Skip to content Skip to main navigation

Spend my pretties! Spend!

johnboy 24 March 2009 87

Our Chiefly Leader commands that you stay in town this easter and blow your stimulus locally.

    The print, television and radio advertising campaign is similar to the one conducted prior to last Christmas, encourages Canberrans to shop locally and spend time in the ACT over the Easter long weekend.

    “Due to the current global economic situation, it is important that the ACT Government continues to actively support the local business community in any way we can. We need to work together to help cushion our businesses, and their employees, from any significant decline in consumer confidence, and Canberrans spending their money locally is one way that we can all help,” Mr Stanhope said

    The campaign will run from 23 March to 5 April 2009 in all local media and is designed to coincide with the payment of the Federal Government’s Back-to-School Bonus, the Single Income FamilyBonus and the $900 Tax Bonus for Working Families.

    “The ‘one off’ government payments will mean that many Canberrans will have a little extra to spend and we’d like to see some of this money being spent in our local retail and hospitality outlets”, Mr Stanhope said.

Lord Stanhope suggests you have a holiday at home by attending the National Folk Festival, something we can agree on.

A little disappointing to see the recipients of the advertising loot though:

WIN Television, Southern Cross 10, Prime TV, The Canberra Times, City News, FM104.7, Mix 106, 2CA and 2CC.

Feeling a little bit like the last kid picked here!

So anyway, go on, I know you’ve been gagging to tell us all about how you’re going to spend your $900.


What's Your Opinion?


Please login to post your comments, or connect with
87 Responses to Spend my pretties! Spend!
Filter
Order
« Previous 1 3 4 5
jakez jakez 11:40 am 26 Mar 09

peterh said :

Mr stanhope can ask us to spend the windfall we got from the govt locally. I disagree with the idea of blowing nearly $1,000 on frippery to appease him. That payment has been spent on local industry. Telstra and Actew bills. That will keep me and my non working wife and 3 kids with a phone and power, water etc.

are we a working family? I work, my wife looks after 3 kids. I have the better part of the deal.

Actually you would have paid those things anyway, so an economist would take that into account when considering where this money has ‘gone’. What you do with the money that you would have put onto those bills but now have spare, is essentially the affect of the stimulus.

peterh peterh 11:29 am 26 Mar 09

Mr stanhope can ask us to spend the windfall we got from the govt locally. I disagree with the idea of blowing nearly $1,000 on frippery to appease him. That payment has been spent on local industry. Telstra and Actew bills. That will keep me and my non working wife and 3 kids with a phone and power, water etc.

are we a working family? I work, my wife looks after 3 kids. I have the better part of the deal.

chewy14 chewy14 10:12 am 26 Mar 09

Did Hockey run out of cliches to use already?

ant ant 9:51 am 26 Mar 09

I didn’t see the interview (I don’t think? Not sure). But I guess it showed that Hockey is “all mouth and trousers”, a performer without enough substance.

Keating rolled him up before the lection, dismissing him as “that Shrek thing”.

jakez jakez 9:37 am 26 Mar 09

When reading my reply ant you should know that I as a member of the Liberal Party, think that Lindsay Tanner is one of my favourite Federal politicians. I think he is one of the most intelligent, decent, and able people in our current House and Senate. Even though he badmouthed Milton Friedman and Arthur Laffer in that interview (which I thought was uncouth and false), I and many of the more intelligent members of the Liberal Party rate him highly.

It wasn’t Tanner, it was Hockey. He just did not have anything to say and it had nothing to do with Tanner’s performance or the questions of the interviewer. It was distraction and misdirection at its finest. It was ‘talk gibberish till they run out of time’ politics. It was appalling. That interview was a gift to Tanner wrapped in a pretty little box.

ant ant 9:29 am 26 Mar 09

jakez said :

realityskin said :

johnboy said :

And yet he still knows more than Joe Hockey.

JOE IS A GOD

(Jakez): He really isn’t.

I was very disappointed with his performance on Lateline against Tanner just before he got the promotion.

It’s unusual for Hockey to do badly as he’s an entertaining fellow. But I think this speaks to Tanner’s considerable talent. IMO, Tanner is one of the most able people in parliament, he’s a clear thinker, wheras Hockey tends to be a bit all mouth and trousers.

Tanner, for instance, was one of the few in parliament to speak up about the inequity of taking from the childless to give to the childed, made some very clear points about it. I guess now they’re in government, he has to support the current policy but it’s nice to think that, behind closed doors, he’s one of those questioning the bandwagon.

jakez jakez 9:19 am 26 Mar 09

Cletus 2 said :

jakez: so you couldn’t answer any of my questions and you have no idea how to do better yourself but you just know they are doing a bad job. OK.

Don’t get me wrong Cletus, the points you raised make for interesting debate in the right hands, however I just found the irreconcilable conflict between your your complaints and solution extremely interesting. I again note that you have not responded to the points that I have chosen to engage you on.

jakez jakez 9:15 am 26 Mar 09

realityskin said :

johnboy said :

And yet he still knows more than Joe Hockey.

JOE IS A GOD

He really isn’t.

I was very disappointed with his performance on Lateline against Tanner just before he got the promotion.

Cletus 2 Cletus 2 12:40 am 26 Mar 09

jakez: so you couldn’t answer any of my questions and you have no idea how to do better yourself but you just know they are doing a bad job. OK.

Davo111 Davo111 11:16 pm 25 Mar 09

I already spent mine on a new server & router. Both profits going interstate/overseas. Sorry Mr Stanhope

johnboy johnboy 9:15 pm 25 Mar 09

Cranky.

This story is done here.

I’m sorry for your loss but that’s the end of it.

cranky cranky 9:13 pm 25 Mar 09

JB,

Sorry to offend, but the topic is regarding Sonic requesting us to spend locally. Sonic derived lack of funds does cripple my erstwhile attempts to comply.

Thumper Thumper 9:13 pm 25 Mar 09

Yeah, that’s a fair call…

johnboy johnboy 9:11 pm 25 Mar 09

Jeez thumper, you don’t think I know what I want to run with?

It’s had a tonne of oxygen here, a great deal of it offtopic.

No More.

Thumper Thumper 9:10 pm 25 Mar 09

JB,

you could run with this. It’s perfect for RA…

johnboy johnboy 9:07 pm 25 Mar 09

Cranky, You’re offtopic, and you raise this constantly.

Try other outlets, get a lawyer, but give it a rest here.

cranky cranky 9:05 pm 25 Mar 09

It was only on writing the above piece that the possibility of taking this further occurred to me. I have, until now, thought that exposing this bastardry on this forum might have convinced the ACT Labor Party to pay up, simply to shut me up. We are talking a very small amount, but it jars like hell when you can’t afford to lose it.

A little background. I did advertising for another candidate as well, and was instructed to invoice the candidate himself. The cheque in payment was issued by ACT Labor. I invoiced ACT Labor directly for the Hettinger material, but was told to invoice Hettinger himself.

Their system was obviously to pay via the ACT Labor campaign office, except for Hettinger, whom they disowned at the last minute. Just as my invoice hit their desk.

This was an anti-Hessinger campaign, but I am the meat in the sandwich, and probably the only loser financially.

A brilliant demonstration of the arrogance and bastardry of the ACT Labor back office.

Thumper Thumper 8:48 pm 25 Mar 09

cranky,

surely you have some recourse? Start writing to everyone under the sun, including the CT and City news. Get it out there if you haven’t been paid.

cranky cranky 8:43 pm 25 Mar 09

Not eligable as I didn’t earn enough.

Assisted by the non-payment of a bill by Sonic and Co for material supplied to ACT Labor for the last election. (Hettinger’s campaign).

I would be taken to court if I pulled the same stunt. Unfortunately, I can’t afford to pursue the debt through the courts, and being business oriented, probably not within the ambit of the Small Claims Court. If anyone knows diferently, I would love to resolve this matter.

Thumper Thumper 8:20 pm 25 Mar 09

Ant has a legitimate gripe. Everything these days is designed to cater to families with kids (err, working fckuing families), if you are single you are simply forgotten.

Bogans on the dole received shit loads for each kids they had before Xmas. What did childless tax paying people receive? Nothing.

Try to take a day off from work without a kid, nope, ain’t going to happen. Have a kid? Simply pull out the old my child is sick routine and no-one will question it.

So yes, ant has a perfectly legitimate gripe.

« Previous 1 3 4 5

CBR Tweets

Sign up to our newsletter

Top
Copyright © 2020 Region Group Pty Ltd. All rights reserved.
the-riotact.com | riotact.com.cn | aboutregional.com.au | b2bmagazine.com.au | thisiscanberra.com

Search across the site