Comments on: Xenophon not stimulated

By: myriad

myriad — Fri, 13 Feb 2009 04:08:16 +0000

really have nothing more to add!

By: adrian

adrian — Fri, 13 Feb 2009 01:17:58 +0000

Contrary to popular misconception, the Greens are far from the nutters that certain sections of the MSM like to portray them as. The real nutters are of course the Liberal National coalition, full to the brim of frothing at the mouth idealogues, born to rule egomaniacs and know nothing imbeciles.
And then are there’s Julie Bishop, all three rolled into one.

By: myriad

myriad — Fri, 13 Feb 2009 00:41:06 +0000

Agreed Adrian – it’s also solid evidence that those on this blog who proclaimed that the Greens just wouldn’t be up to the challenge of doing pragmatic deals in the Senate were wrong.

By: adrian

adrian — Fri, 13 Feb 2009 00:17:28 +0000

The group that has come out of this the best is clearly the Greens, particularly when you read the above.
Turnbull is toast – overcooked, of the white bread variety, and rapidly turning stale.

By: myriad

myriad — Fri, 13 Feb 2009 00:12:28 +0000

Just for those who think the Greens squibbed and settled on bikepaths for yuppies, here’s the list of what they actually got:

The agreement includes:

$200 million in grants for services and job creation projects run by community organisations and local governments.

An extra $50 million to assist low income earners and unemployed people.

Relaxation of the liquid assets tests for people who lose their jobs and seek government assistance-from $2500 to $5000.

An assurance that all low-income earners, including students, will have access to the bonus payment.

$10 million for bioremediation and revegetation trials in the Lower Murray-this will involve green local jobs creation. To the last hour we sought the transfer of more water downstream but the Minister adamantly opposed it.

Re-opening the $500 million program for strategic local jobs-creating projects to smaller local councils who have not applied before.

A further commitment to increase the aged pension in the May budget.

$40 million for bikeways, for an estimated 700 local jobs, to reduce traffic congestion and provide healthy transport options.

$60 million for job-creating projects for Australia’s natural and built heritage-for example, historic buildings and national parks.

$5 million per year funding, in the budget, for Australia’s Bushfire Cooperative Research Centre in Melbourne and an assessment towards upgrading this vital centre to a global coordinator of wild fire research.

Increased funding for the Australian Bureau of Statistics in the May budget.

And perhaps most critically in terms of the funding for all the infrastructure, a commitment that all the new public & defence housing funded will have “energy efficiency standards [that bring]Australia closer to American and European best practice.”

full press release here

By: Ambigulous

Ambigulous — Thu, 12 Feb 2009 22:41:15 +0000

BTW, caroline

I shouldn’t have singled you out at 8.34pm last night. So many commentators are focussing on just ONE of the 35 votes (X’s) rather than the other 34 votes that contributed to the total

cheers

By: kymbos

kymbos — Thu, 12 Feb 2009 21:00:20 +0000

Mark, stopping seepage can be a bad idea because groundwater is extremely complicated and not very well understood. Perhaps the water wasn’t naturally there originally, but it may have been there for decades and seepage may be the only current source of supply for stressed groundwater-dependant ecosystems. We’ve played a lot with water over the years, and not much is in it’s ‘natural’ state.

Otherwise, it is much much more expensive than desalination or any other source of water. It is a bit of furphy as any part of a solution to water shortages.

By: Nick

Nick — Thu, 12 Feb 2009 13:26:18 +0000

“Bringing expenditure forward does not cost us anything extra over what was planned already.”

From the proposed amendment:

“(d) providing for the payment of grants of up to a total of $2 billion under the structural
adjustment scheme required to be determined under section 19.”

That is not money brought forward.

By: Marks

Marks — Thu, 12 Feb 2009 12:58:37 +0000

Kymbos @ 61, why should stopping seepage from places that never normally had seepage be a problem? Sounds to me like it is fixing a problem by returning that seepage to the river where it should be.

Xenophon is doing what he is paid to do.
The MD Basin has been a problem for the past fifty years at least, and no-one has really cracked it.
The MD Basin is a significant part of the economies of NSW, Qld, Vic and SA.
Bringing expenditure forward does not cost us anything extra over what was planned already.
So, bringing forward planned work on a project that has national significance is bad because?

Smoke and mirrors folks – the Govt is after an election – if they get even one or two more senators, they are laughing. A double dissolution would be silly though – it would halve the quotas making it even more likely that minor parties would get into the Senate.

By: Mark

Mark — Thu, 12 Feb 2009 12:45:32 +0000

Update [by MB]: A post on the politics of today's developments.

By: Michael

Michael — Thu, 12 Feb 2009 12:43:10 +0000

I’m not sure this is very smart politics by X.

He’s a lone senator from one of the less populated states, holding up an economic package for the entire country.

I’ve got no problems with balance of power senators doing a bit of parochial horse-trading, but it seems like the wrong time. Surely there’ll be plenty more opportunities over the next few years for X to push his particular barrrows?

By: Liberals Stole My Shoe!

Liberals Stole My Shoe! — Thu, 12 Feb 2009 11:38:47 +0000

I was probably a bit hard on the Greens in my last post. They turned down what must have been a tempting opportunity and played a fairly responsible role in all this. The Greens and the government seem to have fixed some of the unfairness for workers on very low incomes.

And it’s just silly to compare Howard’s raming of non-urgent things through the Senate (as he did with almost no debate on Work Choices) with a world-wide economic collapse.

This money really does have to get pumped into the economy quicky. It’s not some gimmick on the government’s part. I hope everyone here reads Paul Krugman’s blog at the NY Times (Consecience of a Liberal). The rest of the world should be as terrified as he is.

By: kymbos

kymbos — Thu, 12 Feb 2009 11:25:49 +0000

For what it’s worth, infrastructure projects to reduce water losses are about the most expensive ’source’ of water currently available, and their environmental implications (impacts on groundwater by removing seepage) are not very well understood. This aspect of water policy is a terrible use of government money.

By: Armagny

Armagny — Thu, 12 Feb 2009 10:52:14 +0000

What a rent seeker. Give him credit, he’s not one to let a catastrophic national crisis get in his way. Like a ship steward standing in front of the lifeboat demanding his cut.

By: Katz

Katz — Thu, 12 Feb 2009 10:50:03 +0000

The other thing about a DD – someone correct me if I’m wrong – but don’t you have to wait three months before putting the legislation up again? That would be political suicide for Rudd.

patrickg is correct. The whole DD process would consume at least the next six months. Rudd cannot argue that the stimulus package is urgent and hang about for six months to achieve a DD trigger.

Sen X is in a position demand much from the Govt.

I wonder how long it might take for Fielding to work out that he can play that game too.

By: furious balancing

furious balancing — Thu, 12 Feb 2009 10:40:10 +0000

Thomas Paine, I think you underestimate people, and I think you ignore the reality that every crisis creates opportunity for those who have the creativity and drive to pursue it.

By: B.S. Fairman

B.S. Fairman — Thu, 12 Feb 2009 10:39:29 +0000

I doubt they will deal with Mr X, it would almost better to let the Liberals cook in their own juices for a week or two, and then re-introduce, get it passed. And if we get a recession, the blame will fall on the opposition (“the recession we didn’t have to have”).
The smartest move by Turnbull would be to allow one or two his senators to defect tomorrow, attack them in public but gets himself out of a bind.

By: Ambigulous

Ambigulous — Thu, 12 Feb 2009 10:34:30 +0000

caroline characterised Senator X: “one ditzy bloke with an agenda.”

Senator X would not have had that power, if some Lib and/or Nat Senators had supported the stimuli. (Senator X’s prominence is a bit like the end of a footy match when player Z “kicks the winning goal”. Somehow all the other goal scorers, whose efforts allowed Z’s goal to BE the winning goal, are ignored.)

Senator X is a tiny player in a huge game.
Will a Nat cross the floor?

In ‘75 we waited for a rogue Lib Senator to cave in and cross the floor, to pass Supply in the Senate. The GG acted instead.

By: Thomas Paine

Thomas Paine — Thu, 12 Feb 2009 10:20:06 +0000

Who is going to risk new money on a business in the middle of a global recession. The $406,000 will be kept safe for better times.

By: Labor Outsider

Labor Outsider — Thu, 12 Feb 2009 10:19:35 +0000

There won’t be a DD – the ALP and X will do a deal – its how politics works – the only way X can realise the agenda he was elected on, is to tie expenditure on his priorities to the government’s own priorities. If he didn’t pull stunts like this, the government would think he is soft, and either ignore him, or give him less. In political terms, it is that simple.