the rest of your lives in my opinion……..As far as the PM Tony Abbott goes he is a heartless PM and will never care about the hardships and suffering you went through on any Battle fields…….all he is concern about his own retired pension and he gets top dollar for stuffing up our country……..my personal opinion only. cheers good luck.

    • 0
      0

      Well tia-maria, I totally agree with what you have said here !! Its disgusting to think that this Government could even contemplate doing this to these returned Servicemen and women and those that were left behind to work in the steel mills or as machinist’s etc for the then Government! But to now be treated like nothing at all is unbelievable ! True what you said about his pension its the big buck all he is worried about that he will be able to lounge around on after he retires after his one term in office !! As He wont get another turn at it that’s for sure !! Its like what he is also doing to the aged pensioner’s with their pension rates !! Just stink’s it does !! Dotty

    • 0
      0

      Dotty, yes we are also aged pensioners and this government don’t care about any one but them selves……….especially our Men and Women of the armed forces who fought in battle to give us a better life…….No Respect……BUT Politicians always come up with cash with no cut backs for their retirement pensions

    • 0
      0

      folks – by all means criticise Abbott but he is not the treasurer and I’ll go one step further – where did this idea come from – its the Treasury and Finance department and within that group are public servants who do not accept there is anything unique in military service – just see military people as public servants in uniform – many years ago a Secretary said only janitors where uniforms – as Costello said Abbotts biggest problem is he doesn’t take the time to fully understand the economy and it has been reported that he glossed over economic matters during expenditure review committee meetings – unfortunately for Abbott he does not have a Costello to overcome his economic weaknesses having to rely on a poor performer in Hockey (who is no Keating or Costello). As I am vet and affected by these changes I think we’ll see a backflip once the RSL and other ex service orgs get their views to Abbott.

  2. 0
    0

    I think some of these veterans would be disgusted with the type of scum the Labour party has bought into this country just so they can get a few more votes to get into power. I am sure some of the diggers who made the ultimate sacrifice would roll over in their graves .

    • 0
      0

      Yes the Liberals should be taken to task for letting Tony Abbott into Australia and they should be tried in a court of law for letting a lot of his mates in .

    • 0
      0

      ROBO……..Get real mate its about our Vets getting the pensions they deserve…..and with the heartless Liberal PM Abbott the truth is he wont give into them.

    • 0
      0

      Yes ROBO’s a typical liberalite trying to skew what this is about.

    • 0
      0

      Okay lets cut the age pensioners they get far to much as it is and most have done nothing for this country.

    • 0
      0

      How many years was the Liberals’ Menzies Government in charge of the country and the masses of immigrants that reached our shores to build this country. Who was in charge when all the Vietnamese arrived. The Labour government originally didn’t send the soldiers to Irak/Afghanistan but they certainly had to handle the influx of asylum seekers later.
      However, this was not the subject matter posed by Leon Della Bosca above.

      Leon: I entirely agree with the last paragraph of your subject matter.
      There are better ways to “raise” revenue than to “reduce” the deficit by reducing the service pensions and also the aged pensions.
      The government could start by looking at their own expenses and the expenses of providing funds, air travel, offices, cars/petrol, gold passes, etc. for RETIRED POLLIES: After all these pollies have better superannuation than any of us and with all the extras they get for doing “nothing in retirement”, and even holding down jobs elsewhere, they are certainly not in “struggle street” like a lot of other unfortunate people, pensioners and service people.

    • 0
      0

      Hey ROBO, again are you for real???????????????? are you saying the veterans have nothing for this country??? or the majority of us retired pensioners???????

    • 0
      0

      ROBO is simply amusing himself folks by acting as a s**t stirrer and getting off on your replies. Take what he says for what it is worth. Oh LOL please.
      PS Well I think he is, surely? LOL again.

    • 0
      0

      Your right Willie Poker I get the lefties going don”t I.

    • 0
      0

      Yes quite simple to do when serious folk are trying to comment. Shows a lazy brain.

    • 0
      0

      It seems that ROBO’s comments about the immigration free for all that Rudd started when he became PM (and ROBO’s supposition about the reaction of the diggers who died in the defence of Australian democracy) have been ignored in the rush of our lefties to chastise ROBO. Tia’s comments completely miss the point and have nothing to do with refuting ROBO’s claim about the attitude of the diggers toward Rudd’s immigration reversal of Howard’s policy.

      Am I to believe that tia and Wstaton believe that they believe the old diggers would applaud Rudd’s action (and the soaring costs of Rudd’s Folly) that means there is less money available to be spent benefitting genuine Australians, including veterans, pensioners and serving military and naval personnel? In their haste to attack ROBO they overlook the real point ROBO was trying to make. In doing so, they forfeit any credibility through their attack on ROBO instead of debunking the view ROBO expressed. Typical Labor, where they play the man and not the ball in their idea of debate.

    • 0
      0

      I am not sure who these scum are that Rudd brought into Australia. Possibly the the smugglers but not the refugees most who were running from tyranny. Apart from this I hardly think that the number who came would have any effect on a election.
      Typical liberal rhetoric.

      I notice that there is no comment from the right about the giveaways to the well off with super concessions, negative gearing etc given to help stave of not being re-elected.

      So what point was ROBO making except for calling people scum which is derogatory to the refugees.

      I see the problem is a fault of both parties and it is about time that one of them bit the bullet and start hitting those concessions that are not really needed by the more well off.

    • 0
      0

      I think Robo that you should learn to shut your mouth “before” you put that size “15” boot in it and keep it shut, if you can’t give any real opinion other than what you already have !! Dotty

    • 0
      0

      Hi Wstaton. In your closing paragraph you claim that both parties should share the blame for making it possible for making ( that of financial benefits, I presume) concessions for those you call the “Well 0ff”. Do you consider that self funded retirees are among the “Well Off” that you want to financially penalise? Yes? No? Who is, in your opinion in the “Well Off” category? What makes a person “Well Off”? Where does one draw the line in deciding who is well off and deserving of financial punishment (as you imply) and who does not? A bit of enlightenment on your part would help us understand exactly who you are talking about. Are you suggesting that Australia’s Lifters should be penalised to further support the Leaners?

      Until you are able to address the questions I raised about the ( in your view) the evils of “Well Offness” and what to do about those in that category, I am afraid I shall have to consign your comments to the “Half Baked Trendy Lefty Gobbledygook Bin”.

      As far as sorting out the “Scum” from the “Un-Scum” of the migrant community, You seem to want to admit into Australia anyone that claims to be seeking asylum on their word alone. I include the proven liar and self proclaimed asylum seeker Mr Manos, (the Martin Place murderer) that was granted asylum and granted citizenship in this category. How many more “Asylum Seekers” and their disaffected children that have decided to take up ISIS ‘s Jihadi cause to make war on those that do not share their bigoted view of what is right and proper in the world does Australia need to import, and provide sustenance for?

      Again, I must point out that Rudd’s reversal of Howard’s immigration policy in allowing the “Invasion of the Boat People” (and the subsequent cost of this) has created an ongoing drain on Australia’s taxpayers and soaks up money better spent on Australia’s genuine pensioners instead of the care and feeding of imported parasites.

    • 0
      0

      I will not reply about the well off as most people are probably quite aware what i mean. I also not said that being well off is evil. But it is obvious that many are taking advantage of a system that was not intended to reward the so called lifters. One again if they are lifters why are the rest of the community paying them these concessions, doesn’t this indicate that they are leaning a bit.

      As regarding the “scum” comment. What you are saying here is that a few that arrive that are not really refugees (even this should not classify all of them as scum just the few who do mean us harm)and so forth is like saying that the few people in Australia that are criminals means we are all criminals.

      I have not once agreed to what happened during the Rudd era. But I do regard the treatment of refugees as draconian. We treat our criminals better and there are some horrible criminals out there.

      As being trendy, half baked lefty etc, you seem to think that all people who appose the view of the right are just so.

      For your information I am not a lefty or a righty, (heavens “lefty” does not give me a spelling check failure but “righty” does) I am 73 don’t receive the age pension or any concessions (sorry I have a seniors card) I still work from home running my own business and am happy with that. But I also believe in fairness and that all people are not able to do this for whatever reason or circumstances most beyond their control. Yes there will be some who rort the system but once again who are we to tar everyone with the same brush. Some retirees rort so all the retirees do. Yes.

      It is frustrating to me that there are elements amongst all the political parties that are good, some of them bad and wrong. Pity we could not take all the good bits and put them together. I believe in global warming and development of renewable. But hold it that doesn’t make me a greeny. I believe that people should be able to accumulate as much money as the feel they need as long as it is done by their own efforts alone not by being subsidized (does that make me half a righty)

      I believe that people who due to circumstances beyond their fault fall behind should be helped by the community and government. I also believe that anything to do with health and social responsibility should be a government responsibility. (I hope this is not making me a lefty)

      One last word on lifters. The definition of a lifter seems to be that those who make lots of money are the lifters and those who don’t are not. Tell that to the massive number of helpers in the community that spend hours helping others in the whole for no pay. I consider these as lifters. Think of all the firemen, health helpers, Police and many more. Yes they get a wage but they are not going to get rich on it. I consider these as lifters. If I was religious I guess Jesus would as well. You should read what he has to say about money lenders, I guess he would have the same to say about banks today but that’s another story.

    • 0
      0

      Hi W. Thanks for the autobiography. With your well of experience, both past and present, I would have expected you to be a little more sceptical of claims and assertions that we get bombarded with by the left side of the political spectrum. I, like you, tend to judge the people in this forum based on what they choose to reveal about themselves when they post comments. I seem to have a harsher view toward certain segments of the community than you do, but I (REALLY) try to take a balanced view of things, which I fear others do not. To misquote the X Files, “The truth might be out there…somewhere in the middle of the muddle.”

    • 0
      0

      After reading all that, the Hilarity Award goes to KATO up the Top there for Supreme Honesty in Comment !! 🙂

  3. 0
    0

    it would be interesting to see if it knows how much it would save by cutting back on the very generous pensions and payouts of the politicians who sit at home enjoying the protection provided for them by our servicemen and women. Says it all really…..

    • 0
      0

      Tomaso……..what makes me mad is the fact our PM is not an Aussie

    • 0
      0

      tia-maria that is a despicable remark and not worthy. Fact: you cannot stand for public office if you are not Australian.

      And unless you are of Aboriginal descent, one could argue you are not Australian either!

    • 0
      0

      Tomaso, I’m with you; review the politicians perks and pensions most of which devised by Lawyers turned politician.

      Tia-maria; that is a real racist comment. I’m sure he is an Australian Citizen as are millions of other migrants and off-springs of migrants who have and are making this nation great.

    • 0
      0

      If one was born in Australia then you are an Aussie true blue. If you weren’t then you are an Australian citizen.

      If I am correct then I believe even the aboriginals were not the original inhabitants. They moved from the north somewhere. But they do have prior ownership makes them more true blue than the rest of us.

      I also understand that in America you have to be born there to become president. Here, you have to be an Australian citizen to become prime minister or get elected. Did anyone check that T. Abbott had become an Australian citizen.

    • 0
      0

      Wstaton no you don’t have to have been born in the USA to become President, but you do need deep pockets. Mr Obama is a case in point I think.

    • 0
      0

      You are incorrect there. I remember the republicans trying to stop him by saying he was not born in the USA. It in turn was found to be incorrect.

    • 0
      0

      Sorry Wstaton. Article II, Section 1 of the U.S. Constitution states in part:

      “No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.”

      This has been debated but as long as at least one parent is an American (by birth or citizenship) the actual place of birth doesn’t matter. Check the findings about John McCain, George Romney and Ted Cruz 2016 candidate.

    • 0
      0

      Wooooo BOYS club it was not ment to be a racist remark, all I was saying our PM is not an Australian ? I think I am right………..BUT KSS you always try to make mountains out of a mole hill.

    • 0
      0

      No tia-maria you just don’t like being called out.

    • 0
      0

      KSS….your wrong………..I am standing up for the Australians Diggers…….full stop

    • 0
      0

      I realise we have to take a lot of what is written with scepticism, however, Wiki says:
      Tony Abbott was born in England to an Australian mother; her father was Dutch, and her mother was Welsh. Abbott’s father was born in Newcastle upon Tyne, U.K. and he moved to Australia during the Second World War and is an “unconfirmed” naturalized Australian citizen.
      However this debate has been going on for years and according to Peta Credlin, Abbott is a naturalised citizen, but she is not allowing the Press or anyone else to have this confirmed with FOA documented evidence. If you can’t confirm it, who knows?
      Another article indicates that he got naturalised when he was awarded the Rhodes Scholarship as this scholarship is only available to Australian citizens.
      Apparently, there is also scepticism as to whether he renounced his British citizenship and if he did not do so, then he is a dual citizen and ineligible to take office as a politician of any substance in Australia. Apparently there have been High Court decisions on others elected to office who were stripped of office or not allowed to stand because of dual citizenship. Then there are various rules and regulations attached to the electoral role and time-frames involved to declare these suspicions. It would be good if the freedom of information documents were released to confirm the true position.
      When I came to Australia with my parents in 1957 I was 15 years old and didn’t have a passport at the time. I was included (as was my brother) on our parents passports. My father died here and my mother returned to the U.K. Being British subjects in those years it was not necessary to become a naturalized Australian. Only migrants from other countries were expected to become naturalized. However, when I needed a passport of my own to travel overseas some years later, I had a lot of difficulties getting it all sorted out as I had also got married and changed from my maiden name. I was happy to be a naturalized Australian and take the oath, and I used to tease my husband that I had a certificate which actually said that I was Australian, whereas he had a birth certificate that just indicated he was born at a certain hospital in a certain suburb in NSW. I have my certificate framed and I’m very proud of it.
      So, before I took the oath, for many years I was an “unconfirmed” naturalized citizen. There are probably many British subjects living in Australia “unconfirmed” to this day. My brother-in-law (my husband’s sister’s husband) is still a British subject even though he has been in Australia since 1955, and it doesn’t matter how often we have tried to convince him to become a proud Australian where he has lived and worked all his life, he refuses to do. Incredibly they have one son, he lives in England

    • 0
      0

      Sorry about the length of this comment:
      However, I cut myself off just before I was about to finish it, so hence the last bit…….

      ………. he lives in England for the past 30 years and is married to an Italian and they have one son, born there.
      He gets to live in England because his Mother is Australian born and his Father was born in the U.K. I just presume he is still Australian but maybe he has dual citizen?

    • 0
      0

      MITZY thanks for the information

    • 0
      0

      Spot on Mitzy and tia-maria. There is a seious doubt that Abbot has relinquished his British citzenship and as such is ineligible to be a Member of Parliament.
      If he has relinquished his British Citizenship then why not prove it.
      What is he hiding???

    • 0
      0

      For goodness sake get a grip people. Mr Abbott has held public office since 1994. That’s 21 years. Do you seriously think, given the animosity people have towards him, as evidenced daily on this site and else where, that if there were any irregularity surrounding his citizenship and his eligibility for public office, it would not have come out before now.

      You bunch of conspiracy theorists need to have a bex and a lay down.

    • 0
      0

      In that case why hasn’t it been put to rest. Simple as that.

    • 0
      0

      KSS: I think there is equal amounts of animosity applied towards Abbott as there was to Gillard on this site. Some of the derogatory remarks to both of them uncalled for. Whichever political party is in power and making decisions is targeted. This stems from the fact that we have practically equal amounts of commentators posting their remarks based on their political leanings most of the time. There are not too many “independent” viewpoints. If the items we comment on are not political then we get a more balanced viewpoint of the subject matter.
      I doubt there are conspiracy theorists among us, we extrapolate our comments from various sources and the fact that someone started the ball rolling regarding the queries about Mr. Abbott’s naturalisation and/or his dual citizenship is something that has been debated for quite a while now. In fact there was a petition asking the question of “Is our PM legally able to hold office?”, on the Internet asking people to sign it for verification.
      If access is denied (which it is) to obtain this information then of course it raises doubts as to Mr. Abbott’s validity. He is the one person who could put it to rest.

    • 0
      0

      The reason that the question of Tony Abbott’s citizenship status does not die is because of the persistent efforts of the Abbott Haters’ efforts to “get” Abbott and denigrate the man any way they can.

    • 0
      0

      No Wally it doesn’t die because he refuses to release the evidence to support his and Peta Credlin’s claim that he is a naturalised citizen, we know he is. There is evidence he became an Australian naturalised citizen in order to be able to partake of the Rhodes Scholarship that was only available to Australian citizens.
      It doesn’t die because there is a cloud hovering over the question of whether he has completed the form renouncing his “dual citizenship”. Under FOA you can request a copy of this document, however there is an embargo on documents about Mr. Abbott’s citizenship position as of February 2014.
      It’s got nothing to do with Abbott haters, there are and were just as many Gillard haters too. She was in the same position as Abbott, however when entering Parliament she renounced her British(Welsh) citizenship.
      The law states that you cannot be an MP in Australia if you have dual citizenship with another country.
      If everything is above board there is no reason to embargo the information.

    • 0
      0

      There are 2.9m Aussies living here who were born in the UK, does your racial discrimination include all 2.9m?

    • 0
      0

      Frank, What a silly reply, Nothing to do with racism, it’s to do with legality.

    • 0
      0

      What racial discrimination? I’m one of those 2.9m Aussies born in the U.K.
      I took an oath and renounced my British citizenship.
      The law states if you have dual citizenship you cannot be an MP in Australia. There would be conflict of interests as you could be seen to be favouring, for instance, the U.K. in some way, because you are still a British subject. It’s got nothing to do with the 2.9m Aussies who were born in the U.K. At present 1 in 4 Australians have been born overseas!!! Yes, 1 in 4.
      It has all to do with the fact that if you have dual citizenship you cannot be an MP or PM of this country.
      Other MP’s have been stripped or prohibited from serving this country because of their dual citizenship. They were not racially discriminated against. Jackie Kelly was one, she lost the right to represent the community because she had not relinquished her N.Z. citizenship. She did so, and then she was re-elected. Another Senator (can’t remember her name) did likewise.

      I say again, Mr. Abbott’s office has put an embargo on documents relating to his Australian citizenship.
      He’s just a human being like the rest of us, all born the same way, therefore in the position he holds in this country, there should be no doubt as to if he holds that position legally. Nobody is going to kick him out of it, all he has to do is let the people who question his validity sight the verification of it.
      Until this happens there will always be doubt and, as I said before, he is the only one who can tell us. To all intents and purposes it looks as if he is hiding something.

    • 0
      0

      If anyone is discriminated against on the basis of age, religion, sexual persuasion or race in Australia these days it is Caucasian males over 45 years of age.

      And to many of us, Mitzi, no amount of proof will convince some people of something once their minds have been made up. The public uproar and outcry over Lindy Chamberlain and the “Did she or didn’t she” arguments in the Azaria Chamberlain disappearance case are a reminder that public opinion can be a reflection of how people can still hold views despite overwhelming and glaring proof to the contrary.

      So this brings us back to Tony. Is he or isn’t he? Like the lady in the old hair colouring ad that asked “Is she or isn’t she?” (a blonde) “Only she knows for sure”, and I guess that also goes for Tony Abbott. Then to add a little more to the mix, you have the matter of privacy and the invasion thereof. So the “mystery” lingers on.

    • 0
      0

      wally: We don’t need other examples. Its the law, according to the High Court’s decision in other cases and, its apparently in the Constitution as well.
      So, why the embargo? Its not a case of privacy or discrimination it is the law and there is doubt about his validity. If you are the chief politician and running the whole country and having the final say on everything, people need to know that you are doing it all legitimately.

    • 0
      0

      No Mitzy, people with rusted on points of view do not need other examples, as they are incapable of entertaining differing points of view.

  4. 0
    0

    Abbott the rabbit
    get you greasey hands off our wonderful diggers we all have a great debt to repay them best wishes to you all on Anzac day and have a great day I hope to see many of you at the march

    • 0
      0

      marto. 100% behind your comment mate………… our true blue diggers will keep
      marching on as they are as proud as punch……..Enjoy your Anzac Day to all the Armed Forces this is your day.

    • 0
      0

      Hi marto. Your comment about Tony’s greasy mitts grasping at our wonderful diggers brings up a rather disturbing mental image of what is going on in your mind.

      Here’s hoping that the participants in the ANZAC Day marches enjoy a radiant day in the sunshine.

    • 0
      0

      Wally…Pretty sure Marto was referring to Abbott keeping his greasy mitts off the Diggers Pension unless of course Marto is ex navy and then you wouldn’t know what was going on in his mind 🙂

  5. 0
    0

    This is typical of this government attacking those services of people who cannot fight back. (although they will fight to keep this country free and in turn allow governments to screw them) While this happens this government will fight tooth and nail to keep the generous concessions for the rich part of town with super, negative gearing etc.

    Both parties are as bad although Labor is now trying to right things something they should have done during their reign.

    Let the so called heavy lifters lift themselves. They don’t need lifting with these concessions.

    • 0
      0

      Yes both parties are as bad:

      “In 2009, despite assurances by the Labor Government’s Veterans’ Affairs Minister (Alan Griffin MP), the Treasurer (Wayne Swan MP) and the Minister for Families, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs and Minister for Disability Reform (Jenny Macklin MP) that DVA Disability Pensions were included for Review by Dr Jeffrey Harmer into the Reform for More Secure and Sustainable Pensions, it was omitted. This was seen as a blatant and intentional act of discrimination by the Rudd Labor Government against Disabled Veterans. I.e. the ALP moved the goal posts for all pensions except for DVA Disability Pension.”
      http://www.standto.org/latestnews/140-veterans%E2%80%99-disability-pensions-summary

  6. 0
    0

    This government is unbelievable – you can bet your bottom dollar anything they do will disadvantage the people (by which I mean the 80%). The hypocrisy of him always up there with the military, the flags, hogging the limelight, and behind your back cutting the veterans entitlements. The difference in indexation is a huge difference over 10 years. Meanwhile Tony and Co. will be laughing all the way to the bank with their monster lifelong pensions, paid travel, provision of an office and staff (John Howard still trots in to his to dole out a few souvenirs and potter about, at our expense).

  7. 0
    0

    Nobody knows if Tony Abbott is a naturalised Australian or not, because he has arranged for the record to be UNAVAILABLE to us ! No need for secrecy, surely, on such a normal matter. Fortunately he will probably never get this indexation change through, because I would imagine the Greens and Labor, Jacquie Lambie and others in the Senate will unwaveringly oppose it.

    • 0
      0

      What difference does it make? And if there is a difference does it also apply to Ms Gillard?

    • 0
      0

      Of course it makes a difference. If they are not Australian citizens then they haven’t taken the oath of allegiance. It also means we have a foreigner running our country.

    • 0
      0

      If Mr Abbott was not an Australian citizen he could not stand for office. So there is no argument to be had.

    • 0
      0

      KSS wake up mate its about our diggers and the respect our men and women of the armed forces who should be treated with………. more respect especially from our PM Abbott who is the PM of Australia now……….Our Australian digger should be treated with the respect and not having to beg for a decent pensioners…….our politicians REGARDLESS if their Aussie or English they definitely receive what their wanting for retirement …….did they deserve what their payout was ????NO

    • 0
      0

      So then leave out the vitriol about Mr Abbott and what you suppose to be his nationality and stick to the point.

    • 0
      0

      To labour a point, no pun intended, if he did not relinquish his British Citizenship he is ineligible to be a Member of Parliament. Dual citizenship is by Law prohibited for an M.P.

    • 0
      0

      No vitriol, I find that the problem of Mr Abbott’s dual citizenship has been going on for a while. And to date there appears to be no confirmation of his status.

      What are we protecting here, surely it is a simple thing to justify. Considering others have been turfed out because of non conformity this should be a priority. What is being hidden here considering that the FOI request has been refused. Who is protecting who. Our constitution is their for a reason.

      Who is responsible for policing this as they seemed not to be doing anything.

      Having the proof of dual or not dual isn’t exactly a state secret or a danger to this country. If it is proved that he has dual citizenship it simply means Malcolm becomes PM. Maybe best for all of us.

    • 0
      0

      KSS: There is a lengthy post by GEOMAC on 5/9/14 entitled: “Is our PM legally able to hold office”? This post is on yourlifechoices The Meeting Place 5/9/14.
      With respect to Julia Gillard she renounced her British citizenship.
      With respect to Tony Abbott there is a query.
      It is stated he became a naturalized Australian citizen either before or during applying for his Rhodes scholarship at the age of 23(?)

      FOA requests pertaining to whether or not he had filled in the appropriate form renouncing his British citizenship have had “access denied” by the applicants since February 2014.
      Why let a cloud hang over whether you are or are not legally able to hold this office?
      Apparently in the Constitution if you are found to be holding a position to which you are not entitled you could be fined One Hundred Pounds per day of your salary. Accordingly, it didn’t stop that person from eventually being employed again by the Public Purse once they had rectified the anomalies! Just imagine what it could cost you by today’s standards of a PM’s salary. Or maybe it is still the equivalent of One Hundred Pounds converted to today’s currency. Just shows how some parts of the Constitution need rectifying and modernising and we know this is on the agenda for the future. Jackie Kelly was challenged and couldn’t become an MP until she rectified her situation as she still held NZ/AUST. dual citizenship, and there was another lady in the Senate some time back likewise. Probably many more, who knows.

  8. 0
    0

    “It seems that Woolworths and co aren’t the only ones cashing in on the ANZAC centenary” No it seems YLC and Leon are also. A cynical emotionally charged article designed to cash in on the nostalgia and patriotic fervour of Gallipoli leading up to ANZAC day.

    This is not news. There are mooted changes to the indexation of all aged pensions whether paid by Centrelink or Veteran’s Affairs. Or are you saying the Armed Forces pensions should be different to the aged pension? If so then what about the police, emergency service personnel, fire services etc who also put their lives on the line everyday keeping other Australians safe?

    No, this is emotional blackmail by the RSL who are taking the opportunity of the national conscience being focussed on the fallen to make a political point. A cheap shot.

    • 0
      0

      My husband was one of those servicemen for 30 years and he is so over all this poor poor digger stuff. He also will have nothing to do with the RSL given the way they treated the Vietnam vets for the best part of a generation. He reckons doing what he did was/is no different to a copper opening the door on a domestic dispute or a firie/ambo opening a door on a car wreck – you just had to suck it up and do it because you volunteered to be there – even the conscripts did in his early days in the army. Same as stepping back into civvie life. What’s the bloody difference between being a number and a nobody: nothing he says except for the shitload of free sports days. So get on with it. He drives me mad ranting about the poor mes many of whom he will not speak anymore to as he reckons they are rorting DVA and taking the dough from the truly hurt ones.

  9. 0
    0

    Gosh its yet another Anti Liberal Day today isn’t it. Surely everyone is on the same side wanting our War Vets to be cared for with whatever it takes to make their now very senior lives freer of fear of the cost of living. But unfortunately so much money has been just “lost” over recent years – and you DO HAVE TO PUT BLAME ON THE LABOR GOVERNMENTS OF RUDD/GILLARD/RUDD for a lot of this problem. What was the money credit figure when they came to power after John Howard and what did it so rapidly become?? They (Rudd/Gillard/Rudd) just have to take the blame for the financial mess that happened during their era. It was like no other era in Australian history as far as I know. But I also know the problem now has to be fixed, and the Vets. should not be the ones to shoulder the blame. The ‘pensioned off’ ex politicians are very eager to get their fingers into all the money they possibly can, and there are many people earning extremely good money who also believe that escaping their tax dues is what they are entitled to do. The taxation on wealth needs to start at the top and be thoroughly looked at. But who is going to do that?

    • 0
      0

      As well as the money lost we seem to forget about the money given away by various liberal governments as concessions mainly to the rich. And don’t give me that trash about heavy lifters as I see our armed forces and all the other people working to benefit us who are the normal people as heavy lifters.

      Again I must point out this is about the forces pensions not who is to blame and they best way to put it right. I do not see punishing those who are disadvantaged or cannot fight for themselves yet leaving those who are already heavily advantaged alone is the way to go.

    • 0
      0

      Judy, I think when Howard and Costello handed Rudd the keys to the vault there was $70 billion and the budget was in surplus.
      They were unpatriotic in their vandalism.
      They were self centred in their chaos.
      They were simply a useless rabble who stood for nothing except whatever the unions and greens wanted and demanded of them.
      They are still there on the other side of the chamber.
      The Rudd/Gillard/Rudd era will go down in Australia’s history with shameful embarrassment.

  10. 0
    0

    It’s outreageous not to give former service men appropiate pensions. All the hype about
    ANZAC is shown for what it is, a political tactic from the government to manipulate the public to achieve its own goals.

    • 0
      0

      Lula, check the amounts. Service pensions are the same as the aged pension just delivered through a different department. The proposed change to indexation is the same for all pensions no matter what their name or from which department they come.

    • 0
      0

      Correct KSS. And while I strongly support any campaign to ensure our veterans are treated with respect and paid their fair entitlements, I think the RSL is doing Australia a disservice by compounding division. Firemen, rescue personnel, police, electrical workers, miners, and many others also put their lives on the line for the community, and for the most part they don’t receive anything like the benefits veterans enjoy (like free medical care and transport). ALL retirees deserve a fair income in retirement, and ALL retirees should be uniting to demand fairness and decency for everyone. Segregating groups merely plays into the hands of the Government. Divide and conquer is an established rule for winning any battle. Veterans, of all people, should understand that standing together is likely to achieve better outcomes.

    • 0
      0

      Correct KSS. And while I strongly support any campaign to ensure our veterans are treated with respect and paid their fair entitlements, I think the RSL is doing Australia a disservice by compounding division. Firemen, rescue personnel, police, electrical workers, miners, and many others also put their lives on the line for the community, and for the most part they don’t receive anything like the benefits veterans enjoy (like free medical care and transport). ALL retirees deserve a fair income in retirement, and ALL retirees should be uniting to demand fairness and decency for everyone. Segregating groups merely plays into the hands of the Government. Divide and conquer is an established rule for winning any battle. Veterans, of all people, should understand that standing together is likely to achieve better outcomes.

    • 0
      0

      People in the services who have not gone to war or have not been engaged in warfare are paid the same pension as us. However, if they have been engaged in a war or wars and have been injured or the like, they are paid higher. The widow/widower pensions are a little higher than the age pension also for those whose spouses were affected. I think this is what this post is about, the men/women on “military” pensions.
      Single Service Pension $860.20 (same as every age pensioner on a full pension).
      War widow(er) Pension $874.10 + $257.80 Income Support Supplement = $1131.90
      Single disability TPI Pension $1,320.50.
      These military personnel who were injured and returned home and could not work for a living rely solely on their pension for everything in their daily life.
      On Saturday when we watch the ceremonies on TV from here or shores afar (Gallipolli) or participate in them in some form or another “Lest We Forget” should be foremost in our thoughts and the thoughts of our government. Sending men and women to war is not an easy thing to do, and our governments send them away, praising them for their efforts on our behalf, and telling them they will be looked after when they return. How well are they looking after the ones who are suffering with injuries that are not visible such as PTSD? Some are suffering since Vietnam with PTSD. So now, its come to just lets treat them as “leaners”, change the goal posts and reduce their pensions the same way as they intend to reduce other pensions. Hopefully this will not happen, the Opposition, Greens, Independents (thanks for this type of Senate long may it reign) will squash it with respect to all pensions.

Load More Comments

FACEBOOK COMMENTS



SPONSORED LINKS

continue reading

Entertainment

Jenny Eclair: 'Middle-aged women aren't invisible, they are just ignor

"I've had a lapse back into the menopause today," Jenny Eclair declares at the start of our interview. "I had...

Aged Care

Is your loved one in aged care during the pandemic? Here are seven ideas to make things easier if lockdown strikes again

Many families have faced the stress of having a loved one in aged care during this anxious time of COVID-19....

Health & Ageing

How The Midlife Method author keeps her health on track

In The Midlife Method, food and lifestyle writer Sam Rice explores why it is so much harder to lose weight...

Health

How to … tell if you're oversleeping and what to do

An adult needs between seven-and-a-half to nine hours of sleep each night. If you're consistently sleeping for longer than this...

Community

Hand in hand at London Zoo with a simian friend

YourLifeChoices' 91-year-old columnist Peter Leith recalls an encounter of the simian kind during a visit to London Zoo back in...

Podcast

Retirement Made Simple

In this interview with podcast host John Deeks, the 80-year-old offers pearls of wisdom on all matters retirement: the sea...

Uncategorized

The last blockbuster had an end of summer sleepover

Several months ago, the last Blockbuster store on Earth temporarily rebranded - as an extremely nostalgic Airbnb. A few lucky...

Australia

Best day trips from Melbourne

We've got more reasons than ever to embrace the adventures we can find in our own backyard and, luckily, Victoria...

LOADING MORE ARTICLE...