Hon. Stephen Martin (and Paul Keating) Vs. John Howard
Top Comments
All Comments (200)
-
John never won the election, Keating's impervious arrogance certainly assured even 'The Boston Strangler' himself would've won that election... All said and done, Keating had all their measure in the House Of Reps... Those were the days of entertainment compared to todays drivle fest and boredom..
-
great to see keating calmly working away while johnny ranted and lurched away over deaf ears
-
@esparkely racial tension?
-
@fenderboy88 As a percentarge of GDP the 1988/89 Surplus was the biggest in Australia's history.
-
I'm afraid the Speaker mislead the House - a motion of no-confidence is the most serious motion that can be moved!
-
@flyingpigstuff While Howard cut certain things he was a big spender in other areas like election campaigns.
Howard became so use to winning elections that he spent big money during election campaigns and Costello objected in private.
Howard forgot to govern for individuals and became ''labor light'' when it came to some programs like the Baby bonus,giving welfare to single parents in housing commision areas for example which is what you would expect Labor to do.
-
@fenderboy88 Howard gave us a surplus because he didn't spend a cent on anything..
-
this is awesome
frogmouth howard made plenty of threats to union members with the australian building construction commission another work choices tax payer funded scheme 6 months jail or a $22.000 fine for any type of industrial action another pineapple by lazarus the frog to working class people if i was offended by the speaker like lazarus was instead today im facing a fine of $28000 thanks to the ABCC up in karratha i will probably end up in prison as i cannot afford $28000 thanks lazarus for the ABCC
luneco100 1 year ago 17
@fenderboy88 Pretty easy to run a surplus given how things were at the time. A trained monkey could of ran the country without a hitch.
taipan185 10 months ago 3