Talk:Joe Hockey

Part 1
This page is strongly biassed - much of it appears to be election campaign material. In particular, the CV section is copied-and-pasted directly from Joe Hockey's political web-site.


 * I agree, tag added. Cheers, WikiTownsvillian 08:42, 26 May 2007 (UTC)


 * I have now cleaned up the article and deleted all the campaign info, both clean up and NPOV tags removed. Thanks, WikiTownsvillian 08:49, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Part 2

 * Since we are getting rid of campaign material, can we please remove the YRAW caricature of Hockey? It is not appropriate for a BLP. --Surturz (talk) 02:57, 27 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Sure, if you gain consensus to do so. I believe it should stay as it was part of the your rights at work campaign, featuring the defacto minister for workchoices, arguably the biggest issue as to why his party lost at last year's election. Timeshift (talk) 03:17, 27 May 2008 (UTC)


 * I have no problem with it appearing in the Workchoices article (as it does), propaganda from both sides should appear there. But since this is a BLP and the image clearly makes fun of him, I don't think it should be here. I will also make the point that consensus is required for the inclusion of material, not its removal. --Surturz (talk) 03:22, 27 May 2008 (UTC)


 * But if removal is disputed, then consensus is required. Timeshift (talk) 04:07, 27 May 2008 (UTC)


 * It doesn't work that way, Timeshift. Go read the policy. The image doesn't really belong in this article; it's derogatory, doesn't add to the article, and isn't notable in and of itself. Rebecca (talk) 04:09, 27 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Please state where policy says consensus is required to include but not remove. But at least there are more opinions than Surturz now, and if it appears that the majority want it gone, then so it shall be. But let's see. Timeshift (talk) 04:12, 27 May 2008 (UTC)


 * It is explicit on WP:CONS - look at the flow chart. Consensus is reached when no-one reverts or re-edits a particular section. Consensus means everyone should agree, not just a majority. --Surturz (talk) 04:20, 27 May 2008 (UTC)


 * I agree with the removal, as it isn't about Joe Hockey (it's about a campaign). I'm not absolutely certain the image could add much to the campaign, but I'm not an expert in that area so will leave that call to others with more knowledge of YRAW and so on.
 * General comment: legalistic and narrow interpretations of consensus, which do not exist in the document anywhere, such as "consensus is needed to do this but not this" are entirely helpful and even counterproductive. Consensus clearly states we're all meant to work together. Sometimes that will be incredibly difficult, as polarisation can happen and two sides form who can't agree on anything for as much pride as any other reason. But we have to at least try. And making demands and false claims that those demands are based on policy do not actually help that process. Orderinchaos 04:29, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

"Consensus means everyone should agree" that is simply untrue. Timeshift (talk) 04:52, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
 * From WP:CONS... "'Developing consensus requires special attention to neutrality - remaining neutral in our actions in an effort to reach a compromise that everyone can agree on.'"
 * (emphasis mine). This would seem to suggest that consensus requires more than a simple majority. --Surturz (talk) 05:11, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Why delete the image? It's actually a good likeness of 'im - and I can assure you I have been up close and personal at the aircraft noise forums a few years back. I can't understand why you deletionistas get so worked up about things like this. The image is relevant to the page's subject and the caption places it clearly in context. It adds a bit of colour and it demonstrates that Hockey was effective enough in his role to be the subject of this sort of subversion. Albatross2147 (talk) 14:38, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

I would like this image removed. The YRAW campaign was not a campaign instituted by Hockey, the image makes fun of him and should be removed as per WP:BLP. It already exists in the workchoices article, where it has more grounds for inclusion. It is hard to see how including election material is not POV --Surturz (talk) 22:06, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

I agree with removal of the image. The image doesn't even seem to be supported by text of this article and it seems like it's just been wacked in the middle to mock Hockey. This is a BLP and I just can't see how it is justified here. Sarah 05:36, 15 June 2008 (UTC)


 * I completely agree with Sarah and Surturz, the image is not supported by text and seems only to be included in order to push someone's negative view of Hockey. Let's try and keep a Neutral point of view. Loopla (talk) 06:53, 15 June 2008 (UTC)


 * I don't even see it as a POV issue, it's just completely irrelevant to the subject. Had it appeared on a front page and been one of those 10 Iconic Images or something I would argue it should be here, but it's not. I agree with the decision to remove. Orderinchaos 05:38, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

As I said earlier, I believe this image should be removed from this bio per BLP, but after commenting I noticed the image was actually uploaded under fair use, so for the time being I've commented it out because it violates our non-free content policy WP:NFCC. The image page has no rationale for its inclusion on any page so under policy it should be removed from all articles for which there is no rationale. Additionally, I don't believe this image can meet the policy requirements regardless of a rationale for this page because it violates criteria 8 - "Significance. Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic." I don't see how this image can ever meet this criteria for this page but it mostly certainly does not at the present time because it's not even discussed in the text. I think consensus is forming that the image isn't appropriate for this page anyway because of BLP concerns and if so it should be completely deleted from this page, but at this point I am only commenting it out because it violates NFCC. So the folks who reckon it should be used might want to think about writing a rationale for each page they want this image used on and ensuring they can justify its use under every criteria listed at WP:NFCC. Sarah 11:16, 15 June 2008 (UTC) For folks coming to this discussion now, the issue is whether this image Image:Joe_hockey_caricature.jpg should be displayed in the "Political career" section of this article. Sarah

I said at the beginning that if the majority want it removed from this article, then so be it. Timeshift (talk) 13:57, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

Excellent. Well, it seems like this discussion has reached its end so I'm going to try unprotecting the article now. I'll be watching it though and if edit warring or vandalism starts up again I will reprotect it. Sarah 02:59, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Armenia
Just popped in to revert some vandalism. I note inthe history there seems to be some edit reversions about Hockey's Armenian connections. I note that at http://www.missionarmenia.com/presentation_night.htm it is asserted ''Mr Hockey, whose father is of Armenian background, is the second Australian government minister (after the Hon. Phillip Ruddock) to have visited Armenia. During his visit in November 2005, Mr Hockey met with the Prime Minister and the Minister for Health. He also planted a memorial tree on the grounds of the Armenian Genocide Memorial in Yerevan, capital of Armenia.'' I note his website has no speeches listed for November 2005 when he visited Armenia or for this presentation night in November 2006.. His maiden speech only refers to Armenia in the context of his electorate having the highest number of Armenians in the country. However in an interview with Kerri-Anne Kennerly in June 2007 she refers to you took your father who was born in Bethlehem, Armenian, back to Palestine in 1998 - he does not contradict her and moreover the transcript is on his website  - I think therefore he could be said to be of Armenian background and it is not controvesial for him.--Golden Wattle  talk 00:17, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject class rating
This article was automatically assessed because at least one article was rated and this bot brought all the other ratings up to at least that level. BetacommandBot 17:19, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Mike Bailey
Is it really necessary to mention Hockey's electorate competitor in this article? Surely more suited in Division of North Sydney? Removed pending discussion. - arkenstone (talk) 09:20, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Two images
Please keep an eye on the second image i've had to re-add, again. Intelligent Mr Toad seems to like bundling the removal of the image in other edits. Timeshift (talk) 16:04, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Hockey's Performance as Shadow Treasurer
Hockey's "numbers" as Shadow Treasurer have been challenged. Firstly with his figures presented at the last election (2010) being challenged as being fantasy and not adding up - furthermore he claimed that his figures were vetted which is apparently not the case. Secondly he has more recently had a blow up on the National Press Club Luncheon on further scepticism on his figures.

Now it may be POV to claim he is a poorly performing Shadow Treasurer, but the controversies associated with his tenure as Shadow Treasurer should be mentioned, particularly as the apparent “hole” in is election promises damaged the Coalition. It is surely not defamatory to mention that he presided over such questions over the Opposition’s budgetary figures, and that this may lead some to question his competence in such a senior role. To NOT mention it makes the article look more like hagiography than a truly encyclopaedic article. After all it is not POV to say that Sir John Kerr was involved in controversy over his decision to dismiss the Whitlam government, even if you feel he was fully justified in doing so. As it stands, the article sounds too much like a Hockey puff piece by avoiding these political slip ups. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.58.245.247 (talk) 15:01, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

Age of Entitlement
This article needs a discussion of Joe Hockey's Age of Entitlement speech. Here is a first attempt - please place the following text in the article before the segment on the Future of Australian Diversity. --110.20.234.69 (talk) 22:05, 18 September 2015 (UTC)

On 17 April 2012, Joe Hockey gave a speech at the Institute of Economic Affairs in London. It warned Australians that the time to become self-sufficient was at hand, and that the government could not afford to give "universal payments" to Australians. Hockey's approach has been described as being like Nixon's, "using claims of a budget emergency" to cut welfare.


 * The first source is the text of Hockey's own speech, not indepenent coverage of Hockey. The second is an opinion piece. If that speech is important enough to be mentioned in the article, there must be better sources out there that provide a more neutral assessment of the speech and its significance. Huon (talk) 23:00, 18 September 2015 (UTC)

It is useful to cite primary sources. The Conversation has editorial oversight and is considered a reliable source. WP:NEWSORG says: "Editorial commentary, analysis and opinion pieces, whether written by the editors of the publication (editorials) or outside authors (op-eds) are reliable primary sources for statements attributed to that editor or author, but are rarely reliable for statements of fact." and I have done that by saying Hockey's approach was described as like Nixon's. Because the original speech has become a theme for Hockey since then (and has been used by critics of politicians using funds inappropriately), it's not that easy to search for. Trying again with a re-write. --110.20.234.69 (talk) 00:10, 19 September 2015 (UTC)

On 17 April 2012, Joe Hockey gave a speech at the Institute of Economic Affairs in London. It warned Australians that the time to become self-sufficient was at hand, and that the government could not afford to give "universal payments" to Australians. The speech was controversial in Australia, sparking discussion on ABC Lateline and an article in The Australian. This speech was said to change the public's perception of Hockey from "avuncular" to "hard-head", and foreshadowing Hockey's first budget. In 2014, the "end of the age of entitlement" was used to justify the government refusing financial assistance to Holden in South Australia and SPC Ardmona in Victoria, and explaining why they could not participate in Barnaby Joyce's proposal for a bail out of farmers. Hockey's approach has been described by sociology lecturer Verity Archer as being like Nixon's, "using claims of a budget emergency" to cut welfare.

Hockey's resigning
Please place this in the article, right at the bottom of the political career section. --110.20.234.69 (talk) 05:59, 20 September 2015 (UTC)

When the Turnbull Ministry was announced, the Prime Minister announced that Hockey had not sought a place in the new ministry and that Hockey intended to resign from parliament.

The first paragraph says that Mr. Hockey was "fired", but the referenced source says that he technically "would not seek a frontbench role" in the Cabinet reshuffle occurring. If it makes sense please change the wording from "until September 2015 when he was fired" to until September 2015 when he announced he would not seek a frontbench role in the reshuffled Government." Redblueyelllowrainbow (talk) 10:30, 20 September 2015 (UTC)

Treasurer for Sale conclusion
Please add to this section that in June 2014, the judge partially ruled in favour of Hockey, ruling that where the headline had been seen without the article, it was defamatory, and awarded Hockey $200,000 in damages. Fairfax was ordered to pay 15% of Hockey's court costs.

Thank you. --110.20.234.69 (talk) 00:28, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Joe Hockey. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20100504015527/http://www.humpty.com.au:80/Events/MtKilimanjaro/tabid/71/Default.aspx to http://www.humpty.com.au/Events/MtKilimanjaro/tabid/71/Default.aspx

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 01:48, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

His Excellency
I added the honorific "His Excellency" when Hockey became ambassador two months ago, however this was reverted with the comment "Removed "His Excellency" - I believe in Australia this is only used for foreign ambassadors, and in the US it is not used for ambassadors at all)". I left it as there were virtually no reliable references I could find such as DFAT or State Department which referred to Hockey using the title. The title has been re-added recently so I had another look, and found that the U.S. State Department Diplomatic List Order of Precedence does in fact refer to all the ambassadors to the United States as "H. E." and the full list spells it out as His/Her Excellency (although this has the former ambassador Kim Beazley), so it appears that the U.S. does use it after all. --Canley (talk) 12:10, 22 March 2016 (UTC)

Shadow Treasurer
It says that a citation is needed for the statement that the push to get Hockey into NSW State politics ended by his promotion to Shadow Treasurer as it placed him within striking distance in becoming federal leader.

I say that a citation isn't needed. Even though Hockey himself did not become leader, one has to look at history of recent past decades in 1985, 1989, 1990, 1994, 2001, 2003 and 2008 in which the Shadow Treasurer of the day became the new Opposition leader. 122.108.156.100 (talk) 01:35, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
 * I disagree. It may have happened frequently that a shadow Treasurer has become opposition leader and the timing may match up, but it's still synthesis to infer that this was the reason for the end of the push to get Hockey into state politics, without a statement from a fellow party member or a news article confirming this reason. In the reference that is in there, Brendan Nelson states that Hockey had no interest in going into state politics, so that should be the reason published if one is to be at all, unless a better one can be found which does confirm the claim. That may be unlikely due to slippery denials being common in such situations, but that's too bad. --Canley (talk) 03:47, 11 April 2016 (UTC)
 * I disagree for much the same reason as Canley. The article is already vague on when this "push" started; I can only assume it was sometime between December 2007 and February 2009. At least there is one source denying the "push", which in a roundabout way confirms it existed. But there is nothing to confirm that the people who wanted him to move to state politics suddenly gave up the moment he became shadow treasurer. AtHomeIn神戸 (talk) 04:54, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

The people who made the push (no inverted commas please) knew full well the history of Shadow Treasurers becoming Opposition Leaders. It is unlikely one would find a source on when the push ended because whoever came up with this idea thought it was a good idea at the time. The fact that it did not go anywhere result in this idea gradually forgotten about. It also would not have been a good idea for the alternative federal Treasurer to suddenly switch to State politics. It would most likely been interpreted by the voters on how could there be any confidence in the alternative government in handling the economy if the alternative Treasurer has chosen to jump ship.

Therefore Canley and Athomeinkobe are absolutely wrong on this. 122.108.156.100 (talk) 10:17, 13 October 2016 (UTC)


 * I wasn't saying that it was not the case, I was saying you can't make assumptions and synthesis like that on Wikipedia without a reference, even if it is true or almost certainly true. As it happens I did find a reference in a contemporaneous Phillip Coorey article where he states that Hockey's ascension ended the pressure on Barry O'Farrell from the push to replace him, so I have included that. You're welcome. --Canley (talk) 11:08, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

Assessment comment
Substituted at 19:59, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Joe Hockey. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140508224648/http://www.joehockey.com/meet-joe/page.aspx?p=29 to http://www.joehockey.com/meet-joe/page.aspx?p=29
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/malcolm-turnbull-pays-the-price-for-mayhem/story-e6frg6n6-1225805158001

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 12:15, 26 November 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 8 external links on Joe Hockey. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160105093929/http://joehockey.com/media/speeches/details.aspx?s=13 to http://joehockey.com/media/speeches/details.aspx?s=13
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160107014832/http://www.joehockey.com/media/media-releases/details.aspx?r=177 to http://www.joehockey.com/media/media-releases/details.aspx?r=177
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160107014832/http://www.joehockey.com/media/media-releases/details.aspx?r=187 to http://www.joehockey.com/media/media-releases/details.aspx?r=187
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160107014832/http://www.joehockey.com/media/media-releases/details.aspx?r=192 to http://www.joehockey.com/media/media-releases/details.aspx?r=192
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160107014832/http://www.joehockey.com/media/speeches/details.aspx?s=72 to http://www.joehockey.com/media/speeches/details.aspx?s=72
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160107014832/http://www.joehockey.com/media/speeches/details.aspx?s=5 to http://www.joehockey.com/media/speeches/details.aspx?s=5
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131021205639/http://www.icv.org.au/index.php/media-gallery/speeches to http://www.icv.org.au/index.php/media-gallery/speeches
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20151118074835/http://www.joehockey.com/media/media-releases/details.aspx?r=536 to http://www.joehockey.com/media/media-releases/details.aspx?r=536

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 12:57, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

Joe hockey
Do joe hockey live in Washington DC 2601:8C:980:DF40:613B:F1F8:1CDF:425E (talk) 10:47, 3 March 2023 (UTC)