Wow neffo, nice find.

Bazinga, he obviously had a talking to by the party and was told if he has a huge swing against him that he should step aside. Or probably even got told he should step aside either way.

that s*** better happen, maybe a gaming leather clad biker has treated him to another letter

TROUBLE-plagued Attorney-General Michael Atkinson has announced he will not recontest the ministry and will retire to the back bench.

He will retire to the back bench and serve his full term but will not recontest the seat of Croydon in 2014.

Chakas, you may be right, but we're talking about Atkinson here. The guy who thought it would be a good idea to censor blogs during an election. The same guy who came up with anti-bikie laws. His ideas can't be popular within the party. He's like the Barnaby Joyce of the ALP, but worse. Hmmm, actually that's a tough call who's worse...

Pinky, that's probably why he's shuffling to the back bench. He's been a lightning rod for controversy it seems, but I doubt they wanted the black eye of him leaving before a possibly close election (would have given the opposition a lot of ammo), so he's slowly moving out of the way on what seems like his own terms (that's just my opinion).

More news

From the article nF posted:

Mr Atkinson said that it would be irresponsible, given the Government's majority of one, to create a by-election in those circumstances.

Regardless of how many seats the government is in the majority - it would be irresponsible to contest an election and then resign without good reason as soon as you get elected you drongo. By-elections cost the taxpayer time and money, politicians seem to think the electoral fairies pick up the bill.

Best news I've had all day.

Unless some conservative in Tasmania does an Atkinson.

http://i45.tinypic.com/311rgpz.gif

Pinky, that's probably why he's shuffling to the back bench. He's been a lightning rod for controversy it seems, but I doubt they wanted the black eye of him leaving before a possibly close election (would have given the opposition a lot of ammo), so he's slowly moving out of the way on what seems like his own terms (that's just my opinion).

Yeah definitely agree with that. I don't think Atkinson was ever the fall-guy - I reckon he just caused his own controversy with his whacko ideas.

Dazhel has a pretty good point - but from a Labor party perspective Atkinson still has a lot of experience and a lot to offer the party in terms of how to run the show, so I don't think it's that irresponsible.

One thing is for sure: the next Standing Meeting of the Attorneys-General on April 29th (when they raise the R18+ discussion paper conclusions) will have me glued to news.

Well this is nice to hear... but i gotta wonder how much say he will have on who replaces him??? Will we just get a younger and fresher version of him?

Now to see Conroy go.

Its a shame that labor held on.

At least with Atkinson gone there is hope of change for game classification.

Hopefully the new person isn't as traditional as him.

if labor loses is he still the AG

Did anyone answer this? Because iirc, he still will be, it's 2 seperate jobs basically. So even retiring to the back bench of politics, he can still be a states AG. In fact, he probably gets paid more as AG than front bencher of some s***ty political party in some even s***tier state.

Read my post

the next Standing Meeting of the Attorneys-General on April 29th (when they raise the R18+ discussion paper conclusions)

Its still not even confirmed that the R18+ for games issue is on the table for the next meeting of Attorneys-General.

Did anyone answer this? Because iirc, he still will be, it's 2 seperate jobs basically. So even retiring to the back bench of politics, he can still be a states AG. In fact, he probably gets paid more as AG than front bencher of some s***ty political party in some even s***tier state.

bahahahahaha you couldn't be more wrong.

The AG is a minister of the government. If that government loses, then the new government will have a new AG.

Do you really think a Liberal government would have a Labor AG?

the next Standing Meeting of the Attorneys-General on April 29th (when they raise the R18+ discussion paper conclusions)

Its still not even confirmed that the R18+ for games issue is on the table for the next meeting of Attorneys-General.

That's true. The input could swing it either way as well. It had the largest amount of feedback for a discussion submission ever (something like 55k submissions) so that could mean they will prioritise it or it could mean they will say, "We need more time to process this."

I personally think they will get it on the table because the March/April meeting is the censorship meeting, seems like the obvious thing to address and surely the Feb 28th cut-off date is simply in place to be able to get the issue sorted at the April meeting. Otherwise we just wait until November.

http://www.mcvuk.com/news/38103/Switzerland-passes-violent-games-ban

Pinky - yeah I have no problems with what Atkinson's done - if he heads up the back bench until 2014 but doesn't resume ministerial duties, that's fine. I just have a pet peeve for those politicians that cause a by-election because they haven't made a commitment to serve the full term.

Resigning from the politics should be reserved for situations like when someone is critical/terminally ill or there's a serious impediment that prevents the job from being done, not getting offered sweet private sector job or for when they win the seat but lose government etc.

Conroy and Atkinson
I can never remember which d******* is which

The AG is a minister of the government. If that government loses, then the new government will have a new AG.

To which I thought he was a minister of the federal government. I'm sorry if my incorrectness offended you.

The AG is a minister of the government. If that government loses, then the new government will have a new AG.

To which I thought he was a minister of the federal government. I'm sorry if my incorrectness offended you.

Your incorrectness is repulsive casa. Begone.

To which I thought he was a minister of the federal government.

There's a federal Attorney-General as well as Attorneys-General at the State level.

Your in-correctness is only offensive if you, and people like you, wrote submissions on the R18+ issue. As lots of time will be wasted on submissions that are factually and legally incorrect.