I was thinking while watching a budget address in reply that sought constantly to avoid mentioning *the actual budget*, that since one of the main elements of Mr Abbott’s “vision for Australia” was the proposition that everything was so much better, nay, heavenly, under the Howard government, one wonders why they don’t do a Campbell Newman and announce that their Leader Outside Parliament is now John Winston Himself. He could run for, I don’t know, New England?
Like they used to say about Nixon, “rested and ready”…
Seriously, though, obviously the Opposition Leader has decided to maximise his advantage on “economic management” by invoking the Glorious Howardian Golden Age, and avoid committing himself to anything substantive on economic policy in the here and now. As a political tactic, it’s clearly designed to keep the focus on the government, and to change the subject without addressing the questions posed about savings. And to maintain the constant election frenzy he likes to conjure up.
NB: Previous LP discussion is here.
Update [By Mark]: Here’s what I have to say at The Drum.
Kim, in response to your last post before closing the thread, I posted…
Well, for a start they could point out that Abbott’s line about how the ‘rest of the world’ is doing nothing about carbon emissions is a lie.
As is Abbott’s line about how the dreaded Carbon Tax will immediately close down all emissions-intensive industries – the figures he cited were total employment in the industries concerned. And of course, there will be no new jobs in low emissions industries and technologies. Instead of any substantive policy, he offered tree planting as though this was a good idea ignored by everyone else…pathetic.
Careful what you wish for Kim. The ‘tanned, rested and ready’ Richard Nixon won in 1968 and was re-elected in ’72.
Lazarus with a quadruple by-pass?
Te opposition leader has tonight confirmed all of the suspicions of those that do not indulge in the murdocracy view of the world:
That he is a talentless,shallow individual with not one jot of an idea to progress this country, but rather a nasty type who hides behind his christian edifice as he demonises the poor while promoting the rich.
All in all this was a poor performance by any standards as one would expect from an individual with no other thought but to advance his own situation and a compliant media to aid him in his goal.
And for all the rhetoric we still have not a clue as to how the liebrals intend to govern, other than that they intend to spread largesse to every well to do household while punishing the true battlers of this place.
How did we come to this?
This may be the laziest Opposition since Federation.
I hear ya, forgotten Australian families. I just can’t do much for ya, is all, but I’d like to be PM and I’m hoping it will all fall into place. Background
Why should they do any actual work, Cuppa? The media carry all their talking points with casual disregard for truth. Time to realise there is no compromise with this mob, and stop trying. Sadly, Churchill’s quip about Ramsay Macdonald as the ‘boneless wonder’ fits the Gillard cabinet like a glove.
The episode of Big Bang Theory I taped was great! It was the one with the girl who said that thing to that guy, who misread the social cues involved, and as a result said something really gauche, without realising it was gauche. Champagne comedy!
I think as a former journalist, Abbott finds a sympathetic audience among many in the press gallery. As well, they like the fact he’s constantly taking the fight up to the government and creating the atmosphere of a perpetual election campaign.
So they’re happy to play along with him. Of course, it’s also in their own personal and media’s business interests to characterise the government as on the brink of coming apart and Abbott as being on the brink of taking power.
Abbott knows this and feeds the perception, so it becomes a self-generating feedback loop. Many of the younger reporters now know no different. For them, Abbott’s every utterance carries equal weight to what the government says.
Of course, inside the ABC there is another dimension to this, with this ‘equal-time-in-an-election’ atmosphere also nicely keeping the stop-watch brigade from their door.
And all the while as this occurs, the media plays into Abbott’s hands while giving him no scrutiny whatsoever.
MrD, one thing that truly appalls me with the ABC is their casual use of epithets, such as ‘botched’, ‘disastrous’ etc to describe the insulation program despite the existence of numerous reports detailing the facts about a successful program. There is no attempt to inform the audience. The only important reality is the official consensus of the media themselves.
The most substantive policy Abbott can take, unlike the current mob, is to say he wouldn’t piss $200B down the toilet in the first place.
But wait! They’re increasing the borrowing limit to $250B. Just because they’re incompetent beyond our wildest dreams doesn’t mean they can’t make it even worse.
The OO tells it how it is:
Yep, every public servant in Australia still doesn’t know whether s/he is one of the 12,000 in Hockey’s sights.
Abbott generated the largest surplus of motherhood statements in the history of the world.
Yes, raising the borrowing limits in the same week as delivering a “tough budget” is a very bad look.
@8, too true Mr Denmore. I swear to god this country’s going backwards.
One of the more amusing parts of Abbott’s speech was his list of opportunity costs of the “more than $50bn” NBN.
One of them was “extending the M4 to Strathfield”. What can one do but laugh and point to the reference on google maps?
Also amusing was the fact that there were no proposals at all that would involve cuts to expenditure or increases to revenue at all — but the opposite, a list of new spending ideas.
Mr Denmore, Abbott was never a journalist (unless you want to include the likes of Imre Saluzinski and Peter van Onselen). He just wrote random brainfarts for a periodical of some kind.
Poor Mr. Abbott, he must have forgotten we voted and he lost the last election.
This is not 1975. We do not have Mr. Kerr and he does not have control of the Senate.
Also there has been no ministers sacked or accuse of misbehaviour.
The economy is travelling reasonably well.
Unemployment is low, inflation within limits set by the treasury and interest rates steady.
I do not believe that just because you do not like a government and the opportunity arises is grounds to force a new election.
The cost pressures of food and petrol is hopefully of a temporary nature.
Yes water ans electricity have risen, but still among the cheapest in the world.
We need to secure our future water needs and this cost money. The electricity system has been allowed to run down, as well as coal prices reaching record prices over a long length of time.
There is no way Mr. Abbott can do any better, no matter what he promises.
Mr. Abbott needs to tell us what he would do in the real world that exists today, not in one that exists in his imagination.
We have had weeks of Mr. Abbott’s electioneering campaign. To night he has launched or is it relaunched his election opening speech. It has very little to do with the budget.
Surely Mr. Abbott did not or has not forgotten we voted and he lost. It is made up of every slogan he has ever made.
He will announce a list of savings in good time before the election.
WHY WAS THERE UP TO EIGHT OR NINE INTEREST RATES RISES IN THE LATTER DAYS OF THE HOWARD AND COSTELLO IN SPITE OF BUDGET SURPLUSES AND ALLEGEDLY NO DEBT?
Lateline said that even the copy of the speech given to the media was an year out of date. Mr. Abbott did not keep his promise not to be boring. I have news for Mr. Abbott, budgets are about figures and are often by their nature, boring but I hope informative.
Jesus, this kind of BS makes the observations of half-interested laymen like myself look like economic analytical genius in comparision. Way to bring some hefty context to the debate, Craig Mc.
This is what comes of Newscorp having Andrew Bolt as one of their leading budget commentators, I suppose. The ideological rants trickle down into most conservative notions of ‘finance’ and ‘running the country’.
Abbott must surely be something of an embarassment to those on the Lib/Nat bench with functioning brain cells.
If I were Penny Wong tonight I’d have said something like ‘Abbott has nothing except negativity and slogans’,like she did, but then add ‘Malcolm Turnbull, Julie Bishop, you deserve better’. i.e. Pander to the ego of MT and see if it can stir him into a destabilizing manouever.
Julie Bishop seems to have some vestigal liberal tendencies and has already called one of Abbott’s policies ‘insane’. (the defunding of secular Indonesian schools).
Ideally Tones can provoke JB to exasperation again with a similar populist xenophobic stunt while simultaneously making a goose of himself with his Tea Party People’s Revolution Frenzy trying to wreck the budget. If he can just get over-excited and enter the Peter Debenham Hall Of Dills then…
But I admit its a slim hope. Tones has had pretty good self-control these past few years, only once threatening to punch out a journo.
Eh, why not, some context, http://www.petermartin.com.au/2011/05/hockey-said-what-he-get-budget-to.html
When Penny Wong said tonight that Abbott had not moved on from his min $7bn ‘black hole’ budget I thought she was taking poetic licence, but pickle me grandmother Wong is absolutely correct.
From Nick’s link above here’s Hockey owning the whole horror show:
That’s Hockey issuing an invitation to be publicly ridiculed. The problem is that Gillard and Swann don’t seem to know how to go in hard on obvious blunders by Shrek and his mates.
I loved the line that the carbon tax was “a cancer that threatens to paralyse the country”.
Abbott didn’t learn much as health minister did he?
Nickws, from that Peter Martin link, there’s a sterling piece of racism in the Access report:
So if we make money from trading to China it has a “made in China stamp.” But only the budget, mind you – not the private companies that depend on trading with China. And not any other country either – no “Made in Japan” stamp or “Made in the USA” stamp.
Is this really the best quality of analysis we can get from these fuckwits?
What little I watched of the speech gave me the impression that Abbott thought he was still in with a chance to win the last election.
Update [By Mark]: Here’s what I have to say at The Drum.
As promised, I didn’t watch Abbott’s budget speech. (Gran Torino was magnificent, Alice in Wonderland was whgere Abbott’s speech was at, and Animal Kingdom no doubt describes the neyjer regions of the Liberal Party.
However, I saw enough on ABC Breakfast to get the gist of what he said. Of course it was full of crap. But, unfortunately, it appears to have been brilliant poliics. Abbott was even confident enoufg to subtly threaten the Radio National presenter who dared to ask him searching questions. And Tweedle Dum and Tweedle Dee, as expected sprent the morbung bagging the ALP on ABc breakfast.
(Their news service is appalling. The commercial channels managed to discover the bloke on the Sydney Harbour Bridge who shut down Sydney’s transport system for 2 an a half hours was ex SAS and protesting against NSW DOcs, something that totally escaped the ABC News Reporter on the spot. What a waste of public money.)
Nice comment, IanM.
From this morning’s news (and surely its the response to and coverage of the Speech in reply that matters most, not the speech itself) I fear some of you are writing this off too readily. It was powerful politics pitched at the next election and that’s what really mattered. Its another nail in the Gillard Government’s coffin – not one I like to see either as much as I detest Gillard and her pewrversion of Labor principles – He won’t be able to force an election, but he could very well win it when it comes unless Labor pulls a rabbit out of the hat.Mark’s comments on the Drum are very apt. (btw, you were one of the top items on Google News this morning , Mark, where I first read your piece. Agree with you entirely.)
IanM @ 24:
Wouldn’t you say he was entitled to think so?
Gillard was given a massive free kick on the morning TV news on election day when she was repeatedly shown in Robertson electorate spruiking her ‘Don’t risk Mr. Rabbit” mantra directly to the camera. That for mine is the only thing that kept the NSW marginals with Labor against all expectations.
Grigory M @ 29
ah OK, so in fact he did win the last election and now he is PM. That would explain the media coverage he gets from the ABC. Incidentally I have some Nigerian friends who’d like to talk business with you …
IanM @30
Meh
Your wording @24.
Andrew Robb was on RN breakfast this morning, having what could only be described as a rant. Fortunatley I was only half listening but he seemed to be frothing about how this government had us on the brink of disaster. It might play well to the shock jock crowd, but they’d do well to remember that a lot of us expect better from an opposition.
It would seem that the stupidity has spread so far that Tony Abbott can say that he would get interest rates down, lower inflation, and pay off the debt a year earlier than Labor, but no-one can ask him for specifics on how he would do it. He’s just an economic genius
Russ @33. I couldn’t agree more. Abbott is in a position with the media where anything he says – no matter how contradictory or illogical or clearly flaky and ill-thought out – will be reported faithfully without comment.
There seems absolutely no willingness or capacity by journalists to point out the public that this man is winging it. The “pink batts-BER” mythology is swallowed hole and regurgitated over and over – yet his own frailities are never scrutinised.
I find myself almost wishing that he got his wish, an early election was held and a Coalition government was formed, just so he could be exposed as the opportunist he is.
But I suspect not even that would change the narrative.
’d like to thank Adrian at no.14 on the previous post for providing a transcript of a conversation between KO’Brien and MBrissenden on the 7.30Report about Kim Beazley’s 2006 budget reply. If you haven’t read it already I would highly recommend it as it is a timely reminder of the double standards afforded Labor in opposition compared to the Coalition by the ABC’s senior operatives. For me it was also a timely reminder of what a smarmy sneaky operative I felt blink-free Brissenden was. In those days I watched the 7.30 Report every night and taped (VHS!) if I was out (Lateline as well) and was very familiar with his ‘work’. These days I haven’t watched either program for several months. One of the very distinct memories of Brissenden that has stuck with me was during this budget, or the previous, where KBeazley had decided to oppose in the Senate (even though they didn’t have the numbers) one of the governments measures which I think was a super giveaway to the super rich. Of course this had provoked Costello into a choreographed rage of elite private-school prattery on the floor of parliament. In his nightly summary bfB showed footage of this performance and said in the most condescending manner that it had almost been ‘tooo painful’ watching this flaying of poor pitiful Kim. I assumed the pain he was talking about was that of a stiffy in tight trousers. Problem was this week also coincided with the release of the current account and foreign debt figures which were worse than Keating’s banana republic levels despite the benign economic conditions he could only of dreamt about. I waited patiently (naively!) all week for some parliamentary footage or some journalistic discussion on this vital subject but there was diddley squat. We did however get more footage of princess Pete. This transcript was a reminder that the rot set in at the ABC long before Kevin Rudd was elected leader of the ALP.
The question is, how has it come to this?
I think it has got to the stage where the usual explanations of incompetance/laziness and the need to create drama and conflict no longer apply. Particularly if you look at some of the reporting in the Howard years and see that the sense of crisis and drama was used against the then opposition.
How can you explain such a co-ordinated and widespread strategy?
PB and others, I heard most of Andrew Robb on RN this morning, and was pleasantly surprised. Fran Kelly seems to be recovering from the Stockholm Syndrome of the last few years, and actually asked a few questions that reduced him to spluttering incoherence.
Yes, it was quite interesting FFranklin, and apart from anything else, reminded me of what Liberal hack Brissenden was.
No doubt the ABC will soon get rid of their archived material – it’s a bit too revealing of its true agenda.
Naah, if he were still trying to win the last election, he’d be promising not to sleep for a MONTH!!!
I wonder if it might not have been better if we’d got an Abbott minority government at the last election. Labor would have replaced Gillard with some-one who was a competent alternative PM, the Greens would have crucified Abbott’s budget, the Libs would look like they were a bunch of incompetents and Labor would have won the next election with a thumping majority and ben in for years. The way it stands at the moment, unless Labor has the political courage to dump Gillard, who is clearly incapabke of doing the job, we are probably doomed to years of an Abbitt Government at the next election. And that, I fear will be ten times worse than Howard’s ever was.
It’s a bit rich to keep blaming the media in all of this. They may be biased, they may be stupid but FFS the government is hopeless. When the Swanster calls someone “mindless” it’s like a badge of honour.
who cares what Abbott says? He won;t be there at the next election.
Howard’s government was bad? Bland, perhaps, but for lovers of big government & centralised power, Howard put in a lot of spadework for the cause.
Peter Hartcher in the Herald is saying Abbott’s speech was a copy of one given to the Liberal party last year, and was even dated 12 May 2010. Hilarious.
@PB 40 – I don’t wonder. At least Julia hasn’t attacked my rights as a woman.
Gillard seems to have gone missing the last few months. It seems to be all Swan v Abbott in the media – and not just the last week through budget time.
LE @ 45
Gillard gone missing?
You must have missed the Royal Wedding.
DI:
ABC suffers Stockholm Syndrome…
Exactly!
What is causing our cost of living to rise.
1 Petrol. High world wide prices, caused by the problems in the Middle east. Maybe Mr. Abbott should share with the rest of the world leaders how to bring the cost down. Cars are much cheaper.
2 Fresh food. Caused by the floods that inundated most of the states, that Mr. Abbott chooses to ignore. Mr. Abbott is unable to control the weather and will have to wait like us all for the new crops to mature. Time and the weather will deal with this problem. Mr. Abbott, like all leaders cannot control the weather. He can help control the amount of carbon pollution that is allowed to enter the atmosphere.
3 Electricity. The coast of electricity is high for many reasons. All governments of every colour have allowed the system to deteriorate over the last couple of decades, mostly because the solution was too hard. We have had very cheap electricity mainly because of the availability of cheap coal. The world wide price of coal has risen, I believe to record prices. Dearer coal, dearer electricity. Is Mr. Abbott hoping the world price of coal will collapse.
4 Dearer water. We have suffered from a decade of some of the worse droughts this country has seen. Result is that we have found out how fragile our water supply is. Most states have put in place, alternative water supplies to meet the next drought when it comes. This has been an expensive action that water users have to pay for. The price we pay for water is among the cheapest in the world. Many do not see that this generation has to pay to protect the needs of the future generations. I do, and at my age I probably will not be around for the next drought era, but my children, grandchildren and great grand children will.
5 Cost of housing. This is one problem maybe a government can address. I have not seen any evidence that a Coalition has the answers. This problem was worse under the previous Howard government. I believe the cost of housing has slowed down a little but much more needs to be done. Removing the home owners grants and negative gearing from used homes would be a start. This government has attempted to add to the rental housing stock but it needs to be addressed further. I cannot remember a Coalition doing much for those who rents. They did give low income renters subsidy, that immediately allows the rent to rise. Governments, mostly of the Coalition hue have removed themselves from providing welfare housing, pushing low income earners into the private rental market. This needs to be revisited. The most beneficial thing those on low incomes and government benefits can have is the security of welfare housing. It is not only the cost that matters but the tenure you have in welfare housing. The poor cannot afford to move once or twice a year.
6 Health and Education. I am not sure that there has been any rise in these areas, unless you are using the private system. I believe that both has improved greatly.
7 NBN. Mr. Abbott has appeared to backed off mentioning NBNco. Could this be because the country people have managed to get their message to him, to leave it alone as they cannot wait to have it.
Most other things that we need to maintain a family such as clothes etc., has gone down in the last decade, due to the high dollar. This offsets the things that have risen.
Mr. Abbott made a call last night that the first duty of a politician was to do no harm.
Besides elevating his procession to that of a doctor, he should look at his own behaviour as Opposition leader.
Surely if a PM first duty to do no harm, surely a responsible Opposition leader would be aware of the same need.
Mr. Abbott has since he has been appointed to his position after deposing Mr. Turnbull continued with great ferocity to talk the economy down at every opportunity he gets.
Mr. Abbott has not accepted the legality of the present government and is doing all in his power to bring it down. The only reason he has that he believes he should be PM and he does not like Labor.
Mr. Abbott has continued to waste taxpayer’s money continually travelling the country for no more reason than to have photos taken in new back grounds and repeating slogans which amount to lies and scare tactics.
Mr. Abbott sees his job as to destroy a government that at the end of the day was voted in by the people and gained it legality on the floor of the lower house.
The man has a policy of opposing everything, no matter whether it is good for the country or not.
It is the man’s intention to keep the government off balance with the aim of ensuring it is unable to government Efficiently. His only concern is his own interest at the expense of the whole country.
Mr. Abbott has no intention of playing the role of Opposition leader in the present government. He refuses to analyse and offer improvements to any legislation put forwarded. He is not even interested in saying why something is wrong, only opposing because he believes this is the way to become PM.
He is too lazy to do the work to be a competent Opposition leader. He does not care that the only way he can get his risk is to cause the country to descend into disarray.
He does not care that we have passed through a world wide financial crisis and Australia’s economy along with the rest of the world is still fragile.
Mr. Abbott does not care about the budget, the people and the economy. All he cares about is what he considers to be his right so be PM.
He does not care for your family but he does see his high two income family as being needy. Maybe if he did not refinance his home with such a high mortgage to continue to live the lifestyle he has come accustom too, he would manage better. Maybe he needs to have his income quarantined by the government to help him look after his family. If it is fair for the Aboriginals and those on benefits, it is fair for him.
If Mr. Abbott is correct about this government and his ability to rule, all he has to do is wait to the next election which is not that far away.
Mr. Abbott would also be aware he will not have a free rein to do as he likes if he was able to obtain the role of PM. He will have to deal with a hostile Senate, one I believe would have little intent to be obliging for many years.
Mr. Abbott has proven by his actions that he does not believe he can win by waiting. He knows that the government is not as bad as he is painting it. Mr. Abbott’s biggest fear is as time goes on, his scare tactics will not work. He has no other skills or ability to offer.
What we are hearing is Mr. Abbott’s last hurray. The sad part is that he believes he can pull it off. In Mr. Whitlam’s day, the Opposition was able to discredit the government with corruption charges some true, some over exaggerated. They have not been able to do this, but I am expecting to see attempts on the near future.
Mr. Abbott does not have control of the senate and he does not have a Mr. Kerr. I cannot understand why he and Mr. Hockey appear to be so smug and cocky.
Heard a comment on ABC24 morning show. “If Mr. Abbott wants to be considered as a legitimate leader, he needs to answer legitimate serious questions about policies details.”
I would like to add, the copies of the reply speech to the media was a year out of date.
If anyone is interested, Mr. Robb’s interview on Lateline was revealing/ It showed haw little depth there is to their proposals when a little in depth questions are asked and answers questioned. Mr. Robb, with gentle interviewing was reduced to a stuttering mush. He had no answers. Mr. Abbott was little netter this morning.
He’s a dud leader. And your point is? He’s not the PM. He’ll never be the PM. Who cares?
@48
1,405 words. That’s too much Catching Up for me. Gave up half way through.
Mark, in your Drum piece you don’t seem to be taking into account that the so-called middleclass losers are naturally viewing every loss of their entitlement through the prism of a looming carbon tax driving up fuel prices for which they don’t expect to be compensated on the $150K rule? It would be an inept opposition leader of truly Nelsononian proportions not to be able to exploit this? Absent the tax, the cutting of indexation would have passed without pain!
It has astonished me how direly Labor has thought through the political ramifications of its decision to legislate a carbon tax? If it had/ did at every step along the way, it would be very careful not to create more noisy middleclass losers in this budget at this point in time. But I suspect you aren’t thinking it through, either. Why is this? They could do with some good advice from their supporters.
In meantime, since Feb 24 Julia et al have been incrementally handing govt to Abbott like Matt Moran serving up a masterchef plate every week.
babishop@51
that may be so but go and look at the statistics, firstly there aren’t many of them, secondly, they almost certainly all vote Liberal already anyway and thirdly, only a minute percentage of the minute percentage that might Labor will change their vote because of a carbon tax. You’re dreaming, which means you probably have all the qualifications to be an ALP advisor.
IanM, in the recent NSW elections we witnessed the early stage of an agrarian socialist movement when the miners joined with the agriculturalists to soundly defeat Labor.
The miners, staunch Labor voters for generations, deserted because of the CO2 tax and they won’t be coming back in a hurry, if ever.
Poor Tony, his Budget Reply was his Swan Song, and what a pathetic bleat it was. Reheated hash from last year. Not a new idea in sight. His last shot in the locker.
His parliamentary team is out to lunch, refusing to do their homework, with News Ltd and the shock-jocks doing all the heavy lifting. Andrew Robb talks random rubbish and thinks he is convincing, Christopher Pyne is a standing POO joke, Barnaby Joyce has something loose in the top paddock, and even Laurie Oakes boggled in disbelief when Joe Hockey barked out his amazing budget-saving solution, “sack 12,000 public servants!” Good grief.
There are only a few more sitting days left now until the Senate turns over on 1 July, at which point Tony Abbott will turn into a feather duster, and Malcolm Turnbull will strut into view: a reasonably predictable scenario that the spaced-out nongs at News Ltd seem to have completely missed. They are off on a fantasy narrative of their own, arguing about who is rich and who is not, fomenting aboriginal disputes, destroying the greens, lecturing latte sippers, and predicting the collapse of the Gillard Government. Any time now. Soon.
All is well, seems to me. The Opposition is in intellectual disarray with a merciless deadline approaching, while the Independents have found their feet and are starting to enjoy themselves, the Greens are standing their ground, and the Gillard Government is “moving forward” in the direction of July, where hope lies.
Although it has to be said that Gillard and Wong really did not manage to land a punch today in response to Abbott’s speech. This was the time to switch to vaudeville, ladies. It was left to Bob Brown to bring it home: We, the Government, the Greens, and the Independents, will decide when the next election will be held, not you, punk.
el gordo, I live in the Bathurst electorate. If that’s what you think happened then you have completely, completely misunderstood it.
IanM: You say almost all of them wouldn’t vote Labor anyway? In fact many, probably most, of them on that $150K family-income level voted Labor, or gave Labor their preferences, in 2007 and again in 2010. They are a small but significant part of the reason Labor is in government at all.
Mindu @ 44,
I’m sure teenage single mothers will absolutely agree with you.
There’s a news item today about how Qantas is having to put up its fares because of European penalty taxes applied on account of Australia not having a carbon price. There are plenty of businesses out there pushing for carbon pricing and certainty about the future trajectory. The framework will be introduced, and the sky will not collapse. Where will Tony Abbott be then?
Paul most sensible teenage single mothers for the last ten years have been voluntary working with Centerlink to better their situationin a similar manner.
What is being proposed that this scheme become mandatory. It is being trialed in a few areas.
The scheme was one of Mr. Howard’s few success stories.
Still, ACOSS seem upset about it.
Still, I suppose its not as bad as Abbott’s idea not mentioned in his speech, of just cutting everybody off benefits and leaving them to starve.
But, OTOH, now that I understand the Gillard teenage single mother policy is a Howard policy and not a Labor policy, I understand exactly how it came about.
Yes, but it was voluntary.
No one has said that Mr. Howard did not manage to introduce a good policy or two. After all he was in power over ten years.
Labor did not abandon it becasue it is good policy.
I am not too sure his aim was to help these people but to get them back to work.
Funny though Mr. Howard only believed that single parents should work. He made sure he gave mothers who had husbands the support to stay home.
Most Labor voters are capable of acknowledging good done by the other side. Pity that Coalition supporters cannot show the same grace.
It’s all the difference between journalism and PR. See The Failed Estate:
http://thefailedestate.blogspot.com/2011/05/dark-side.html
This is officially a Dead Parrot Government.
Razor,
They’re certainly not going well but I think you might be a bit hasty in jumping to the conclusion they’re a dead parrot government. I don’t think the electorate wants Abbott as PM. They didn’t want Gillard either btw, and I’m not sure a lots changed since the election..
Labor’s possible success, apart from retaining the support of the Greens and the independents depends on a number of factors.
Being able to sell their policies better. (I don’t think they are really capable of that.)
Tony Abbott continuing to be a negative idiot. (I think Labor can rely on that.)
Putting the asylum seeker controversy to bed. (As much as I don’t like the immorality of what they’re doing to boat refugees, I think the Malaysia/Manus Island/Thailand et al is likely to work.)
Selling the carbon tax. (I think once the details of the compensation package comes out they could garner enough votes to get them across the line.)
So, a half-dead parrot, I would suggest.
First off – thanks for the pointer Paul – getting used top the new layout.
So, it’s not a Dead Parrot – more like a ‘Bring out your Dead’ Government.
“I’,m not dead yet!”
“Here, can I give you a hand with that?”
Doof
“Bring out your Dead!”
Or perhaps this Government is the Black Night Government?
“That’s only a flesh wound!”
“Come back here and I’ll bite your legs off!”
Catching Up – that is crap – most conservatives are more than happy to praise good policy from the ALP – like maintaining the schedule of tax cuts up to the last budget, floating the dollar, bringing in across the board superannuation, not rolling back the GST (what happened to Rollback??).
The problem the ALP Government has the moment is that they could not organise a piss-up in a brewery in terms of producing and delivering effective policies – evidence – the Building the Entertainment Revolution following on from their previous learning experiences.
Add to that – no one believes them or is listening. They said we were going to do a tough budget and then created a forecast $50 billion deficit and a possible $3 billion deficit 3 years out – how much did the deficit foreast blowout for this year from the last forecast? And nowe they want to raise the government debt ceiling to $250 billion at the same time. Forehead slapping stuff. And, if I recall correctly – there will be no Carbon Tax.
Do you really believe I should take them at their word or treat them with any credibility?
So, Razor, in line with conservatives praising good policy from the ALP, I guess that means you’re happy to agree that the BER and the insulation scheme were good policy, well-executed, and Rudd’s govt deserves praise for making sure Australia dodged the GFC.
DI(NR)
Posting previously as plain old simple Razor i have already gone on record saying that the proverbial Drover’s Dog could have successfully led Australia through the GFC. The BER and insulation schemes and $900 handouts were not required. The bank Deposit Guarntee was an unmitigated disaster for the mortgage funds sector and investors still locked in to those funds.
4 major areas of difference from the rest of the world (ROW):
Government finances – Australia – envy of ROW
Banking Sector – Australia – envy of ROW
Real Estate Sector – Australia – envy of ROW
RBA Interest rate policy – Australia – envy of rest of world as we had the interest rate head room to make cuts equating to about $30 billion in interest savings for the economy.
The ALP have managed to make a rod for their own back with their monumentally bad handling of our economy. They did not need to blow our surplus on wasteful programs (I am not discussing the policy aims of insulating houses and building school buildings – just the fiscal stimulus part). Now we have deficits we didn’t need to have and an economy continuing to strain against constraints that have been exacerbated by excessive government spending therefore helping to push inflation and interest rates.
@DI(NR)
http://newmatilda.com/2011/05/16/why-abbotts-budget-economic-twaddle
Razor, in light of the link Mindy provided, I hope you aren’t suggesting Abbott would do better.
Razor, there have been tax cuts for the last few years, including three of Labor. Can you please tell me when tax cuts are no longer viable. Is it when we reach zero tax.
It is no wonder that the higher paid are in love with tax cuts. They are the ones that benefit the most.
Sometimes it is OK to address the needs of those who do not benefitted from tax cuts.
@71 – I would be more impressed/suprised if the New Matilda published a piece that either supported Abbot or criticised the PM. An unsuprising article.
Despite the desire of the ALP to make out than an Opposition should behave as if it is a shadow government running it’s own shadow departments and budgets, the reality is that it’s job is to bring the Government to account and cause the Government to lose the next election. How they do that is up to them – if they want to play a small target strategy then so be it. Worked in NSW. The only test of whether their strategy is right or wrong is how much they expose of bad policy and practices of the Government of the day and whether the Voters think they are worth voting them in. Certainly appears to be working at the moment, although we all know that the numbers will tighten if an election is called.
@72 – the reason for those tax cuts was that we were over taxed and still are. Zero tax is a stupid suggestion. However there is a level that meets the needs of funding necessary govrnment services. Australia has for too long been on a big spending/big taxing binge. Far too many Australians are either employed by the Government sector, are in private enterprise directly reliant on Government funding or receive welfare benefits. This fact puts huge hurdles in the way of restructuring the economy to a more productive basis. Frankly, I find the comments of Abbot about minimal cuts to FTB at the threshhold of earnings to be distasteful. Short-term they have some opinion poll impact but long-term they place a double edged sword at the throat of fundamental reform to our tax and transfer system.
Catching up – do you agree with the statement that the ultimate goal of welfare policy should be to get the recipient off welfare?
“Catching up – do you agree with the statement that the ultimate goal of welfare policy should be to get the recipient off welfare?”
Yes I definitely do. I say we should do with the middle and upper income earners first.
We have to address the problems that are causing people to depend on welfare.
Training and education for those who have no work skills.
Support for those with disabilities that enable them to get back into the workforce.
Housing and medical support for the mentally ill, to stabilise them so they can work.
Ensuring that teenagers remain at school or in skill training. Extra support to be given to teenager mothers.
Oh, I just noticed, that is what the recent budget is all about.
I would like to add, there are many people that are genuinely unable to work. We should treat these people with respect and not make them feel guilty. There are some, that no matter what is done are simply unemployable. Not only unemployable but a danger in the workforce. I do not believe that many of these people choose this lifestyle.
A highly taxed country. A myth of the highest order. We are oner of the lowest, 27 out of 32 countries. One graph put us below the USA.
http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/2692862.html
“…….This presentation reveals four fiscal developments:
•In the final years of the Howard-Costello administration, social security and welfare reached high levels, crowding out other areas of expenditure.
•The big boost in social security and welfare in the first full year of the Rudd-Swan administration reflects the temporary stimulus payments to individuals.
•The boost in “other” in 2009-10, was for ongoing stimulus payments such as payments for school buildings.
•There is a reversion to a plateau of about 41 to 42 per cent for “other” payments in the outer years.
What we are now seeing is a small re-allocation of budget priorities – to compensate for the reliance on welfare to mask inequalities that has developed over the last thirty years, and a stronger emphasis on government programs…….”
“…….The issue being avoided by this and previous administrations is that Australia is one of the lowest taxed countries in the developed world. Out of the 32 countries in the OECD, only Turkey, Mexico and the USA collect less tax as a proportion of their GDP. (It’s questionable whether the USA actually collects less tax. Their reported figure is 26.1 per cent of GDP, while ours is 27.1 per cent, but in the USA there are many private levies, the most significant of which is health insurance, which would normally count as taxes in other countries.) At 27 per cent of GDP, our tax revenue compares with a 35 per cent average for the OECD; the difference is about the same as the revenue forgone through our tax expenditures. And many of these OECD countries, particularly the USA, are going to have to raise their taxes to cope with high and unsustainable levels of government debt. Yet, the Government has specifically stated an aim to “keep taxation as a share of GDP below the level for 2007-08 (23.5 per cent of GDP), on average” (The difference between this and OECD figures is accounted for by state and local government taxes.)……”
Of course you will dismiss the above.
It is a pity that peoples perceptions have to some become fact.
@75 – can’t say I particularly aspire for Australia t be in the same fiscal situation as either the US or the EU.
No, and the question is so facile as to make a nonsense of the notion of welfare. Replace the term “welfare” in your question with “education” or “medicine” and you might appreciate how simplistic your question is.
There is no one, single, “ultimate” goal for welfare. Recipients are in a vastly different range of circumstances, and have a vastly different range of prospects. For some people, getting off welfare again is a great goal and a welcome outcome. For other people, welfare is necessary to prevent true immiseration, and the best prospect is that they can maintain basic dignity and avoid a downward spiral that would be catastrophic for them as individuals and, if repeated in enough cases, catastrophic and destabilising for society at large. In some respects, welfare is the price the taxpayer must bear to keep our society from descending into bedlam.
So if you really must insist on a simplistic view, then the “ultimate” goal of welfare should be directed towards the welfare of the recipient, whatever that may entail in their specific circumstances. I would have thought that was obvious.
Given Abbott will win the next election (unless Turnbull miraculously rolls him under a bus before then), it’s smart politics for the ALP to move as far as they can on a carbon tax now, while still in government. This will set a good policy distinction in the electorate’s mind for the elections subsequent to the next one.
Abbott will have committed himself through word and deed to being a climate change denialist. Long term this will help the ALP eventually get legislation through.
Dead duck govts must prepare the ground for the future. Gillard et al seem to be doing this ok.
“Harder budget cuts would risk economy: Treasury
The new treasury secretary has defended the federal budget, saying harder or earlier cuts could have damaged Australia’s economy and resulted in extensive job losses….
..”My own sense is that to do significantly – and I emphasise significantly – more to tighten fiscal policy in the short run would inject another risk – that of slowing the economy excessively and undermining the prospect of achieving fiscal consolidation,” he told the assembled economists and economic journalists.
Dr Parkinson also defended the Federal Government’s stimulus spending during the financial crisis, saying it was critical to provide sufficient stimulus to avoid recession and widespread job losses…
…In response to criticisms (including from some of those in the audience) that the budget had not cut deeply enough, he said it was the fastest deficit reduction in the past 40 years, and to cut much harder or earlier would have risked damaging the economy, thus further reducing tax revenues and resulting in no real improvement to the budget bottom line…..
Treasury estimates the stimulus saved around 200,000 jobs, and he says the loss of those positions would not have been temporary, but would have led to long-term unemployment similar to that now seen in the US, or in Australia during the early 1990s……
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2011/05/17/3219381.htm?section=justin
I don’t know why you think Abbott will win the next election, wbb. He possibly would if it were held next weekend, but he’s got about another two years of treading on his dick before his next chance.
Behind Abbott’s current hysteria is the knowledge that he has to force an election prior to September or, I understand, the two houses will be out of sync, something that hasn’t happened since the 1970s when we were having an election every 5 minutes for a while.
Abbott won’t be successful in turning the independents, so he’s stuck, short of a by-election caused by a death. In a month or two the game will change.
Laura Tingle said the other night that Howard had been as far behind at times as Gillard is. OTOH the present Govt is unlikely to fluke circumstances like the Twin Towers and the Tampa in 2001, and don’t have the breath-taking cynicism to exploit events like that any way.
The only hope is to perform on things like climate change, the NBN, health, education, infrastructure, stopping the boats, bringing the budget back to balance, and then hope they can sell the story.
Brian, I thought it was unlikely that the senate would not go to an election either next year or the year after.Mr. Abbott can only hope to have a lower house election.
He would pushed the country into a long period of instability to get his own way. The sky will not fall in if he waits to the right time. If Mr. Abbott is correct in his assessment of the government, the government will not go it’s full term.
Mr. Abbott knows the government is not as bad as he makes out and is afraid if he waits, the public will turn against him.
The truth is that there are no grounds for this government to be pushed to the polls while it has the numbers on the floor of the lower house. The government is not corrupt and is passing bills.
It is not enough to push for an election because you do not like the government.
Good things come to them that wait.
Even if the Gillard Govt did lose the support of the Inds doesn’t the GG just invite the Opposition to see if they can form Govt? With no love lost between Abbott and the Inds he could find himself rolled in favour of a leader they can work with.
“Today the Government is rolling out a Bentley to every Australian. We believe that we can as a nation only afford a Commodore at the moment. “
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2011/05/18/3220574.htm
Maybe we do not need a Bentley, the Commodore will do the same job. They hold the same number of people and travel at the same speed.
The comparison between Labor and the Coalition is between the Commodore and the horse and cart. As they say, if something is worth doing, we should do it well. It is much more costly to build a house that is too small and try to enlarge it later by adding extensions. What we will have is a patchwork and inferior product.
Look at how fast our web needs have grown over the last ten years. We have gone from 56k dial up to ADSL2. Each met our needs for a short period. Look at the last couple of years where our access to the internet has gone from our computers to our TV, our games console and to our phones.
For the advances in medicine and doctor supervision to occur over the web, it has to be to our homes. Those opposed to the fibre to home are insisting that it only needs hospitals to be hooked up. This is a use that is beginning to be used today, especially in the bush. It is cheaper in the long run to connect while the fibre is being laid. It will only be a short time before people find they need the connection.
We do not build new homes today without connecting water, sewer, electricity and phone wires when they are being built. We even ensure that the road and foot path are installed. Why should something that is becoming a part of our day to day life be any different. The internet is more than something we like to have. It is essential to our daily life. I have no idea how you search for a job or rent a home without it. Most find it essential to do their banking. If you think the present speed is OK, I suggest you try and do your grocery shopping on the Coles site.
The Turnbull interview on Lateline was interesting. Mr. Turnbull said he voted for Mr. Howard’s climate change policy. He said that Labor does not have a policy, only an idea.
He refuse to comment on the Abbott Direct Action, saying he would explain how it worked, but you would have to ask Mr. Hunt or Abbott if you wanted an opinion. He said this more than once.
He was not much better when talking about the NBNCo. What surprise me was his statement the Korea was only supplying fibre to the node, not the home. I must have read something wrong, as I thought they had already supply fibre to the node and were now extending it to the home.
Now Mr. Turnbull would not lie but he was an successful barrister if my memory is correct, and a very successful one.
What we got tonight was pure barrister talk. Putting forwarded a case as directed by the client/ boss, but not necessary believing in guilt or innocence.
He was challenged for once during the interview.
I think Mr. Hockey’s problem is that he is defending a situation that he knows is tripe.
Every time the Opposition puts forwarded the proposition that PM Gillard needs a mandate for introducing a price on carbon, they ask, where was Mr. Howard’s mandate for Work Choices.