Sound public policy is in the eyes of the beholder, but implementation is legislation so, your wish would be the 200 odd bits of legislation passed during this parliament in the face of a policy free Noalition? Question time is pretty much up to the opposition: they can ask policy and program questions like: How does policy X as implemented in program Y affect my electorate? which is their job. Or they can ask about Craig Thompson which is the job of the police and the courts; or they can ask about something JG did early in her career outside of parliament, again the job of the courts or police; or they can fling accusations on other topics. In the absence of substantial questions, and in the face of smear and innuendo, why would the government not go tit for tat in Question Time on an issue that they see as open question rather than baseless? Not that I think tit for tat is a good or useful response but pots on one side, kettles on t'other both covered in soot, your bias meets someone else's prejudice and you want to say you've had a gut full! You probably need to grow up a little yourself.

I suggest you read this:

http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/gillard-reveals-true-nature-in-playing-gender-card-20121010-27cnq.html#ixzz28rr0nV9q

And this:
http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/-27bnm.html

Both are in the Fairfax Press, a long time supporter of Gillard. There is much more to come. Be patient - it all will be revealed in time.

I agree and as I quote Anne Summers is a Walkley Award–winning journalist
"I can only speculate. Is the Canberra press gallery so thoroughly disillusioned with Gillard after two and a bit years of reporting her prime ministership that it cannot adjust its perspective when the game changes? Were the briefings by the Opposition yesterday so persuasive that seasoned journalists chose to ignore constitutional realities in favour of an ideological sledge? Or was it something else? I wish that rather than simply opine, that they would talk us through, share the reasoning, explain to us mere mortals how they got to these extraordinary judgements.

They are, after all, seemingly so out of kilter with how so many of the rest of us reacted that they need to provide some explanation for us to have any reason to take at all seriously anything they write in future."
Gone is the turned cheek: Gillard as we've rarely seen her - The Drum Opinion (Australian Broadcasting Corporation) http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/4305728.html via @abcthedrum

Sommerville says
"There is much more to come. Be patient - it all will be revealed in time."

The signature tune of the coward. Come on Peter - don't just hint at accusations - put up or shut up.

Have you been hanging around the grubby and disgusting web site of Larry Pickering? That would be in line with your usual standards.
"Pickering is commonly known as a cartoonist, but he's also an inveterate liar, a bankrupt conman with a seedy history of fleecing the gullible of millions of dollars while not paying his own bills."
http://www.thecourier.com.au/story/234232/larry-pickering-the-conman-stalking-gillard/

I wasn't talking about Abbots speech on Gillard but the longevity on parliament sitting days the Labor Ministers utilise on Abbot about gender bias. This has been happening well before Abbot or Allan Jones's recent comments.

Stick to solving the public problems of the Australian people and developing sound policy instead of approaching the microphone just to debate personal quarrels.

I hear Abbot & Julia get stuck into the same gender groups just as much as they both do the opposite gender.

Too many of you on here think its all about man v woman even when the topics do not transend gender boundaries.

Labor however, turn to gender bias 'lately' whenever their policies fail to hold up in the real world. Unfortunately this is all too often.

The unfortunate truth is that Abbott and the Libs in general use every form of bigotry and prejudice they can unleash in order to disrupt and obstruct the Government going about its business of "solving the public problems of the Australian people". It is laughable to talk about "developing sound policy" when the Liberals appear to have no policies on any issues and confine themselves to unrelenting personal attacks or misrepresentation of ALP policy eg Abbott lying to Parliament yesterday about the doubled electricity bill.

They all are just as bad as each other but you pick out Abbott and the Libs in general?

Do we all remember the pre election no carbon tax pledge from our PM or is that different because it wasn't Abbott?

What Gillard actually said was she wouldn't introduce a carbon tax but she would introduce a carbon price. And she didn't introduce a carbon tax but she did introduce a carbon price. So she told the truth but Abbott, Jones etc have lied about that ever since. How does that make them all as bad as each other?

What has Pickering got to do with whether Julia Gillard received back-handers organised by AWU officials?

Look, it wasn't huge amounts of money and I sure she hasn't become PM in order to misappropriate government funds - but facts are facts whether you are left or right.

If you think that taking a few thousands in free renovations disqualifies you from being PM, then that should be the end of the matter. If, on the other hand, you think it is unimportant, then just come out and say it: "I think Gillard is a great PM regardless of whether she dipped her hand in the cookie jar in the 90's"

The fact is that you don't have the faintest idea whether that is true but given that she is a lawyer it is extremely unlikely to be true.

But facts are facts whether you are left or right Did you personally make corrupt payments to her? If you did then just come on out and say it. If you didn't then you should just admit "Hey I'm a gullible spreader of defamatory rumours because I can't handle having a woman as Prime Minister."

Hi again Mike,

I have to admit to purchasing a Pickering Calendar over 30 years ago, to hang behind my toilet door, which seemed appropriate at the time. You appear to know much more about Pickering than I do - curious that.

I do read the Fairfax and News Limited Press and a number of overseas publications. I am interested in following the trends in the tone of the reporting as well. The articles cited represent a distinct change in the tone of the Fairfax Press, at least in my view. You may of course disagree.

The Baker article appears to be based on the original documentation recently released by Michael White. I do read the documents being published by Michael, more so than his commentary. He says there are more to come. I am quite happy to wait, watch and read.

Actually they didn't vote to support Slipper, they voted against a sleazy cheap stunt and in support of due legal process, something conservatives used to support before they completely lost their moral compass. And they already knew he would resign in due course. But don't let facts get in the way of of your posturing about morality.

Thanks for your calm rationale explanation Ian. Yes I am one of those poor souls that the Press refer to as "a Labour supporter" which leaves little alternative but to posture about morality since the Labour Party has none at the moment.

Replace "rationale" with rational...