First up, I’d like to thank everyone who responded to my call, in this comment, here at Larvatus Prodeo yesterday, for
… bloggers and blog commenters from every part of the political spectrum to start giving Rudd and Gillard instructions on how to do their jobs properly …
On checking the Oz Politics blog feed this morning, I’ve seen that there’s been no shortage of bloggers with advice for Kevin Rudd and Julia Gillard on what to do next. Some of that enthusiastic response was no doubt due to the fact that News Limited took up the call too. There’s been plenty of advice from the government side of the House of Reps too, and of course the op-ed pages. I can’t take any credit for that, of course – that advice would have been forthcoming regardless of anything that I might say here.
Today, I think we need to change focus a little. Right now, Kevin and Julia are probably feeling as little overwhelmed by the helpful advice – particularly that coming from Government heavy hitters like the PM, the Treasurer, and the Health Minister on how to be responsible opposition leaders with a shot at winning government. No blogger, however expert her opinion, can expect to cut through those louder, more authoritative voices, right now. Any further advice from bloggers, however sound, will probably be wasted. It’s time for less advice, more encouragement.
So let’s take a look at how Rudd and Gillard are travelling, starting with Rudd’s performance in Question Time yesterday. I took a look at the Reps Question Time on the ABC, for the first time in months and my impression was that Rudd performed pretty well. I’ve prepared an edited transcript based on Hansard. In the editing of John Howard’s answers, I’ve focussed on the substance of what was said, rather than the way it was said.
Mr RUDD (2.03 pm)—My question is to the Prime Minister. It refers to today’s report of the House of Representative Standing Committee on Health and Ageing, tabled today entitled The blame game: report on the inquiry into health funding, which finds that the community is getting sick of blame shifting between governments about the inadequacies of Australia’s health system. What action will the Prime Minister take to stop the blame game in health between the Commonwealth and the states? Why has the Prime Minister rejected major reform of the health system, despite the fact that the health minister has described the current funding arrangements between the Commonwealth and the states as ‘a dog’s breakfast’?
Mr HOWARD—The government has already taken a large number of very significant measures to end the blame game … [It’s the States who aren’t pulling their weight].
Mr RUDD (2.08 pm)—My question is to the Prime Minister and again refers to the House of Representatives Standing Committee on Health and Ageing report into health financing entitled The blame game: report on the inquiry into health funding, which recommends that the Commonwealth:
… should supplement state and territory funding for public dental services so that reasonable access standards for appropriate services are maintained …
What action will the Prime Minister now take to reinstate Commonwealth funding to dental services across Australia?Mr HOWARD—As with all reports of this kind the government will examine it. [But dental health services are traditionally the responsibility of the States. So it’s the States who aren’t pulling their weight].
Mr RUDD (2.14 pm)—My question is to the Prime Minister. Can the Prime Minister confirm to the House that there have now been 55 consecutive monthly trade deficits, the most ever recorded? Prime Minister, why is the trade account still in the red despite the resources boom? When does the government believe Australia will next achieve a trade surplus?
Mr HOWARD—The answer to the first part of the question is yes. The answer to the second part of the question is [the economy’s going great guns and, quite naturally, we’re spending a lot on imports. So what?]
Mr RUDD (2.20 pm)—My question is again to the Prime Minister. Does the Prime Minister agree with comments by former Governor of the Reserve Bank, Ian Macfarlane, made in the Boyer lectures, that a lasting legacy of the economic management in the early 1990s was ‘Australia had an inflation rate that was in line with world’s best practice. We had returned to being a low-inflation country’. Prime Minister, hasn’t the government’s failure to address skills shortages and infrastructure bottlenecks resulted in core inflation now rising above world’s best practice, with real implications for the cost of living for Australia’s working families?
Mr HOWARD—No.
At last – an answer that’s short, sharp and to the point.
Mr RUDD (2.24 pm)—My question is again to the Prime Minister. Prime Minister, if today’s productivity growth is tomorrow’s prosperity, why has Australian productivity failed to grow in any real respect for two years?Mr HOWARD—The productivity growth that this country has experienced over the past few years is a product of earlier reforms. [But I can’t really answer that question, so I’ll bag the ALP on industrial relations instead].
Mr RUDD (2.31 pm)—My question again is to the Prime Minister. It relates to his previous answer, in which he referred extensively to his government’s industrial relations legislation. Prime Minister, is it not the case that the Office of the Employment Advocate statistics for the September quarter show that, since the commencement of the government’s industrial relations legislation, the biggest uptake of AWAs has been in the retail trade and hospitality? Prime Minister, is it not also the case that the labour price index for this September quarter shows that, since the commencement of the government’s industrial relations legislation, wages growth in these two areas has been less than the inflation rate? Prime Minister, is it not the case that this is the result of the government’s industrial relations legislation?
Mr HOWARD—As was my custom with his predecessor, I always check before I accept as gospel what is quoted by the opposition in relation to statistics. [Now that I've ducked the question, I’m going to sound off about how great WorkChoices is].
Mr RUDD (2.35 pm)—My question is to the Prime Minister. How does the Prime Minister reconcile his assertion that the Liberal Party is a party of family values with the fact that, under the government’s industrial relations legislation, an employer can roster an employee to work at any hour of any day during the week and on weekends and then change those rosters without notice? Prime Minister, how is it possible for families now to plan to spend time together on weekends under this new legislation from the so-called family values party?
Mr HOWARD— [First I’m going to have a shot at Sharon Burrow. Now getting onto your question…] The great gift that this government has brought to the families of Australia and therefore, according to the definition of the Leader of the Opposition, the family values of this country is to put more Australian families back into the workforce.
He doesn’t mean the kids, of course – he’s talking about more families having breadwinners. But there’s more to come. A quick Dorothy Dixer from Cameron Thompson to Brendan Nelson and then Rudd is back in the hunt:
Mr RUDD (2.41 pm)—My question is to the Prime Minister. I refer to his answer to my previous question on the relationship between his party’s commitment to family values, so-called, and the content of his industrial relations legislation. Prime Minister, are you saying to the parliament that the legislation that you have introduced on industrial relations will have zero impact on a family’s ability to plan to spend time together on weekends? Prime Minister, is it not a fact that this government’s industrial relations legislation represents a triumph of market values over family values, which is why the Catholic Church has come out and so roundly criticised this legislation from the beginning?
Mr HOWARD— … In a spirit of reconciliation, I say to the Leader of the Opposition, who tries to contrast market values and families value, that we should not see these things as working against each other; in fact, we should see these things as working in tandem because, unless you have a strong economy, you do not have strong families.
I kid you not – he really said that.
Mr RUDD (2.47 pm)—My question is directed again to the Prime Minister. It relates in part to his earlier answer concerning the British Labour Prime Minister. Is the Prime Minister aware that Mr David Cameron, leader of the British Conservative party, stated in April this year:
It’s become fashionable in certain circles to dismiss the Kyoto agreement. That’s a mistake. Kyoto provides a model for international partnership on climate change, and we should build on it.
Is the Prime Minister also aware that Jan Petersen, former foreign minister of Norway and current Deputy Chairman of the International Democratic Union, said in June 2005:
The Kyoto Protocol on climate change, although it may have its limitations, is the only international instrument available for addressing the problem reasonably effectively.
Given that the Prime Minister is Chairman of the International Democratic Union, why can’t he do what every other self-respecting conservative is doing and ratify Kyoto?
Mr HOWARD—When I make decisions on climate change and the Kyoto protocol, I do not speak for a particular political philosophy; I speak for my country —and it is in my country’s interests not to go down the European path.
(i.e. I’m running off to my traditional last refuge)
For now at least, Howard and his government are still looking comfortable and relaxed with the change in ALP leadership. But Howard has always been at his most comfortable and relaxed – and sounds most authoritative – when he’s being evasive. He’s become a very polished performer that way. Just as he’s at his most indignant when he’s been caught out and knows it.
Can Rudd and Gillard cut through the government crap? I hope so. Certainly, if you were listening to what John Howard actually said yesterday, rather than the way it was said, Rudd looked like he made a good start on cutting through on health, the economy, WorkChoices and Kyoto. If you weren’t – if you let yourself be distracted by all the merriment on the Government side of the house, and you only caught the second half of question time anyway, you’d probably come away from it with a different impression.
I’ve heard Rudd briefly on the radio sounding almost bellicose, releasing his inner bastard perhaps? If he can maintain this sort of attack on Howard keeping his ‘question to the Prime Minister’, varied, unpredictable and cutting, he will unsettle Howard. He is reputedly an intelligent man (our Kevin), I would’nt want to be the focus of a concerted attack from him. If he can make Howard look foolish in Parliament that’s one thing and he’ll probably manage it, but translating this to the electorate will be much more difficult. It will however be heartening to see Howard squirming–that’s for sure, but I doubt we’ll be seeing the back of him at the next election.
In an interview with Chris Uhlmann on AM:
Rinse and repeat until election day.
Hello – I’m professor rat and I’m an alcoholic.
And today I must confess to a little post-caucus-coitus depression. See I didn’t see any addressing of at least three fundamental questions.
1) The crisis within the Alternative Liberal Party over sticking up for the ALP. If they wont get mongrel on the monarchy ( more specifically – the Governor Generalate ) and stick up for themselves then why should any worker imagine that these fakes, frauds and phonies who regularly get dacked would ever stick up for them?
Where are the true believers screaming ‘ NEVER AGAIN!’
2) Looking in vain for any adressing of the crisis for the first Australians. Still haven’t found what I’m looking for.
Something HAS to be done about the monarchy and something HAS to be done about giving the indigenous hope. Number three?
I’ll table my ‘ Brothel vouchers for pensioners ‘ proposal to a later date.
Former Latham co-author and Whitlam Institute director Dr Peter Botsman has put a market price on his advice to Ruddy – 55 cents.
http://www.workingpapers.com.au/publishedpapers/2387.html
What’s with that?
I must admit I got quite excited a couple of years ago at the idea of reforming welfare and personal income tax: finding out exactly at what point it becomes a disincentive to take full employment, stopping hiding all those willing-and-able people in their 50s who’d love to work if only they weren’t discriminated against, where/how childcare fits into all this, etc. Then, Costello dropped it, Hockey got caught up on some card and Beazley went to sleep. Tanya Plibersek has done a bit of work but all she has to show is: gosh, people work so hard these days and they don’t have much to show for it, do they?
That, and a few big infrastructure things, would do wonders in a) showing Costello up as not an economic genius but a lazy bastard, and b) weakening business resistance to a Labor government.
Presumably that’s 50 cents for the advice and 5 cents for the GST Mark.
Still way more expensive than the advice that’s on offer round these parts.
Maybe it’s carrying a price lest it be accorded the same value as free advice.
Nice work Gummo. It’s about time that question time was dragged out of the darkages and into the blogosphere. Noticed today that while a Matter of Public Importance was being debated there was next to nobody on the Governmennt side of the chamber. The arrogance and ignorance on display was breathtaking. I doubt that they even had a quorum present.
I think that with the spotlight now fimly on the Liberal performance in parliament – people will be disgusted with the work ethic of these highly paid servants who don’t think it is important enough to do the job that they are paid to do.
If Labor can muster up the enthusiasm and presence to be in the parliament then why can’t the Tory side who claim to be governing this country. Obviously Rudd and Gillard have caught them napping literally.
It was left to underlings and an independent to reply to the attack from the Labor team and I think if this is the best that the Libs can muster then they are in for a very hectic year. In politics once the unravelling process begins, things unravel very quickly. As with all conservatives changing bad habits is difficult and they have started very poorly in response to the Labor performance of the past two days.
Hmmmmm…….
http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,20878093-1702,00.html
Governments have done this for decades. It’s not unusual.
Longer obs: I know how to post links.
What’s your point, dude?
Hmmmmmm……..indeed observa! Is Abbott trying to tell us that he has presided over some sort of health system that could be termed by some weird stretch of the imagination a shing success? A dubious claim if ever I heard one. Pots and kettles I’d say. I don’t think health policy from Abbott is likely to be seen as an area where he has shone.
Argument going on at Leftwrites between Bob Gould and another commenter, Norm Dixon, who suggests Rudd and Gillard embrace the Socialist Alliance’s prescription for electoral success:
http://www.leftwrites.net/2006/12/04/murdoch-tears-down-labor-leader/
You couldn’t make this stuff up!
…
What planet do these people live on?
I wonder what ideas the Socialist Alliance has for increasing productivity and improving business innovation?
Sorry for the long quote from Bob Gould but I think people will enjoy it…
Confusionist.
Heh.
I’m worried that treasury, trade, health, social scrutiny, community services, aged care and every other dept head is busy churning through scenarios, budgets, what if-s and costing current alp proposals etc – Meanwhile other chums at the big 4 and macquarie, the industry council, mineral council and every other employer group, are working out strategies and feeding info. up the line to ratty….
all for the express purpose of being able to shoot down any new policy on detail/costing/decimal points etc
and the office of workplace bullshit – will hand down another modest pay rise before the election….(last one for the decade.)
howard also has superior PR/advertising/direct mailing team (the diff. in 2004 was like the difference between telstra and crazy johns.) their direct marketing campaign was huge (don’t 5/6 personalised addressed letters get X amount of sales in marketing terms??) – i had 6/7 personalised letters in the last two weeks of the campaign, which had been data-mined and were addressed to me from John Howard….”Dear Jo…..I know that you’ve been thinking about XXXX” )
and of course, all the govt advertising at his disposal – every new govt. policy will have a matching media campaign
katz, had a list of potential policies on the last thread – increasing child care tax deductibility eg. Which are likely to be thrown around like confetti. In 2004, they made $12 billion in promises JUST during the campaign (how many they kept – who knows)
whether this will work AGAIN, up against Workchoices for real, bye bye telstra and medibank private and a softening economy with rising interest rates, and potentially a democrat US congress hunting roos…AND best of all – it’s only a few percentage points to make up…..even latho still got 47.3% 2PP, frightening the horses and all…ok..feeling much much better now – nighty night.
‘Mr Rudd has vowed to choose the front bench he wants, raising expectations of a mass shake-up which would defy the wishes of the party’s powerful factions.
“Look, I’m leading this party and if I want some new talent on the front bench of the party, I intend to get it,” Mr Rudd said on Macquarie Radio today.
But it appears only minor changes to personnel will take place when caucus votes on Thursday morning – although a major switch of portfolios is expected.’
Money quote from the article I linked to. Basically Rudd still has one mighty big handicap in his saddlebags and that’s the Federal Labor Party. OTOH Johnny boy now has the luxury of an accomplished team beneath him. Mind you that wasn’t always the case and if Rudd can turn that gaggle of meandering dreamers and prima donnas into a disciplined and cohesive team, then that makes him PM material naturally enough, just like the process did for Johnny. Democracy, aint it grand? Hewson, Downer, Crean, Latham, Beasley……next!!!!!
Oh, forgot to mention the Colt from Kooyong, but probably showing my age now.
“OTOH Johnny boy now has the luxury of an accomplished team beneath him.”
Love the interesting choice of “beneath”. A Reichian slip perchance?
Beneath John Howard, eh? Could there be anything lower?
“I kid you not – he really said that.”
I kid you not, I really agree with him.
Well James, I’d take that as an indication of how soft everyone’s gone since the Great Depression, when a lot of people survived by maintaining strong families in a crap economy.
Actually, I wouldn’t because that’s all folklore and The Waltons style pop-culture romanticism. Equally, John Howard’s “a strong economy means stronger families” is a technocratic cop-out. A fine soud-bite with no substance to it.
strong economy = better wages = more women’s independence = higher divorce rates
but then
weak economy = weaker wages = pissed off people = more domestic violence = more divorce (with much less money)
Ooh look, I’ve been eating some of that brown acid Zoe warned us against.
But seriously folks, the solution to happy families is a lovely safety net, that means that people have social capital, as well as jobs!!
Oh, this all we need
Watch The Rodent do a Tampa on this.
http://www.news.com.au/perthnow/story/0,21598,20882216-5005361,00.html
Hanson targets Muslims, ‘diseased’ Africans
By Jessica Marszalek
December 06, 2006 02:32pm
A DECADE after warning Australia was being swamped by Asians, right-wing firebrand Pauline Hanson has voiced concerns about Muslims and said diseased Africans should be barred from the country.
The former One Nation leader is considering another political comeback, although she said she is unsure whether she would stand for the Senate or House of Representatives at the next federal election
lynn,
Take your point, particularly on the safety net, so what follows shouldn’t be taken as a criticism or snark at you.
If “strong economies = strong families”, would there be any need for compulsory relationship counselling before people get divorced? For marriage to be defined, in law, as the union of a man and a woman to prevent gay-marriage/gay-civil-union induced relationship breakdowns in traditional marriages?
On Hanson – what’s she worried about? She’s the last person I can imagine catching AIDS from a diseased African.
Mr Calabreses ,please take a bow – I saw the same article and was wondering where to post it.
Ms Hanson is always ahead of the mob .Such an operator.
Brisbane stikes again -first Mt Rudd and now the dancing comeback queen.
On a separate point though I have a neurosurgeon friend and she was amazed that she was treating someone who had been allowed into Australia as a migrant . Amazed because the person was tuberculosis positive .Her treatment was for a complicated spinal problem and how this went undetected leads me to guess that there is plenty of corruption among those responsible for ensuring that potential migrants are not a burden to the health system .
You may think it is Ok to let migrants come even if they are troubled by chronic disease but this isn’t the standard that is currently expected by the authorities.
Hmmm – separate issue I think boredinHK (and Frank).
Pity I couldn’t resist the Hanson joke – now it sounds like I’m retrospectively applying a double standard, doesn’t it?
Absolutely Gummo but where can we send such a link when LP doesn’t run a separate continuous free form thread ?
Subject matter and relevance are for stuff shirts .
Steve as Sacha saod its not unusual for most MPs to be outside of the parliament during debates. What is of significance, however, is that rather than responding to Rudds battle of ideas speech himself or getting Costello to do it Howard had Joe Hockey responding.
Either Howard has gotten really arrogant or Rudds ideas talk has gotten him rattled (I suspect a bit of both).
Today’s questiontime was pure gold. Rudd nailed the Rodent to the wall and convincingly outsmarted him with every new question. It was the sort of wide ranging attack that Labor has needed for years but it was delicious to see Howard squirming under the pressure.
At one stage a Lib who sounded like a Pommy Private school Prefect rolled the plum to the other side of his mouth and asked the Speaker whether standing orders say the Leader of the Opposition and his Deputy could both ask questions. It was the first time in my life that I have heard a Tory Pollie ask the Speaker if someone else could ask a Question because the Leader of the Opposition was so convincingly overpowering the Prime Minister.
On the Hanson question -hasn’t she been making a living recently as a Real Estate Agent selling to Africans and especially Sudanese at Annerley on Brisbane’s inner Southside? Talk about biting the hand that feeds you!
But we do, boredinhk.
You can post at any time of the week on the Saturday Salon thread where discussion about anything is not just permitted but positively encouraged.
http://larvatusprodeo.net/2006/12/02/saturday-salon-81/
That’s a bit intriguing.
Maybe Howard thinks Hockey has Rudd’s measure from the Sunrise programme?
steve – she left the real estate game. Apparently she didn’t make too many sales. Annerley’s gentrifying pretty quickly. Wrong market, I guess.
Speaking of under the pump. Red Kerry gave ol Wlma Vanstone a good old grilling on the 7.30 report, alas there is no transcript available as yet.
The other good news on the Murdoch press tonight is that there will be no ballots in caucus tomorrow to elect the Shadow Cabinet so the Tories don’t even get the usual Labor footshooting to help them out this week.
On Sydney ABC morning radio yesterday (or the day before?), Adam Spencer played a recording of Pauline talking about how she “just needed to get Christmas out of the way” before potentially doing something about these lying politicians. You see, Pauline’s a traditional Aussie – Christmas is the most important time of the year. Is she going for the traditional Aussie vote?
“Maybe Howard thinks Hockey has Rudd’s measure from the Sunrise programme?”
Maybe since everyone’s used to seeing Hockey debate Rudd, it won’t immediately look like Howard’s had to stop to catch his breath.
But you know, Howard doesn’t handle some change well. It looks like Rudd’s knocked him around the same way Latham did. The PM got his groove back that time, I wonder how this one will pan out?
d
After reading Mischa Schubert(?) in today’s Age, I’ve concluded that Rudd’s serious problem is with gallery hacks who prefer entertainment, Abbott and Costello style, to substantial (or as Pete would say, substantive) debate.
Sheesh! This is bloody Parliament FFS, not Big Brother.