🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <4mfbdl$28d@csc.canberra.edu.au>,
pickle@blitzen.canberra.edu.au (Michael Paxton) wrote:

> In a loose interpretation of the original Sanskrit David Howse wrote: 
> :>
> :>>That would be an interesting precedent...making an employee pay the cost
> :>>of filling his position should he choose to retire
> :>
> :>I disagree.  By standing for office the MP is agreeing to retain the
> :>position until the next election.  By retiring early he is defaulting
> :>on this.  Sounds like a breach of contract to me...
> 
> As far as i know there is no written binding contract...any implied
> contract would have a big clause that says "If P. Keatings party fails to
> hold a majority, he will retire from office". Remember people voted for
> him in full knowledge of what his plans were. John Howard expressed the
> same intent.

What rubbish!  Neither individual admitted, neither on the great debate 2
when they were asked this specific question, nor in any other public forum,
that they were planning to retire if defeated.  There was intense media
speculation on the issue, but without public confiurmation from the
principals at the time, that was all it was.  Go shove your "full
knowledge" back up where you got it out of from.

 ~ m
 u U     Cheers!
  \|
   |>    -Peter Mackay 
  / \    petemack@ozemail.com.au
 _\ /_