Today marks the second anniversary of the election of the Rudd government.
No doubt thousands of words will be written to commemorate it.
This is your opportunity to add even more!
Life, Culture and Politics from BrisVegas
Larvatus Prodeo was an Australian group blog which discussed politics, sociology, culture, life, religion and science from a left of centre perspective. more»
The “HowRudd” and “Howard Lite” jokes before the election were dead right. The only advantage of KRudd is in those policy areas where it’s been all talk and no action, where doing nothing is better than Howard doing something.
At least it Howard had been voted back in we’d have already passed a carbon trading bill that is exactly what Labor have put up now and cannot get through.
Its a pretty core question.
Just how well has this government performed?
As compared to the previous and as compared to what can reasonably have been expected from it at this stage in its term and in the near future?
Its a pretty core question for hannah’s mum and me, we spent thousands of hours in ’07 directly and indirectly trying to get rid of the previous mob in exchange for this mob.
So we ask ourselves was it worth it, would we do similar again?
And to merely measure progress, if any, against the standard of the previous decade is setting a very low bar indeed.
I mean any alternate govt to the previous would have to be an improvement wouldn’t it? So that doesn’t help much in assessing the worth of the present lot. Grey will always be lighter than black.
But in about a year we can do the same comparison, potential ALP 2010 onwards versus ALP 2007-10.
Different bar.
I dunno.
I’ll have a think.
“At least it Howard had been voted back in we’d have already passed a carbon trading bill that is exactly what Labor have put up now and cannot get through.”
So Dave, I guess we should take it, you really believe Howard would have kept that promise given his abysmal reputation for election eve promises and the backsliding neanderthals he would have needed, to round up, to pass it? To trust in Howard on anything, in my view, is like planning for the next tattslotto win.
Any evaluation of the Rudd Government has to take into account the current state of the Senate, particularly the presence of one particularly loopy senator, and thats ignoring all the loopy coalition members.
Perhaps DBath above would like to explain how he would have got anything through the senate.
I am bitterly disappointed in the CPRS and their goal of a ‘big Australia’.
I am disappointed but not surprised by their committment to growth, free markets and the Howard govt’s assylum seeker policy.
I am reasonably happy with their progress on the Murray Darling Basin. We all want more done more quickly and some are bitterly condemning them for not doing so but that is unreasonable, IMHO.
I must say I’m looking in vain for any evidence of the “education revolution” in my little corner of the higher education sector.
Narrow pass.
Major successes [GFC/stimulus,the apology] balanced by major failures [Iraq/Afghanistan, the Murray Darling fiasco, the continued NT intervention, environment in general].
Minor, slight at best, progress noted in many areas [public education, public health, the environment generally, refugees, open government] but all too often positive rhetoric unmatched by performance.
Fear seems to be the key, I’m reminded of the line “Fear is the killer” from Frank Herbert’s “Dune”.
The ALP is still coming to terms with being the government, there is still a defeatist, too scared to rock the boat/scare the horses mentality.
The Turnbull/Grech affair is a case in point. It required a direct taking on of the media by pointing out that previous to the exposure of the e-mail as a fake there was no case to answer because the fundamental grounds of the accusation were irrelevant [Julia made that clear from overseas during a Cassidy interview but her line was not pursued vigorously].
The previously near overwhelming power of the media has only recently been gently confronted and only after the cracks in that power from within the media were made obvious by the public no longer trusting the media version of the world did the ALP even attempt to confront it.
Undemocratic media power in this country has not been confronted.
The people are more progressive than than the government eg same sex marriage.
The major problem this government has is a failure of courage.
CPRS/ETS is the classic example, Murray Darling another.
They have caved into the powerful lobbies far more than necessary and paid the double price of achieving little at best and still reaping the inevitable negatives for no gain.
There has been a natural decrease in the social and economic power of the sectors of our society that exert control, the GFC has helped expose that to some extent, but the ALP has failed to capitalise on that or exploit such to the level it should.
We’re streets ahead on industrial relations and also on asylum seekers, who would still be called “Illegal immigrants” if the other mob were in power.
There’s more rational planning on infrastructure spending (I think). Education has been a big disappointment in most sectors. In schools the schools sector I found myself agreeing almost 100% with Kevin Donnelly on Counterpoint the other day. He gave them 3 out of 10 and reckoned we are following Blairist and New York policies when those places are moving away from them.
I don’t agree with Donnelly’s policy prescriptions, however.
And again the Coalition probably would have been worse.
I also think we are doing better in health than we would have been and the tax review will be interesting.
Yes, I think that education has been the major disappointment, particularly continuing with the Howard funding regieme.
5% ETS! YAY! Nice ‘commitment’ to AGW Mr Rudd. Next time I’ll just vote for the fucking shooters party or something.
Re my point above, please explain how Rudd is supposed to get a more extreme version of the ETS through the Senate? Somehow pretend that Senator Fielding isn’t there?
By doing precisely and exactly what has already been done BUT lifting the ante in the stake from the beginning.
Include agriculture.
Raise the reduction rate by at least a unconditional minimum to 15% ….
and so on.
Do you think the COAL [and friends] lobby would have been any more effective with their anti ETS propaganda?
I doubt it, they have set the agenda from day 1 anyway, as was entirely predictable.
So we would be at exactly the same stage as we are now,but with the ALP negotiating from a higher and wider level of reductions, which gives much more room to manoevure, and probably stronger support from the Greens and the left, which would be a positive.
Australia has a higher level of distorted debate on this issue than most developed countries, our denialists, fed by the lobby groups and the media, are noisier than most other countries. That was entirely predictable.
You do not win games [and this is more serious than a game] by aiming for a draw before the ball is bounced.
Yes, but given the unpredictable and entirely loopy nature of much of the Senate, it would have been unlikely to get through. So the argument boils down to: no ETS is better than this ETS.
That at least is a debatable point. BTW I was suprised how up-beat Tim Flannery was about all this on Lateline last night, particularly Rudd’s role internationally.
Minuses: Very weak on dealing effectively with climate change. (Though he did go through the symbolism of signing the almost obsolte Kyoto agreement. Too busy selling out to the coal industry.)
Lies about the effectiveness of clean coal technology.
Probably as a consequence of the law of unitended consequences might turn out to be worse than Howard on asylum seekers. The caveat being that unlike Howard, he really didn’t mean to be an unprincipled bastard.
Commitment to Afghanistan. We haven’t lost many Australian boys yet, but if the casualty toll begins to rise people might ask exactly what we are doing there. I think this one is a sleeper for Rudd that might eventually huret him very badly.
Not doing anything about getting rid of the Howard puppets on and in the ABC.
Very slow on reform of the health system. Which I suppose brings me to this pre-occupation with process. Things might be getting done far too slowly.
Big bad – increasing price of cataract surgery by reducing rebate to eye doctors – very bad, actually as the ones most effected could be the poor.
Another very big bad. Not getting rid of the Intervention.
Now for the good. Which I’ve put at the end of the comment so it’ll stick in the mind more.
The apologies to Indigenous people and abused state wards/child migrants. A very big tick.
Much more compassionate approach to the disabled. Big tick to Bill Shorten.
Not bad about increasing public/cheap housing for the homeless. Pity about the lead time, but I suspect its unavoidable.
Saving Australia from the GFC. (I think.)
Telling the electorate the truth. (I think some people might underestimate how important this is in the electorate after the non-stop lies of the Howard years.)
Exposing neoconservatism for the ideological sham it is.
Ending the culture wars.
and, finally, probably making the Libs unelectable federally for years to come.
Flannery’s cheeriness may have something to do with recently scoring a gig off the Government.
The argument doesn’t boil down to this ETS or no ETS. That argument is analogous to saying to a man who’s just had his throat cut, do you want a band-aid or are you just going to bleed to death.
“Big bad – increasing price of cataract surgery by reducing rebate to eye doctors – very bad, actually as the ones most effected could be the poor.”
Hey Paul are you sure you are on top of that one? I was under the impression that the eye doctors costs had dropped dramatically with technolgy etc and that they had maintained their fees.
I heard a bloke on radio while very complimentary about the care he received with his operation, told of, I think it was, about 12 other operations by his doctor that morning. Which amounts to very big money even when allowing for the high costs involved.
joe2,
Not on top of the cost, no. Too scared to go to the doctor and ask. (Not of the operation, but how much it might cost.) It was $100 for consultation and $100 for the operation, 2 years ago, and on the pension, that used to be steep. Might be a bit easier with pension increase. Will know as I struggle to pay three largish bills at once next Thursday.
Paul it looks like I am out of my depth here.
I would have thought you would pay very little once the nashnal elf had kicked in.
That maybe there would sadly be a long waiting list but the charge would be taken up by the government for crucial medical care like this.
And that the medicos were trying to protect large incomes by fighting the governments attempt to reasonably draw back the fee for cateract surgery.
Adrian,
That is pretty much my very point, this ETS with 5% reductions is such a joke that it shouldn’t be allowed to pass. No one is going to take a 5% reduction seriously. I understand what you mean about Minchin and his merry band of fools but they can happily sit back and block an ETS that is really just an economic hurt with no real environmental gains.
What do you think the situation may be like if Rudd came out with a 30% reduction and had the backing of the Greens? I think that 5% just makes our PM look like a joker who is once again looking to score some easy points.
I’m in a very strange position (as are many greenies I assume) that I’m actually hopeing denialist mob boss Minchin will block this ETS and we have a DD on the way. Krudd needs to get the public thinking serious about AGW if it ends up a election issue.
/ramble
Has everyone forgotten how mind-boggling awful the Howard years were? If Rudd had done SFA it would still be a 2000% improvement.
As it is, he moves on cautiously in the face of a Senate controlled by the weirdest bunch of lunatics to ever assemble in any Australian parliament ever.
I’m amazed he has managed to achieve anything. I’m prepared to wait and judge him by what he does when labor/greens control the senate.
His big achievement, I think, was in succeeding in doing what Howard promised, but failed, to do. I certainly feel much more relaxed and comfortable, and I think most other people do too.
How would the Government get its ETS through the Senate? Well, they could talk to the Greens. They’d rather gnaw off their arm than do that.
George,
Labor + Greens does not a senate majority make.
joe2@ 18,
The two one hundred dollar fees were after the elf had kicked in. Prsumably that charge will rise now the limb of the elf given to the opthalmologists has been removed/reduced. Up here, though, waiting times are pretty short. I gather I wouldn’t have had to wait no more than two weeks. Back then my eyes weren’t bad enough, and now only one of them is, so that would be at least two ops, increasing the cost, before the elf was removed, to another $100 probably. So, at the present moment it would probably cost me a minimum of $300 + whatever was snatched from the elf.
I’m not sure even I can follow the above. And at times I have a pretty convoluted mind.
Am I the only one in Australia who not only likes Rudd but is genuinely passionate about his government, proud of his initiatives, and pleasantly surprised at his progress so far?
Perhaps it’s because my expectations were so low but I’ve really liked his government so far — it’s more competent than Whitlam, more radical than Hawke, more politically savvy than Keating and certainly head-and-shoulders over any conservative government in Australian history.
I honestly doubt whether Hawke, had he been in power in the current crisis, would have pursued the stimulus, so desperate was he to ensure that Labor was ‘taken seriously’ as a low-tax, low-ambition, low-RISK party. But Rudd isn’t crippled by the desperate inferiority complex (interalising his opponent’s critiques) that drove the Hawke government, nor by the sense of impending doom that seemed to drive Whitlam. He’s increased funding for schools and the role of the public sector, and seems eager to challenge accepted narratives about Australian government (the neoliberal experiment), even if it is just for political reasons.
Socially, he hasn’t been perfect, but he’s been a damn sight better than Howard. The apology, the package of superannuation and other reforms granting a greater measure of equality to gay couples, a more thoughtful (if still very flawed) approach to asylum seekers, and what seems far more willingness to accept multiculturalism as not merely a fact of life but something genuinely good in its own right.
On foreign policy, my only real complaints are of pace. Afghanistan remains a canker sore but his position isn’t VERY odious — at least, not yet. With Rudd, you do at least get the sense that if the war did degenerate he would give serious thought to pulling out, which is more than could be said for Howard. ‘Good intentions’ aren’t everything but their role is too frequently undeservedly scoffed at. It means a LOT to have a prime minister who seems to give genuine thought and good-faith consideration to foreign affairs, an impression Howard never gave.
So, on economics he’s been more progressive than Howard by any measure, on social policy he’s been flawed but his instincts are often decent, and on foreign policy he’s been very effective. I like the Rudd government, I really do, and I want it to last as long as possible.
This term was largely about scaring the pants off the Libs and putting some very large cracks in their efforts to unite. He has a very tough task in getting Australia onto Renewable Energy whilst simultaneously keeping the spectre of McNuclear McPower/McWaste from our land of sweeping plains[ Which I LOVE, btw! ] but has clearly demonstrated that he knows what the priorities MUST be: get the Libs off your back and take the electorate with you!
Smart guy: he will be there for ten years and I can almost guarantee that!
Metrosexual Australia, aka THE complete-&^%$#-w%$#@-class, can only cry into their collective crack-pipes and we have Rudd to thank for that!
*** Halle-&^%$-lujah! !!! ***
NB: Jack-the-insider seems to be acknowledging lately that the Libs are in some very deep doo-doo!
I should have commented on the day but like everyone else I’ve been too pre-occupied with the fate of the CPRS. As that whole issue has progressed within the Coalition and watching the body language of Wong, Rudd, Tanner, Gillard, Combet et al I have to agree with KeIthY @ 25. Everything is moving according to plan! Hallelujah indeed!
This ETS, so flawed it has critics from the right, the left and at its very heart now that it’s been so drastically amended, seems to be to have been designed to survive the worst its opponents in the Coalition could do to it as well as destroy them in their grappling with it. I accept Tim Flannery’s assessment of Rudd as sincerely wanting to achieve climate change action. “Brilliant” is not a description I’ve seen used by many climate activists about any politician. If he can be brilliant on the international stage we can be sure he has planned his ETS campaign at home with great care.
So ditto to everything BlackMage has said and let’s wait and see what happens next on climate change action – not wait and see as the sceptics would have it – but wait and see how much more effective our team can be at Copenhagen with even this minimalist legislated commitment to support our team lobbying there. The latest science says that even more urgent and stringent controls of emissions are required. Once this ETS legislation is through the Senate a new level of public acceptance of even more reform will be there enhanced by the theatre of international politics against the global and local backdrop of drought, fire and flood.
Climate change action alone will ultimately stand out as a major achievement for this government in its first term. And there’s so much else – the “apologies”, taking on the AMA, sorting out financial planners, collaborating with the RBA and Treasury to mitigate the GFC, getting rid of Work Choices, support for equal pay for women, superannuation reform etc. etc.
Why so few of us lining up to hand this sane and effective new government of ours the praise it deserves?