Talk:Easton affair

Correcting bias

The lack of an article previously had been noted as being biassed: [1] - glad we have fixed it--Matilda ^talk 08:36, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

I think it was just a lack of a coincidence of time, inclination and resources on the part of any potential contributor, not bias. Any accusation of bias found in an Andrew Bolt blog has to be regarded as the epitome of ironical humour. Retarius | Talk 09:20, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Expansion topics

• A source for the text of the Easton Petition would be useful for expansion, as would details of the means by which its falsity was determined.
• John Halden was subject to, and defeated, a punitive motion in the Legislative Council. Was it for expulsion? Retarius | Talk 08:54, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

In article cites

Only two at the moment - in view of assertions in the article - about 20 are needed - that info does not come from thin air SatuSuro 08:23, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Keating Government's legal challenge

I am hoping someone can clarify with what I am about to ask because it has been bothering me for years.

The Keating Government launched a legal challenge against this royal commission with an opinion poll showing that the majority of people supporting the legal challenge. However the same poll also showed that these same people did not want the legal challenge funded by their tax payers money.

Considering the fact that the sole source of income for the government of the day comes from tax payers money where on earth did they think the money was going to come from for the legal challenge.

If not their tax payers money how else did they think the Government was going to fund the legal challenge which they supported?122.108.156.100 (talk) 04:04, 1 October 2016 (UTC)