Foskey, dogs and vomit

Hear Hear Chris,

Now that the principle has been raised, move it onto the wider problem.

Re: the post-grad life, my comment was more aligned towards the fact she could have obtained employment at any time with the qualifications she had, yet decided not to. It wasn’t intended to be a slight on her choice to persue her Doctorate, merely the choice to continue living off the Government’s teat while doing so.

If I had my way, I’d be a Doctor as well, I’m sure everybody reading this post would have loved the opportunity to stay at school and obtain a doctorate of whatever field they consider they are best at.

The fact is though, most of us eventually find out that we have to take a break, obtain part-time work, or abandon our potentials due to lack of fiscal credit.

Heck, if I had the money do you really think I’d be sitting where I am right now over a beach in somewhere sunny and warm with a few lazy cocktails ?

As Chris quite rightly pointed out though, it’s time to switch focus to all of the other abusers of the system, since I haven’t yet heard of a Government refunding taxpayers due to the common perception that they are not spending their tax dollar wisely enough.

The point that Lex makes is a valid one – the money from the sale of the property will simply go into the overall budget, not specifically to purchase any particular properties. If one were silly enough to track the money through, it could end up anywhere.

I accept that Deb Foskey is her own worst enemy on this, and was either very foolish to continue her tenancy, or was poorly advised (or both).

The point remains that she was simply acting in accordance with the current ACT Housing rules. Vilifying one particular tenant is useful where it highlights a major discrepancy in the rules (and also probably a level of hypocrisy), but I think this debate needs to move on to the much wider problem where there will no doubt be many tenants paying this fictitious “market rent” who should be moved on.

Pressure now needs to be applied to the ACT Government to overhaul the way in which Housing is operated, and let’s get rid of the fiction that those paying full rent are supporting the system – obviously full rent means different things to different people.

I agree with Johnboy’s comment re studying – most of the PHD students I have known have had to tutor at some point to make do on the “luxirious” lifestyle that is post-grad life. Re: Deb’s ex-house, I will wait to see whether the ACT Govt will actually buy a (or 2) new residences (anywhere) with said money or whether they will use it for ACT Housing debt.

I thought Shanahan’s article could be summed up as “government by wankers for wankers”.

The writing’s already on the wall BT, if she doesn’t move out of Canberra to her interstate retreat after the next election she’s either dumb or stupid, take your pick.

Oh, I see.

A doctor in moonbat theory.

When’s the next election? Or rephrased, when’s she going on the waiting list?

Noooooooooooooooo, she’s studied at the ANU!

I wonder if Deb’s going to go back into Govt housing once she’s kicked out of the Assembly next election?

Global politics of population according to this page.

As an aside, exactly what is the discipline to which deb’s doctorate applies? I’m assuming she’s not a GP.

Deb only opens her mouth to change feet.