We’ve reached 400 on the other thread and I’m not sure we are done yet. Any way I wanted to make a rather long comment.
To me there were three general factors and three specific ones. The first general one was it’s time. Poll Bludger says that governments accumulate baggage until it’s too heavy to carry. He points to the 2006 election when the Bundaberg Dr Death scandal should have sunk any government, yet Beattie kept most of his large majority.
The principal reason why Labor survived in 2006 and 2009 was the lack of a credible opposition. The Liberals in Brisbane had become a farce, with about enough members to fill half a phone box. There was infighting and city Liberal voters preferred Labor to a coalition run by a country National. Lawrence Springborg did a study tour of Canada and became convinced that the parties needed to merge. But The Borg himself as a country National dressed up in LNP clothes didn’t quite have the credibility to carry the day in 2009.
The answer then was the Gold Coast Liberal Jean-Paul Langbroek. He had no credibility in the bush, but after the asset sales a drover’s dog could have won provided he kept his mouth shut. Of course he didn’t. When Bligh’s standing revived somewhat after the 2011 floods the party panicked and installed Campbell Newman, last March, to lead from outside parliament. He did succeed in uniting the party and providing an apparent viable alternative government.
Political scientist Paul Williams mentioned the ‘Liberal restitution’ the other day, the nascent Liberal vote in Brisbane that needed something to vote for. We’ve obviously seen it.
The third general factor was the election campaign. Exit polls showed this as the issue most front of mind. Much has been said, which I won’t repeat, except that state ALP secretary Anthony Chisholm didn’t resile from the personal attacks on Campbell Newman. He reckons he could only find two seats in the last couple of years where Labor was ahead at any time at all – Ashgrove and Bulimba. At the end of the first week when Federal leadership issues were resolved the swing was 16%. By attacking Newman they pulled that back to 10%, but then it blew out again.
Everyone knows that Labor sunk like a stone after the 2009 election when asset sales were announced. The issue was trust. They say she lied. I don’t recall asset sales being mentioned in the election campaign, but certainly the policy was not to sell. Bligh says that when they came to put the budget together receipts were down so far that they wouldn’t be able to maintain their infrastructure building program. Some 200,000 jobs were at stake. Whether this was true or not doesn’t matter, everyone said she lied.
Notable in this, was the fact that the biggest opposition to the sales came from the unions. Labor was alienating its base.
The second specific factor was competence. First there was the Health Department pay debacle, a stuff up of gargantuan proportions which went on forever. Staff were mostly being underpaid, but some were overpaid. Payments for overtime and extra shifts were not going through. Attempts to compensate and rectify became farcical. Is it fixed now? Then an employee managed to nick $16 million dollars.
This was April 2010. This is December 2012 where they are still talking about significantly improving the ‘payroll experience’ of staff. This happened as the election was about to be announced. Maybe it was the Commonwealth Bank’s fault, but it didn’t help.
The third specific factor I’ll term economic issues, but it goes further than that. The cost of utilities and fuel keeps going up. There’s the two-speed economy, with businesses everywhere unrelated to mining tending to find it tough. The lack of job security makes it hard to gain finance for home loans. The high dollar has knocked the stuffing out of the tourist industry. FIFO has changed the character of towns, put stress on families and made it in some cases impossible for small businesses to get staff.
It came the day after the election, but the Background Briefing program on Moranbah (transcript shortly) was illuminating if you want to know why some ALP supporters took more than a look at Katter’s economic nationalism.
Each of those three factors could cause traditional Labor voters to change their vote. In the event a net 1 in 6 voters changed.
Of interest now is whether there are implications for the federal scene, what the LNP is going to do to improve the life experience of voters and how Labor will rebuild.
Each of the three factors above will be a problem for the Gillard Government – trust, competence and economic issues. I’m thinking that in Queensland the federal ALP, whoever they put in charge apart from possibly Kevin Rudd, which is now impossible, won’t have a snowflake’s chance in hell. Pollbludger mentioned Qld tracking at 41/59. Once before we had only one ALP member.
Newman has hit the ground running with fast-tracking mining approvals. Environment impact statements are taking far too long.
We know he can’t do anything about the dollar. Sunday’s paper pointed out that tourism is going to get a 20-year strategic plan and from memory an extra $16 million over four years. Or was it $8 million? In either case, laughable.
We know that he will be socially very conservative. How will minorities fare? I seem to recall boot camp for young offenders.
One of his biggest problems, though, will be that his promises are based on some $5.7 million savings. That’s fanciful.
As to how Labor rebuilds, obviously with difficulty. It took 15 years after the 1974 ‘cricket team’ outcome for Labor to win power. And that was after the Nats had stuffed up possibly like no other Australian government ever has. Twice today I’ve heard Labor figures say that there has to be a return to Labor values. Just putting yourself forward as a better manager is not going to work.
This “trust” meme is infantile, 2 year old brat whining posing as political discourse.
“But the bad lady bwoke her pwomise!”
Thanks Brian, on the ‘trust’ issue, I’ve noticed a political tactic emerging in recent years that, if carried through consistently, is going to make any state, or the Federal level, effectively ungovernable. It is this:
- Any policy change by an incumbent government that was not a part of the formal election campaign is immediately leapt upon by opposition figures as “a breach of trust” and they shriek that “this wasn’t announced before the election” — the meme is then that the government “lied”.
I’m not referring to any specific case: I’m suggesting that this is the new opposition tactic applied to every major announcement by every state and federal government, regardless of party or the individual circumstances of government.
If this tactic goes feral, and I believe it already has, then we end up with a situation where governments are paralysed to make any reform unless they have specifically included it in their 1,095-day plan for government submitted to the talkback stations before the election…
But Shirley governing is a mixture of both implementing announced policies/plans — and also responding dynamically to unforseen contingencies that arise while in office? — And Shirley the people elect whichever mob they believe will be the least worst team to handle both sides of that coin?
The electorate seems to have decided it doesn’t want any surprises — at all, and oppositions around the country are willing to pander to the fantasy that life will unfold predictably, forever.
Good luck then, to the Newman LNP, who haven’t announced a single concrete plan for anything (or at least, nothing that has filtered to news bureaux south of the border): everything the Cambpell LNP government does will be susceptible to the idiotic “breach of trust!” “they didn’t announce it in the campaign!” “liar!” meme…
I’ll second Mercurius on ‘trust’, Also:
raises the question of what, and to what extent, State governments of any persuasion can do something about these issues.
Underpinning all of this, the Great Disruption/Great Transition/Greatest Transformation/Upside of Down is upon us.
Geoff Gallop.
Hope Gallop’s right Paul, because that might give the feds a sliver of a chance.
I see that Clive Palmer has come clean. His bizarre claims about the CIA links to the Greens were, as we suspected, designed to damage the Green vote and divert the media from questioning Campbell Newman. He now applauds the media for swallowing it ,hook line & sinker.
Yes. It wasn’t so much that the lady lied about the asset sales – just that it was so unexpected and undesirable for this to occur or even be tabled in the first place. Of course she didn’t take it to an election, she would have lost a term ago.
Campbell Newman didn’t have to do much except form a party that didn’t look like a country church about to have an ecumenical split, and thus be a viable alternative. Which, of course, he did. Good luck to him. If he does a credible job, he will be leader for a long time to come.
Paul Norton – very high cost of water by SEQ water (and the schmozzle of an administering body) and doubling of fares by Queensland Rail – plenty they could do.
Mercurius is half right. The public should expect that a government should keep its promises as best it can. Unexpected events happen and the expectation is that a government will align with its core values and its core base in response to those unexpected events.
Gillard, in the unexpected event of having to barter with the Greens and minor parties to form government has abandoned Labor’s base – not the urban elite – but Labor’s base.
I think that was a good comment about Bligh abandoning Labor’s base.
I will be writing more about how Labor-Greens preference deals have trashed the same rights and freedoms that the ANZACs fought and died for. Labor has deliberately written into law the sort of tyranny that ANZACs fought to restrain.
Labor do not deserve to govern until, amongst other things, they recommit to the nuts and bolts of democratic freedoms.
Labor federally has no chance. Arguments in favour of Gillard getting a second term, Tony Abbott. Significantly that falls into the “personal” category described above, ie Labor in attacking the man have lost sight of the ball.
@3 – Yes Norto, how is Newman’s LNP going to stop petrol, electricity and grocery price rises, exactly? A state-controlled economy? Vouchers? FFS…part of their platform was to ease cost of living increases….good luck with that….
Question for the QLD electorate and QLD ALP: Will Newman have “lied” if the cost of living in QLD continues to rise?
Are you saying that state governments are powerless to do anything about the supply of/demand for electricity in their states?
“the same rights and freedoms that the ANZACs fought and died for”…
And the victory of Kaiser Wilhelm would have affected the freedoms of Australian citizens exactly how?
Yes, the lied meme.
And Labour have been useless at reminding the public about Abbott’s hyper blatant history of almost pathologic lying. And the most typical of these was his promise, as Howard’s minister of health, to match Latham’s free health care for the over 75′s, and then just 3 months after the election quietly backing away from that PROMISE. And he could not even help himself from lying again in the interview with the ABC. There is a transcript of that infamous exchange.
And then he tried to whitewash his past when he became leader of the gang ……..by one vote……….saying that “the past was the past and he looks to the future”. Abbotts own little African style “truth and reconciliation” commision.
Abbott needs to be reminded about his total lack of integrity every day in parliament. Every day he needs to have his total lack of honesty shoved down his throat
I personally see Toxic Tony Abbott as being cast in the same mould as Adolf Hitler. Same tactics, same hold on reality.
And now he is trying to gather more of his ilk with Barnaby Joyce wangling to join the “team”.
Frankly, this country deserves to burn if this is the best that it ha to offer as “Leaders”.
Chris @12, according to some the defeat of Kaiser Wilhelm and the signing of the Treaty of Versailles rendered the Australian Constitution invalid and all subsequent actions by Australian governments at all levels null and void.
Umm, might not South Brisbane still, with 10,000 of the roll still uncounted, (nearly 3000 in postal and pre-poll votes, from scrutineering times memory aren’t in the on the night reported notional two party count) possibly not be going to a by-election at all, rather being the new Bennelong, with Anna simply losing her own seat?
There was a certain green voter preference backlash there over labor’s handing out an imposter green HTV card, putting themselves @ 2, whereas the authenntic green htv was just vote greens 1, so the expected anna’s (temporary) arse saving greens preferences might not materialize to the expected extent.
Jackie trad a local, hahahahaha. Except for when in Narangba, or hiding in NSW from the sheperdson enquiry. Heather “My Wife Would Kill me If I went Back to Politics” Beattie? Talk about QLP death throe spasms.
What next? Kev standing for South Brisbane, and doing “Transition to Power” again?
“Loser” is a kind description of people who think Tony Abbot is like Hitler.
Campbell Newman is not Tony Abbott, as Andrew Welder reminds us.
Care to provide us with an example or three? Or do you just enjoy making unsubstantiated outrageous statements that have no basis in fact?
Soldiers died at Gallipoli and on the Western Front not for freedom but in the cause of supporting the empire and the incompetent British ruling classes.
No legislation passed by the current Government with the support of the Greens represents an assault on anything to do with our freedoms.
Previous Coalition Governments with the shameful support of the ALP have already passed draconian legislation that hands to much power to the “security” forces in this country.
Sorry off track and I know I shouldn’t feed the trolls but I have a low tolerance for nonsense
Leaving aside the Hitler comment BilB is right.
Mercurius said:
Its even worse than that. If someone changes their mind and then goes to an election before implementing it, they’re still years later called a liar (no shortage of people calling Howard a liar over the GST for example).
But I think it does go back to whether we are electing a fixed plan at each election, or do we elect parties and individuals who will make decisions based on facts and the ideology we support. I think because of an increasing mistrust of politicians that people are doing more of the former than the latter.
OK……..Bill………
Care to enlighten us on how Abbott might be considered a pillar of virtue?
I have no problem with likening Abbott to Hitler as he uses the same megaponic lie tactic. To say “the lie” and repeat it thousands of times, aided by a corrupted and captured media, to the extent that people hear nothing else, and eventually are led to believe that “the lie” must be true. And as this comes from someone who is a habitual liar it consolidates the comparison. The difference between Abbott and Hitler, and the main difference, is that Abbott has not had the opportunity yet to perform the attrocities of Hitler. The only other difference is that Abbott is not as clever as Hitler was.
This has nothing to do with Queensland as Campbell won with good tactics and a powerful presentation, something we will not be seeing in the Federal competition.
There is probably quite a lot that can be done to at least slow electricity price increases.
One of the biggest drivers is the wasteful investment in renewables to meet the 20% renewable target. This has resulted in huge subsidies being paid to the mostly well-off to install solar cells on their roofs.
On top of this the utilities have been required to pay feed in tariffs more than double the retail rate for solar generated power.
This has had the perverse result of an ALP government subsidising the well-off for every KWH of renewable power generated and increasing the power costs of everyone else; and commentators wonder why there is a groundswell of anger about the steep rises in utility costs.
Water costs have skyrocketed because of insane decisions made over 20 years ago when the Wolfdene dam was canned by the Goss government. The advice then was that a new dam was required to cater for the water requirements of SE Queensland in the face of rapid population growth.
The chickens came home to roost when a drought hit. The policy makers were then in thrall of MMGW and the idea that it wouldn’t rain sufficiently again. An expensive water grid was built which would provide no additional water storage but shift it about as required. Traveston was committed to against the advice of the Water Resources Commission but politics again held sway and a 5th tier site was adopted which was eventually canned federally.
On the Gold Coast there was plenty of water available but the residents there were forced to ration water in sympahy with their Brisbane neighbours. That went down well and the consequent costs hammered water prices for everyone.
This was the base line for the inevitable new increases to be imposed with the implementation of the carbon tax. No wonder voters were less than enamoured and cost of living increases were a big factor in the ALP backlash. All of that was a result of government decisions both state and federal and all avoidable.
@18 and 19
Example of law passed that violates the United Nations Covenant on Civil and Political Rights:
The Vegetation Management Act.
More here: http://www.samuelgriffith.org.au/papers/html/volume17/v17chap2.html
And here: http://www.abc.net.au/rural/news/stories/s812799.htm
Straight from the Act on presumption of innocence:
VEGETATION MANAGEMENT ACT 1999 – SECT 67A
67A Responsibility for unauthorised clearing of vegetation
(1) The clearing of vegetation on land in contravention of a vegetation clearing provision is taken to have been done by an occupier of the land in the absence of evidence to the contrary.
(2) In this section—
Occupier, of land, includes—
(a) for freehold land—the registered owner; or
(b) for a lease, license or permit under the Land Act 1994—the lessee, licensee or permittee; or
(c) for indigenous land—the holder of title to the land; or
(d) for any tenure under any other Act—the holder of the tenure.
Wild Rivers has problems too.
I am not the only one speaking about this:
I understand the bigger source of electricity cost increases is the inefficient structure of producer, distributer, retail adding costs in some states, and worse: the rising cost of new infrastructure to meet peak demand, including perverse incentives to build more of it, rather than look at systemic efficiencies (as the US is doing).
In this picture, its not the people with solar on their rooves, but rather the attempts to meet peak demand on hot day ) eg for those with air-conditioning, an no solar) thats the area driving costs up.
One of the great things about home solar is the creation of a distributed network that reduces peak demand. Its not perfect, but it engages people and makes them producers – worth it for that alone.
It is a curious thing that elections are usually sunny fair weather days.
Elections should really be held in February. Elections should be held in the middle of floods, amoungst the smoke of bushfires, the depression of the droughts and the choke of the dust storms. Grapefruit sized hail should be pounding the roof of the polling booths, dried carcasses of dead farm animals should be stack against the walls, tanks of mine runoff contaminated water should be in every corner, cane toads should be hopping about, and images of near extinct animals should paper the walls.
Because………this is the only way, it seems, that Amotiser’s “akuna mata” “she’ll be right” electoral philosophy can be balanced with the reality of where this country is really headed.
Most of the utility price rises I’ve seen in my adult lifetime have been their direct result of shonky privatisations, corproratisations and other fashionable neoliberal crap: which has all added up to a. worse services, and b. getting royally ripped off.
Here’s a short list of things whose price monumentally EXPLODED after ceasing to be straight up government owned and run entities:
1. Phone bills
2. Water
3. Transport in some areas (eg Metro Melbourne)
4. Electricity (selected states)
5. Banking charges
Wasnt this supposed to become cheaper and more competitive? Well – it didnt. Ideology fail!
Here’s a shorter list of thing that did actually get cheaper as a result:
1. Airfares.
We just created a spiv’s paradise in which we can buy shares in things we already owned, and created a “user pays twice” systems, as many retained massive govt subsidies anyway.
Anyway, back on topic: if you can handle the slight air of self-congratulation, Beattie actually offers some very good advice to Federal labour here.
I think what we’re getting here are clues as to how everyone will pay dearly for electing the LNP in such large numbers. Those who are getting the feed in tariff will maybe not now get it. State schools and the QTU are another obvious target, given the amazing transformation of our state schools over the last 20 years. In short anything progressive you have done either individually or collectively you will now be punished for. Also, how will the parliamentary committee system function? It won’t obviously. None of the usual conventions of parliament can work without enough opposition members. The LNP are already telling us how good for parliament this will be. I for one have been here before. It is an open invitation for corruption and abuse.
I am not suprised by the result of this weekends elections, but a liitle shocked at the level of the rout. I had been a proud labour supporter from my fisrt election in 1980. Have had a great deal of trouble with the ALP both federally and state wise for about 10 years. They stand for nothing. Where are their principals. I am well aware that compromise is a part of governing and ‘you can’t please all the people all the time’, but for goodness sake. We nolonger have anything that suggests robust support for social democratic polices within our two major parties, just a race to see how far right the overton window can be moved. Demonize the poor, the immigrant, the other, it’s enough to make one very sick.
As bad as the privatisation decision, the campaign, and the length of time in office made things – you actually cant blame the ALP for the extent of the rout.
Im afraid you have to blame our outdated single member district electoral system for that.
Some 40% of QLDers did not vote LNP – and all they got was 13% of seats in return.
Its actually not good enough (and yes, I did say the same thing after the Beattie landslide)
danny @ 15:
The QLP has been dead and buried for 50 years. It was a political party formed in 1957, closely aligned to the DLP and lead by Vince Gair until 1960. It was absorbed into the DLP in 1962.
Debbieanne,
“They stand for nothing”
This is not true. The problem that Labour has got is that Australia is working quite well. What do you do when you have achieved most of your goals. People are being educated fairly well. The health system works pretty well. People are paid quite well. We have good support for those who are unemployed and those who cannot work. Of course if there was an endless supply of wealth then things can always be further improved.
There is one challenge reamining for Labour, and that is securing the environment so that this “good Position” will not be demolished by the pollution of our success. And that is the very issue that Labour, albeit very haltingly, has faced up to on our behalf………………and are now being punished for taking that responsibility.
Now take a look at what the LNP stands for.
That is the real issue.
The worst is still to come for the ALP. Just wait until the Commission of Inquiry into The Heiner Affair kicks off in the next few weeks. Queenslanders will start to realize just what a bunch of political thugs were in charge over the past 20 years.
Gordon Nuttall will be joined by some of his former mates in free taxpayer paid accommodation.
Taa for that t@37
You’re on the QR gravy train (p the p) aren’t you?
Any intra-workforce opinion about how damaging the blatant featherbedding of Cronin P. , hubby (sic) of Jones K., very highest tier of of QLP (sic) royalty, into QR prepatory to selling it off was in being one of the first of many electorally fatal stenches of the rank?
Yeah, I’m getting a bit sick of the ‘Labor stands for nothing’ meme. It certainly stands for more than the various vested interest groups, including the Federal opposition could ever hope to stand for.
It’s like the ‘Juliar’ meme, that has similarly little basis in reality, but has taken off while serial liar Abbott gets away scott free.
I guess we’re not very good at reality in entitlement land, Australia.
This is actually quite scandalous, but try finding a mention of it in any of the pontificating analysis provided sundry commentators in the MSM.
BilB @33:
No we don’t.
This is all quite consistent, Lefty E. the QLD government will want as much privatisation as possible (talk about a gravy train). This will, as you observe, push up prices. Then they’ll be able to do a blitz of SEE WE TOLD YOU ENERGY PRICES WOULD GO UP IT’S THE CARBON PRICE. What’s not to like? (For them, I mean.)
Danny @ 35.
I have already pointed out to you that there is no “QLP”, and that there hasn’t been such a party since 1962.
My work is my work. I am not a government employee, and I do not make public comments on my work, or about company or government policies that affect my work.
To do so would not be professional of me.
For you, or anyone else, to imply that I am on a “gravy train” is something that I regard to be personally offensive.
Ruth Bonnet @ 8 & 24:
So, you’re arguing, Australian soldiers boarded troopships between 1914 and 1918 to fight on the battlefields of New Guinea, France, Belgium and Palestine to defend a United Nations (formed 1945) Covenant that was enacted in 1966?
That’s rather an inventive position to take, to say the least.
Is it absolutely essential that Des O’Neill repeat the same monotonous blather about the Heiner affair every single thread? We’ve got it, Des, the ALP have hired space aliens are exporting our precious bodily fluids to Saturn in a cash-for-comment deal.
Newman has already announced that they are going to sell off the ‘golden share’ that the state owns in Qld rail. Yes, it was an election promise.
Des @ 34, do you have any real evidence that the Heiner affair ghost will come back to haunt?
The simple view is that evidence was collected which Judge Heiner ruled inadmissable because of the way that it was gathered. The Goss government decided to shred the documents to prevent anyone making further mischief with them. I know that it has nevertheless been revisited several times and has a very high emotional charge, for very understandable reasons – rape of an Aboriginal girl, apparent protection of Labor mates.
Along with the ‘devastating outcome’ and ‘wipe-out’ meme, which comes from the unrepresentative election system, there is the received wisdom that the people of Queensland comprehensively rejected Labor in favour of conservative forces whereas a sizable minority did no such thing.
In talking about what ‘Qld electors’ did to Labor, the actions of nearly half of us are completely elided.
So Des, do you still reckon Campbell will reinstate the Queensland Upper House?
Well, Paul N, there is still some more for Labour to work on.
Do you think that the Liberals will be working to fill the pockets of the unemployed and disadvantaged where there is a need?
I have not really been classifiable as unemployed for decades, although in reality I am completely unemployed every time there are no orders to fill. When that happens I get on the phone and canvas for more business while continuing to develop new products (in employee speak read skills, knowledge and qualifications).
So I am not that much in touch with the status of the 5%. I tend usually to only ever hear about the difficulties, worries, concerns and needs of the 1%.
LeftyE – well I think the cost of electricity would have still risen by about the same if it was government owned. State Governments
of late have not been willing to invest in infrastructure if it means going into debt. Prices might be lower but only because of political pressure and they would have just been subsidized behind the scenes. I’d prefer the subsidies are explicit and reserved for those that really need it (ie not most of the population)
Mercurius at 2 stop worrying. This ‘trust issue’ hack is just an outlier. Dollars to donuts when Abbott takes over (and you’ll see a little of this in QLD for the next month) when things are pushed through that weren’t on the agenda or go against past promises there will be talk of two things.
1. Changed conditions due to the state/nation being in much worse condition than previously expected. As in ‘we wish we didn’t have to make such hard decisions and there will be pain but the blame for this can be left at the feet of the inept ALP who left us in such a state.
Followed up by the winner.
2. The mandate. “Besides we have the mandate of the people.” (In the case of QLD they definately do. But remember, the the win is by 1% that is still an overwhelming mandate according to Howard’s Way.)
But is it the mandate of the LNP or the LNP? Privatisation is one of those issues that divides that bunch, and even they can’t be ignorant of how unpopular it is.
A key part of Abbot’s success to date is that he has done a good job of getting core conservatives on side by supporting policies they like. A key part of Bligh and Julia’s unpopularity is that they have been pissing their supporters off like mad in their chase for the votes of people that are never going to vote for them.
Labor should be backing Swan in his attacks on the great and greedy and selling hard what it is doing to help people at the bottom of the pile. Labor should be working to increase the protection for casuals and people on sham employment contracts. Labor should be doing things that the people who vote for them are longing for….
It would help to if Gillard learnt to converse with people at the other end of the TV camera as equals. Somehow she has to stop talking to people as though she is the head prefect and they are the junior school. Equally to the point she has got to stop talking as though she has just completed an elocution course for the elite.
I’d agree with
“It would help to if Gillard learnt to converse with people at the other end of the TV camera as equals. Somehow she has to stop talking to people as though she is the head prefect and they are the junior school. Equally to the point she has got to stop talking as though she has just completed an elocution course for the elite”
all of that, and add that she tends to drift into Sunday sermon mode. But having said that, what she does say is generally worth hearing, and not an insult to ones intelligence.
Julia Gillard, I observe, is a very genuine engaging person who is rapidly improving as a stateswoman. I look forward to the coming battle which I believe she will win. This federal contest will be a very different event to the Queensland election, and Labour will have a powerful front line including the Independents and the Greens all working to win. If they work together as a team then the difficult message of building a better environment and low carbon future, versus the energy and resources candy shop tale of the Libs, will be much easier to sell.
@40 lol.
Thank you – I see you have a sense of humour.
Civil rights dates back to the Magna Carta (1215), but I would not like to hijack this thread on that topic alone.
I AM concerned about the lack of opposition in parliament, and would expect the media to perform that task.
Newman does not like public scrutiny.
The media has its job cut out for it.
T@39
Soz, didn’t mean it like that, just couldn’t resist the QR/train pun (should have made “p the p” explicit i suppose). My bad. I got lots of family with QR heritage, there’s no way I’d think of the firm’s honest toilers at the coal face ( or at least moving it from A to B) as anything other than value adds to the enterprise.
I just thought how over the years you’ve said lots about your work you might have been up for giving us a bit of insight from what you might have picked up at bbq’s etc when you get the “what do you do” q how the qr privatisation engineering went down.
Like I say, soz.
Danny @ 51:
Apology accepted
T:
Mind you, I think just about everyone in Ipswich , of a certain vintage, with the remotest connection to the workshops, was possessed of a rather heavy gauge fold-up steel barbeque of a unique and particularly elegant design. All from scrap, and made after hours, of course.
I agree with what Essential’s Peter Lewis said on The Drum last night, bascially the ALP had no real reason for being in government anymore at the last election so bereft of any real ideas turned to the ‘economic rationalists’ and ‘technocrats’.
He also made the salient point that the public hate privatisation especially when Labor government’s do it.
Yep. e.g. only Rudd seemed to work out that just becuase ‘tough on boats’ works for the coalition, doesnt therefore mean it works for the ALP.
Gillard got lucky on that one lately though: rescued from an awful policy fiasco by the High Court, and then Abbott hoisted himself on his own naysaying petard, for once. Now there’s a fair case there’s no tough policy cos the coalition didnt support it, and its all gone quiet on the northern front.
So what’s the go with Annastasia Palaszczuk? Is she any good? Does it matter?
Look on the bright side. Having had virtually the entire parliamentary party eliminated, now they will be able to go out and get some decent talent. No problems with renewal now.
The LNP experimented with having their leader outside Parliament, Labour will be able to experiment with having 2/3rds of its shadow cabinet outside Parliament.
Don’t see it as a problem, see it as an opportunity!
I read Denis Atkins saying the LNP had run a decapitation strategy, which focused on getting rid of the next generation leaders like Andrew Fraser. Thank you, LNP for getting rid of Andrew Fraser. If you had been really smart you would have moved heaven and earth to try and keep him there.
http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/breaking-news/sex-party-and-ex-senator-in-mayoral-bid/story-e6frea7l-1226311569217
Guy Rundle goes in hard on the QLD election loss:
http://www.crikey.com.au/2012/03/27/rundle-time-to-work-out-what-a-labor-party-is-for/
It turns out Newman won’t sack Anna Bligh’s husband. Not at all. He can stay on and just remove all the carbon reduction schemes he spent four years creating.
I keep getting flummoxed by the extent to which east-coast Conservatives have gone so hardcore reactionary on environmental issues.
Last time I checked, there were plenty of Liberals who had some time for environmental issues, even if they had little time for the Greens. In WA, the new government are no environmentalists but the Premier has largely kept the anti-environmental extremists in check. In Queensland, NSW and Victoria they seem to be running the show. What gives?
As I understand it, our elected politicians make policy, the public servants carry out these decisions.
I wouldn’t worry about it guys. The result was just a fabrication of the hate electorate.
Along with the ‘devastating outcome’ and ‘wipe-out’ meme, which comes from the unrepresentative election system,
Have you point this out while Labor were in government?
It might be a very short honeymoon for Newman. Loud large and aggressive as a scary mix. Overshoot territory here for those who just wanted to try a change.
It’s like on a broader level, we’ve forgotten the relationship that exists between cause and effect, justification and conclusion. The foundation is no longer important– it’s that simple. The only important thing is the result: “Don’t worry about it,” “Global warming is bogus science,” “This investment is AAA+”, “You deserve the best.”
Any justification, especially if it doesn’t challenge the audience to think is acceptable. If the justification can be forgotten, you have a winning formula.
So what’s the go with Annastasia Palaszczuk? Is she any good? Does it matter?
I remember when in Young Labor in the late 80′s trying to convince her of my charms but she had the good sense to give me short shrift, so maybe there is some hope for her. Even though she was a Minister in the Bligh government she didn’t get much coverage. She probably doesn’t come across as smart as Bligh but maybe her softer nature might be what is needed while the party is rebuilding etc?
If Palaszczuk is worth half as many points as her name in Scrabble, ALP will be back in one term!
Sorry, couldn’t resist
When you look at the CEP of GE coming out in support off Gillard’s decision, you realise that one day, and not far off, this attitude will see the LNP out of power for a decade.
Till they learn..
CEO of GE.
Will Greg Withers stay and do the job now ordered to do?
Will this test he convictions to CC?
Will he quit on moral grounds?
Is the money too good?
Can he stay an pretend to fulfil Can Do s brief, while white anting from within?
Soooooo many Questions.
don coyote @66:
Many times, going back to about 1967.
Labor continues its quest to turn all that they touch into a debacle, determinedly pursuing the pissed bogan/talkback radio vote, desperately scanning the horizon to spot which section of their electoral base they can next belt over the head with a brick as they posture to look tougher than the Libs. The only thing that will possibly make these dimwits see any sense is a brutal rout at the Federal level of a scale that would make the bloodthirsty abattoir of the QLD election look like a Tiddas post-concert scone-and-bikkie bake off raising money to send a kindergarten full of photogenic tykes on a bus trip to Taronga Zoo. Sadly, as much as I wish this wasn’t the world as it is, I think Labor have as much chance of winning the next election as a phonetic description of my farts drawn in Microsoft Paint does of winning the James Tait Black Memorial Prize.
Brian,
The Heiner Inquiry was a public service inquiry established under the provisions of the PSME Act 1988, in September, 1989. It was lawfully established and there were no legal problems with its establishment. National Party Berys Nelson had a view when establishing the inquiry that if sufficient evidence of impropriety was forthcoming a full Commission of Inquiry (Royal Commission) would be established. Events overtook her vision and the Goss government was elected on 2 December, 1989. One of the first actions of the new government was to close down the inquiry. The Heiner Inquiry was established at the request of the QSSU union. I was an Executive member of that union. Other unions representing staff at the JOYC were the AWU, QPOA and QTU. The QSSU provided the DG Dept. of Family Services with a series of written complaints about JOYC Centre Manager, Peter Coyne. The Inquiry kicked off and all the staff at the JOYC were interviewed by Noel Heiner (a retired Childrens Court Magistrate). What Heiner was told can be pieced together from speaking to various staff members who have now come forward. At the JOYC there was an “us and them” attitude between the management and youth workers. Coyne had shit on some of his workers and on turn some of the workers had shit on Coyne.
One particular youth worker, who was an AWU member, had admitted to assaulting children in his charge. On the other side of the coinj there was an incident in May, 1988, where a 14 year old girl was pack raped, by other inmates, whilst on an outing organized by the professional staff (QPOA and QTU members). The pack rape was covered up. Coyne was also illegally prescribing the children drugs and there were also several instances of illegal handcuffing.
When the Goss government came to office, one of the first tasks it carried out was to close down the Heiner Inquiry. The particular youth worker who admitted assaulting the children was also an AWU union delegate.
JOYC workers, including the Manager Coyne sought the assistance of their unions to see what was said about them. Coyne and the Assistant Manager also engaged a solicitor, Ian Berry (the new LNP member for Ipswich), in order to gain access to the written complaints about him.
Coyne had an absolute right of access to the complaints under the rules of natural justice and regulation 65 of the PSME Act. Coyne was moved out of the JOYC and ended up in the gulag where he was made redundant. On 5th March, 1990 the Goss Cabinet ordered the destruction of the Heiner Inquiry documents, knowing they contained evidence of child abuse and that Coyne wanted access to the complaints under regulation 65. The department sought legal advice from the Crown solicitor in relation to the documents. Coyne’s solicitor was told the documents were safe after the decision was made to destroy them.
In destroying the Heiner Inquiry documents Cabinet breached section 129 of the Criminal Code. The cover-up then begins.
“phonetic description of my farts drawn in Microsoft Paint does of winning the James Tait Black Memorial Prize.”
You never know. Mixed media is the new thing.
To remain slightly on topic, Ms Palaszczuk said today that it was time to end factions in the party then announced that she had the numbers to be opposition leader. Nice one.
Jumpy @73
Your schadenfreude aside, it’s fairly obvious the intent is to make his position untenable, so he’ll resign and relieve the Government of the relatively generous severance obligations they would otherwise be required to honour. Fairly standard practice for governments who want to get rid of particular public servants, but not usually quite as well publicised.
There are genuine questions to be asked about the extent to which the Federal CEF scheme renders state-based emissions reduction schemes redundant, but that’s clearly not what’s going on here.
Funny way of putting it.
On the federal election, Im starting to think the media’s approach is to annoy the living crap out of Australians until they vote for Abbott (someone they clearly cant stand ) – just so the yapping heads will shut up.
Not sure who the “pissed bogan” demographic is meant to be. Is it is a posh term for those Labor used to call “working families”?
annastacia says no to factions. reckons she has the numbers?? Meanwhile, in another part of the eel street palace, Bill Rasputin has let it be known he doesn’t like wimmin leaders, never has.
Theres more delights in store at the ‘its just a flesh wound’ qlp self mutilation extravaganza. The ‘lets torture mr bligh by making him work or have him for breach of contract’ sideshow alley rotating clowns head on a stick exhibit should be particularly gruesome.
It’s like someone flicked the vaudeville switch up to the ‘david lynch’ mark.
Lefty E , Helen, et al, can usually smell a rat quick, I’d say.
This re Qld Labor’s appalling decision to privatise after offering a hard core unambiguous promise to the electorate on election eve on the main election issue that would have had people vote them out otherwise and for good reason, let alone after black shirt Costa’s antics in NSW, which were earlier fatal for NSW Labor.
The rubbish from others that there was no significant breach of trust is astonishing. To suggest that the breach occurred for anything but perverse and shabby reasons (as usual), could also be seen as dishonest.
Mercifully, John Quiggin and Ian MacCauley at New Matilda, to name just two, have shot down the big, fat, erratic and slow-flying bird that the broken pledge was not incredibly relevant as a sign of character and a test of honesty.
Against the rationale usually offered, most privatisations are just ideologically justified opportunities for graft, privatisation of wealth/socialisation of resources, debilitating attacks on unionised labor and job security and inevitably, inefficiency and inconvenience for the public, as “situational bads”are incorporated into captive markets and political patronage skewed, a la Enron.
What’s wrong with Labor and leadership? It’s like they all went to art school and read the same books about monumentality or something. It’s totally underwhelming. :S
On another thread I said something to the effect that it would take a week before the LNP started behaving like the Qld Nats of old. I was wrong. It only took a weekend. Silly me, believing in the goodness of humanity and all that.
Bligh’s hubby should just hang in there and make them sack him, which they will eventually if he doesn’t rise to their trolling, and resign.
Of course he shouldn’t do any of their bidding on dismantling anything. No doubt he’s got a lot of leave saved up: Annual Leave, Long Service Leave, Accumulated Sick Leave, Fuck Off Campbell Newman Leave, and so on. He’s probably got a year’s worth of leave; maybe more. Senior public servants usually do. He could go on a 12 month holiday, collect his salary – all the while accumulating more leave – and then come back and get his contract paid out.
That’s what I would do if I were him.
If Labor cannot admit that the Qld election really is the “time to work out what we stand for” moment, then they are doomed. IMO this question needed greater attention from as long ago as the Keating loss in the 90s. Now it trully is the “elephant in the room”.
Personally, I think Labor today has about as much credibility as a speaker for social justice as the Vatican has on sexual morality. The tribalism is a symptom of the problem, but it isn’t the problem. They are loyal to the wrong tribes. The world has changed but the internal structures of the Labor Party have not. It is an effective mechanism for weilding power, but a terrible one for achieving representative inputs to politics. The first place to start reform must be to sever the delegate rules for affiliated unions. Even a 50/50 rule is inadequate.
Those who are poor and in need in our community are no longer identified by neat labels like “worker”, “unionist”, “wharfie”, or miner”. Many of the workforce and community groups best represented within Labor are comparatively affluent. Why does a confrontation between Rio Tinto and miners, or between Patricks and wharfies, attract so little public interest and sympathy? Because most of those union workers are on incomes double the average wage or more. Even one group of social welfare recipients (retired pensioners) is, in asset terms, usually in the wealthiest quarter of the population. By contrast, the campaign against Workchoices was brilliantly successful, because it was an issue that affected the majority of average people.
Combined with the facts that most workers are not in unions, and some of the most powerful unions represent comparatively affluent workers, unions representing large groups of modestly paid workers are often impotnet. The Health Services Union is the most notorious recent example. Many line public servants, especially teachers and nurses, are now under paid relative to most of the workforce. Often unable to strike, they have been poorly served by their representatives, who as Craig Thompson demonstrates, may be more focused on other things.
Finally, unions have not come to grips with changes ot the nature of work. The whole “blue collar/white collar” distinction is obsolete. With 1/3 to 1/2 of all school leavers doing some tertiary study, it is not the case that all university graduates will be financially fine. In a knowledge economy, a knowledge worker is just a worker, not a future mangaer who can fend for themselves. In my experience there is no adequate union representation for the thousands of graduates such as engineers, accountants, scientists and others who don’t fit into one of the traditional union groupings. Whenever these markets are oversupplied, incomes may be average and working conditions grim, but Labor seems blind to this. Who represents a graduate wiht a $50K HECS debt and no job? Certainly not the NTEU.
In short, the Labor Party needs to build a new interface with the working world. The present interface (affiliated unions) has merely become a career path for ambitious party machine players, too many of whom have never had a real job. Hence the low quality of candidates in safe seats.
Paul Walter, I’d like evidence of a “hard core unambiguous promise to the electorate on election eve” about privatisation. My memory is of distraction by an oil spill and no mention of privatisation until a few months after the election. Then on radio people saying “You can’t tell me that they didn’t know before the election they were going to do it”, a thought being translated into a fact, meaning that Bligh was dishonest, and later termed a lie.
My information is that it came up from Treasury and Treasurer Andrew Fraser in the context of budget planning and the notion that the economy was going to tank, post GFC, and they wouldn’t have the money to maintain the infrastructure building program, essential to maintaining the construction industry, a key of the Qld economy with an expanding population.
Privatisation to get some cash was presented as the only solution. Whether it was or not perhaps should have been challenged by Bligh at the time.
Certainly — the QLD government would have had no trouble at all raising loans to support the building program. The income from the assets could have serviced the debt. It’s doubtful that the blowback from this would have bween in the same ballpark as the privatisations, and doubly so if they’d explained the rationale.
Excellent bit of due diligence thinkage there socrates@86: Thanks for taking the time.
I’d put timing of the rot setting in well before Keating time. If you haven’t done so already, I recommend a read of Barry Jones’ biography for id’ing the point of inflexion from evo to devo. Then back it up chronologically with Bill Hayden’s biography: he gently suggests that, sure, he didn’t get the glory, but all the work on good policy Hawke delivered was done on his, Bill’s, watch, and he can live easy with that, doesn’t need the B1 & B2 show biz stuff.
Maybe that’s where, with B1, the current mania of politicians wannabe-ing rockstars (that on one of these threads a recently former qld labor staffer points out has really become a big part of the problem, workshopping with the staff a clever tweet being much more interesting and important than digesting a portfolio briefing paper) phenomenon got its rise from the primordial slime.
Onya
Fran, yes, I agree with that and it’s what the economists have been saying. Against that, the state was already borrowing a fair bit and incurring debt, to the extent that we’d lost our AAA credit rating. The perceptions of the dreaded markets and how that would play politically may have been a factor here. But certainly it couldn’t have been worse than what happened.
I have a private suspicion that privatisation was on the agenda of the boffins in Treasury and they used the situation as an opportunity to promote it. But I have absolutely no evidence for that.
Yep! In my experience they never missed an opportunity to argue for privatisation. Often spoke of ‘lazy capital’ and how it could be better used..
Very surprised that Bligh bought the nonsense.
Very well said Socrates. We badly need a real Labor party who, among a number of things is an active force for improving the lot of the whole workforce, not just those that the traditional unions cover. When 40% of the workforce are now casuals and many others are on sham contracts that the tax dept won’t recognize for tax expense claims and whose right Fair Work Australia refuses to consider there are real problems that need serious action, action that will be loudly opposed by business lobbies.
We also need a real Labor party that takes a longer view than what is going to happen between now and the next election. We have an economy where mining levels have reached a point where the industries we will depend on when the mining bubble bursts are being destroyed. We have good farming land that is being damaged for the sake of a quick buck. We have……
Perhaps the Greens will grow to fill the gaps left by a dying Labor party. Many of hteir supporters are facing the problems Socrates described.
I’d put timing of the rot setting in well before Keating time.
The idea that there was some golden age when the Labor Party was true to its principles (whatever they may be) is horse shit mythology. Read the mid 20th histories. The Labor Party has been accused, rightly or wrongly, of betraying what it is supposed to believe in, from the get go.
I say wrongly, because the Labor Party has never been, and has never intended to be, a party of high principle, much less high socialist/social justice/workers’ champion/whatever principle. It has always been pragmatic, sometimes for good, very often for bad (see Bligh, A).
You can’t accuse a party of selling out when it has never bought in.
Egad! Heiner!
Des @76… you’ve elided a number of pertinent issues, as I’m sure you’re aware – since they’ve all been pointed out ad nauseam by several inquiries’ reports. I won’t bother to go into the detail, but one thing is important to remember – the Heiner inquiry was only ever supposed to be an internal public service inquiry into allegations of bullying of staff by other staff, not an inquiry into child abuse. The total duration of the inquiry was less than two months, during an epochal election campaign.
The trouble with the criminal conspiracy theory here is that there is no criminal enterprise. The presumed object of the conspiracy was to conceal child abuse and other criminal wrongdoing in order to protect the state from embarrassment. For there to have been a criminal conspiracy involving, let’s remember, the chief legal officer of the Crown, the State Archivist and all members of the Goss cabinet, having just got into office after 32 years in opposition they must have been prepared to break the law in order to defend the reputation of the recently defeated Cooper government. Really?
As far as cabinet was concerned, they had legal advice the improperly created and therefore unprivileged documents had the potential to expose the state to financial risk, but as far as was known there were no proceedings contemplated. The Crown Solicitor advised them to take the action they took, and the ingenu cabinet took that advice. That’s what several inquiries have determined.
It’s now 23 years since the events occurred. Many of the principals are now dead, including Ken O’Shea the Crown Solicitor.
If you’re looking for a conspiracy, you couldn’t do better than the 1986 electoral redistribution commission’s papers, whose disappearance from the face of the earth was very much in the interests of the government of the day.
The Labor party has been at least a buffer against the worst excesses of corporate capital for the last 50 years or so. It’s just that in the last 20 years, for a variety of reasons these excesses have got worse, and the vested interests more strident.
The ALP needs to develop ways of communicating with the electorate that do not involve the MSM, as the ALP will continue to be misrepresented, ridiculed and their faults and failings amplified while those of their opponents will go largely ignored. This will only get worse.
They need to stop buying into the agenda set by others, and become more assertive and less defensive, both regarding their record and their plans for the future.
In the current climate all this and more is very difficult.
That’s certainly true. The last senior Labor politician, state or federal, who fitted this description, was Paul Keating.
The strange thing is, when it comes to intra-Labor Party matters, you’ll find no shortage of very assertive people. But get them out of the hermetically sealed, inbred, island that is the ALP, and into the wider community, they become church mice.
Case in point: Wayne Swan.
Sam
I would agree that you can go back through Labor party history to the days when Frank Hardy wrote Power Without Glory, and find a lot of skeletons in the cupboard. You can go even further back in Qld Labor history to the Forgan Smith government of the 1930s, and Red Ted Theodore, to find some more dirt. Nor has it ever been strong on ideology. So yes it has always been pragmatic.
I think the difference is that that pragmatism was supposed to be directed towards an end of improving life for “working class people”, whoever we might define them as. Labor’s own website right now says under Our Values:
“Through the good times and through the tough times, the great mission of Australian Labor governments for more than one hundred years has been to improve the lives of ordinary Australians.”
http://www.alp.org.au/australian-labor/our-values/
I think you can trace many times in the past, from Chifley’s Light on the Hill speech to Gough Whitlam’s reforms, where Labor have done that.
So yes I accept they are pragmatic in terms of ideology not being fixed. But they have a pretty clearly defined mission. Clearly, they are not living up to it at present, and seem structurally incapable of doing so.
Labor do not have a traditional ideology, but have a traditional modus operandi (work with unions to advance social reforms, because unions represent most working people and indirectly their families). The problem is that modus operandi is now connected to a union movement that is unaligned with the majority of workers.
There is also the lack of alignment between many union figures and some of the social reforms sought. Union bosses who describe themselves as “socially conservative” and oppose reforms like gay marriage seem at odds with “Labor Values”. They need to go back to the website I linked above, and work out if they really belong.
Absolutely, but memory is selective and people recall the bits they find appealing. They edit out the bits they don’t like and go misty-eyed over the more left populist claims of Lang or Curtin or Chifley or Evatt or Whitlam — a kind of left-liberal version of Howard and Menzies.
All of us do confabulation and retrospective gloss from time to time — if not in politics then in our personal lives. Who doesn’t like to think pleasant things when things are not pleasant, imagine a happier time when things look grim? Sadly, while it can make you feel better, it really isn’t helpful in the longer run either in politics or one’s personal life.
One might add that if it was indeed the case that the ALP was once the party of every centre-lefty’s fondest dreams — one would be obliged to account for its decline to its putrescent state today. What went wrong? Surely that answer would be worth having. If the answer is that such a party were, due to changed circumstances, no longer possible one would be obliged to cease raising it against the current regime. Conversely, if one rejected that view, one would have to wonder about the flaw in the party’s design that allowed such a happy condition to fall away without compelling exogenous cause. Plainly, the seeds of its decline were there even in its golden age.
Folk mythology is no basis for a political claim.
Union bosses who describe themselves as “socially conservative” and oppose reforms like gay marriage seem at odds with “Labor Values”
Well, they would argue that “Labor Values” are conservative Catholic values, and, arguably, that would be a historically correct reading. Or, at the very least, “Labor Values” have never been settled as there has always been a battle inside the party for (a) what they objectively are and (b) what they should be.
A quick tour of the Labor Party’s history shows that it started as a strong supporter of White Australia; large elements of it (maybe the majority) supported Franco in the 1930s; large elements of it (maybe the majority) supported the Vietnam War; it has always been strongly influenced by — indeed infiltrated by — the most conservative elements of the Roman Catholic Church, and so on.
We laugh at people like Joe de Bruyn, and with good reason. The problem is that they really are, if not the mainstream of the Labor Party, one of the mainstreams.
Sam,
those large elements who supported Franco became the DLP.
Paul, as you must know, the party didn’t split in NSW.
I haven’t seen a graph of QLD Labor polling but in my mind ” the rot ” started with forcing water fluoridation without a mandate from the voters, and ignoring fierce and vocal opposition from their voter base.
Anna just said ” We’re doing it,so suck an egg”
I still don’t understand why she did it.
HAL9000,
“the Heiner inquiry was only ever supposed to be an internal public service inquiry into allegations of bullying of staff by other staff, not an inquiry into child abuse.”
Not true – the original complaints given to DG, Allan Pettigrew, included details of the mistreatment of children e.g. illegal handcuffing.
“As far as cabinet was concerned, they had legal advice the improperly created and therefore unprivileged documents had the potential to expose the state to financial risk, but as far as was known there were no proceedings contemplated.”
Not true – Coyne and the Assistant Manager Anne Dutney wanted access to the complaints about them. They had an absolute right of access. Coyne may be an arsehole, but he still has a right to natural justice. The Heiner Inquiry was properly constituted. Are you saying the Crown can destroy evidence in order to minimize a damages claim?
The fact is that the Crown is supposed to be a model litigant. Crown Law legal advice is just that – advice. Once legal proceedings had been foreshadowed, it was up to a court to decide, not the Crown Solicitor and not any departmental officer or for that matter the Cabinet.
Coyne’s case was to make the Crown comply with the law. It was an open and shut case.
“It’s now 23 years since the events occurred. Many of the principals are now dead, including Ken O’Shea the Crown Solicitor.”
There is no statute of limitations on the Heiner Affair.
P.S. I expe4ct the corrupt Labor lawyers at the CJC will receive lengthly jail terms.
Maybe she had been convinced that the evidence was overwhelming that fluoridating Queensland’s water would have an immensely beneficial on Queenslanders’ dental health in the long term. And she looked at the evidence from Townsville,which had fluoridated its water for over forty years, when she did so.
And she was aware that dental health also affects the health of the rest of a human body, including the heart.
The evidence is that she made a good call.
I would be pleased if you shared your view with us on the terrible damaged done to us in the nineteen fifties and sixties by the compulsory public health campaigns which eradicated tuberculosis in our country.
And the public health campaign to require that children enrolling in school for the first time have a fully completed vaccination card, an initiative introduced by Brendan Nelson as Howard’s Minister of Health, to which Kim Beazley, then Leader of the Opposition and victim of childhood poliomyelitis himself, responded “More power to your arm”.
You might then want to do a bit of research about the introduction of fluoride into Canberra’s water supply, by that evil arch- socialist Doug Anthony.
Tell us what you find.
No doubt you are right about the ethical obligations to be a model, but since no court proceedings had actually started the question of legality is entirely arguable. Certainly the CJC thought the destruction to have no Section 129 problems – but I suppose they’re all going to jail as well.
In any case, since the documents were destroyed and very few people had seen them, the claims about what was in them rely on he-said she-said hearsay that is never going to fly in a Royal Commission or court, even if all the conspiracy stuff is true.
Des.
If so, it wasn’t in Heiner’s terms of reference.
Not once the inquiry, having been found to have been improperly constituted, was wound up. The investigation was over, and the complaints could not be held against them. The agency the subject of the inquiry no longer existed and the whole juvenile justice system was the subject of a major review. There were thus no natural justice issues in play.
No they had not. It was open to speculation that they might be, but they had not.
Indeed it is, and here you are on safer ground. The Crown had, however, by its improper appointment of Heiner, actually exposed whistleblowers to the risk of legal action by gathering evidence under privilege that turned out to be bogus. The messages this would send to potential whistleblowers everywhere are obvious. There was a state interest in protecting these individuals from litigation to which the state had unwittingly exposed them.
You still have failed to mount a case of criminal purpose. Why on earth would the Goss cabinet enter into a criminal conspiracy to save the defunct Cooper government embarrassment? It does not stack up.
Last, the conspiracy theorists here keep muttering darkly about child abuse allegations having been suppressed. Even had Heiner been properly appointed, such an inquiry under the Public Service Act was never capable of examining them.
HAL9000,
What I said previously about the illegal handcuffing was correct. Janine Walker from the QSSU drew up the complaints after DG Allan Pettigrew insisted they be put in writing. The written complaints (a copy) were handed on to Noel Heiner. I was an Executive member of the QSSU in Sept., 1989 and Janine Walker briefed the Executive about the case.
I say again – The Heiner Inquiry was properly constituted. There was some doubt about the legal protection given to witnesses and the Goss Cabinet decided to indemnify witnesses. This was NOT because the inquiry was improprtly constituted, but because it was established under the PSME Act 1988. Witnesses would have received qualified privilege in any case i.e. if they told the truth they were protected.
This differs from a Commission of Inquiry whereby if you lie you are open to a charge of perjury.
Heiner’s evidence definitely contained evidence of child abuse. Youth workers who were interviewed by Heiner have come forward. It also contained evidence of the pack rape of 14 year old Annette Harding. Heiner asked a Youth Worker “what do you know about the rape”. The Youth Worker then gave Heiner details of the rape incident (May, 1988), which was covered up.
When the Goss Cabinet ordered the destruction of the Heiner Inquiry evidence they KNEW it contained evidence of child abuse. This was an admission by former Minister, Pat Comben, in Channel 9′s Sunday Program, Queensland’s Secret Shame.
The fact that the Heiner Inquiry papers, tapes and notes contained this type of evidence meant that it must NEVER be destroyed.
Coyne and Dutney had an absolute right to access information about them. They officially sought it under Regulation 65 of the PSME Act, 1988, in a solicitors letter signed by Ian Berry of Berry Rose solicitors.
A Solicitor General’s advice supported their claim. It didn’t matter where the information was held, if it was detrimental, they had a right of access.
The legal proceedings foreshadowed by Coyne and Dutney was not for defamation, but enforcing a right of access to the documents on them.
Coyne & Dutney’s solicitor was misled by the department. They were told the documents were safe after thye decision, by the Cabinet, had been made to shred them i.e. they were lied to.
No matter how honourable you intentions (protect whistleblowers) you simply cannot destroy evidence required or COULD be required for court (Roger Rogerson case, Ensby case). The Heiner Inquiry evidence was such that it must never be destroyed and the Cabinet and Public Servants KNEW it.
Why the Goss Cabinet did what it did is a question they will have to answer. Was it because they were arrogant and considered themselves all powerful and above the law – there were a number of solicitors in the Cabinet? Was it the result of lobbying from the AWU, to protect AWU Union Delegate Fred Fiege? Fiege had admitted to bashing and rough handling children in his charge and Coyne had kept notes. Was it because there was a suspected known paedophile in the senior management ranks of the department? Police intelligence suggested that this individual was abusing young boys and probably sharing them with his mates. He was known to accessed and abused at least one boy (14 year old) from the Childrens’ Court.
Whatever the real reason, it is up to a Commission of Inquiry to establish the facts in this regard.
GregM @104
I wasn’t arguing for or against fluoridating water or vaccination, just government approach to its introduction.
Excellent. So, let’s not waste pixels discussing it here, hmm? That would be the reasonable and sensible approach…
Jumpy @102 gets the elephant stamp for the most creative and original explanation of the election result. However the fluoridation program commenced in 2008 and the government was re-elected. Having looked at Newspoll and Morgan Poll archives I think the privatisation explanation is closest to the mark.
Jumpy, I for one am sick and tired of the old “the government has not been reasonable, used the wrong approach, rammed it down peoples throat etc. etc.” which is rampant in my neighborhood.
What chance has a government got to be reasonable when the bogans just fear any change, cannot grasp the basic fact in physics, like the one established something like 150 years ago, that CO2 traps heat, and on top of it inhale every fart that people like Mr “cash for comment” emits as ultimate wisdom!
Recently our arch conservative and ‘DEALGAMATE NOW’ ex mayor has been boasting of how he has successfully introduced fluoridation many decades ago be by approving it, announcing widely its implementation and then quietly waiting to turn the treatment plant. When the whining and moaning started about the taste of the water and headaches etc started, he went ha got yous and turned the plant on.
Now if you like to be governed by deceit, good on you. I prefer to have an evidence based discussion, that fleshes out the pros and cons of any proposed legislation. If you can’t follow the technicality of the discussion, anyone can get an education to inform themselves. It used to be for free before a conservative government put a TAX on it (hecs). I suggest if you don’t like the fluoridation, then get a rainwater tank or an osmosis filter, the Labor government has not taken that right away yet afaik.
I’ve just heard Ray Hopper, the Member for Condamine, say that the Felton Valley coal proposal, 35km SW of Toowoomba, would not go ahead. This was prime agricultural land, but because it is undulating, did not fall within the labor Govt’s strategic cropping land legislation. Further, he said the Acland New Hope mine expansion would not go ahead. I think that’s near Oakey, west of Toowoomba, and if true, is good news.
He also said that the flood plains on the Western Downs would be protected. They always were under the strategic cropping land legislation, but not from coal seam gas development, which being ‘low impact’ and limited to 50 years in duration, was allowed.
It’s still not exactly clear whether the LNP is going to protect the flood plains from CSG.
Des,
Without entering into a debate about the merits of of your argument, are you able to put a date on when you will personally consign it to the category of ‘abhorrent injustices that will never be satisfactorially addressed’?
I think you earlier wrote that you expect an new inquiry to be launched within weeks. if six or twelve months pass without any action by the new government, will you accept that they will not meet your expectations and the matter is finished? Is there a date in your mind after which you will be resigned to the fact that this government is not revisiting the matter? and if so, will you regard the issue as dead, or will you pin your hopes on the next government, or the one after to pursue it?
d
Ootz – I think you will find that HECS was introduced by the Hawke Government in 1989. Maybe getting the facts straight is a good start in any discussion.
Darryl Rosin,
I expect something to happen within the next two weeks. Alot of work has been done on The Heiner Affair and it is well advanced (Rofe Audit) for a Commissionj of Inquiry.
It’s a matter of knocking on certain doors when the Newman ministry is announced.
I don’t think it will be a case if nothing happens. It’s a matter of when and how far a Commission of Inquiry goes. If it’s a Fitzgerald type inquiry, I will be over the moon. Upper House, Role of the Media, Academia, Assoc. of Labor Lawyers etc.
If the shredding had been done by a conservative government in 1990, the government would have fallen within 6 months. The same should have applied to an ALP government. For various reasons it didn’t, those reasons must be explored and debated. I don’t propose to explore them here.
The bottom line is that I expect there will be a seperate inquiry for Heiner and the cover-up and perversion of the Qld. justice system WILL be corrected.
There are more individuals than myself pursuing this issue.
There used to be a fellow on usenet (I forget his nym now though I heard later his actual name was Lindeman or something) who would incessantly insist that “any day now”, the government will crash and burn over “the Heiner affair”. IIRC I can recall him saying that from before Rudd was even elected PM. He insisted that Heiner would destroy Rudd in his first months of office but for some reason even when the Libs controlled the senate, it never arose.
Rudd departed, as we know for reasons that had nothing whatever to do with Heiner, the ALP was re-elected both at state and Federal level and all Akerman’s bleating came to nothing.
You can’t put a timeline on this Daryl. The people who are obsessed with this are like those folks predicting the end of the world. They will just move the dates back.
Got to admit though, that’s pretty funny!! Now they just need to make fake windfarms and try the same thing
I like it.
The Royal Commission was a farce. When is the Qld Government going to get around to properly investigating a certain ALP premier’s involvement in the Mungana Affair?
According to this graph, the Lib/Nat bounced remarkably after 2001 , if you add last weekends result.
It took 11 years.
I doubt Labour can better that from an even lower starting point.
And Ootz
Reread @108 + I’m a bore water man.
Things are looking up at last, with ‘Tip’ Costello called in to look through the books.
Des, thanks for the response.
So, you’re expecting an announcement in a couple of weeks. If nothing happens by the end of, say, June, will you accept that nothing more is ever going to happen and the case is closed?
d
@114. Mr Speaker, I will unreservedly withdraw that allegation and maintain bogans inhale every fart that people like Mr “cash for comment” emits as ultimate wisdom!
@120. Sorry Jumpy for my whining about whining, nothing personal. I did mention I had a bad night.
Brian @112
I’m not at all sure that Ray Hopper speaks for Campbell Newman. The old Nats don’t look to be in power, at least not in the way they imagined. In the photo of the LNP caucus meeting, Vaughn Johnson looked about as happy as if someone had just shot his dog.
Trying to remember if, back in (say) the 1980s, someone who was demanding an inquiry into the forced removal of Aboriginal children from their familiesin the 1940s, 1950s,1960s and early 1970s would have been regarded by the political and media mainstream as anything but an obsessive, crank or nutter.
Fran @116: Probably Kevin Lindeberg
Hal9000 at @124 – Maybe it’s belatedly occuring to the former Nats that – now they have handed the books, the car keys and the family silver over to The Liberal Party of Australia (Qld Division) T/AThe LNP, they no longer have the option of running separate rural conservative Coalition candidates against their urban liberal allies, and would have to quit their party and start from scratch to do so, or else join the KatterList.
Darryl Rosin,
“Des, thanks for the response.
So, you’re expecting an announcement in a couple of weeks. If nothing happens by the end of, say, June, will you accept that nothing more is ever going to happen and the case is closed?”
By June we will know one way or the other. Campbell Newman promised a Forde Type Inquiry, so that will happen one way or the other. Heiner should stand alone, as a seperate inquiry. It is well advanced, with the Rofe Audit completed in 2008. You can get an electronic copy of this document from your local Senator. He has access to a special web site and a password. All that has to be done, is a Commission created and the Special Prosecutor legislation reintroduced.
If Newman doesn’t agree to a special Heiner Commission, the Forde type inquiry would have to do. It will be preety messy, though.
If nothing happens on Heiner after all this time, will I walk away from it – the short answer is yes, however, I can’t speak for others.
From a purely political perspective, the Heiner Affair has much to offer the LNP. It will clean out some of the stupid appointments, of Foley and others, to the Courts. Six current and former, judges and magistrates, are facing charges, in the Rofe Audit.
A very, very senior judge should be aware, of what wilful blindness is and is not amongst the six, I mentioned.
No worries Ootz, get well.
Tom R observed:
I know nothing of you Tom R but it seems at least possible that your capacity to compare and contrast may be as shapr as anyone’s here.
Bearing in mind the following:
a) the ubiquity of damage asserted to the legitimate interests of those affected
b) the severity of the damage asserted to the legitimate interests of those affected
c) the extent to which evidence of malfeasance has been available and was at the time when people were pursuing it
d) the extent to which the damage was the consequence of public policy rather than of rogue conduct by officials
e) the capacity in each case to deliver adequate remedies to those ostensibly harmed and/or the capacity to prevent a repetition of the harmful policy in some future administration
compare the feasibility of pursuing the issue of the forced removal of indigenous children in the 1980s and, in 2012, the issue of document destruction on Crown advice in relation to matters occurring in the late 1980s in a youth detention centre.
I doubt that any honest, informed and rational person could conclude that the two were issues were comparable. The issue of forced removals profoundly affected the lives of thousands of people still alive in 1980. It bore down severely upon the self-esteem of all indigenous people in this country. Witnesses were plentiful. Remedies were available. These harmful policies were deliberate and in their original conception, aimed at the destruction of Aboriginal identity rather than the malign acts of rogue officials. These needed to be repudiated and compensated.
This was nothing like the Heiner matters raised.
I’m getting the message that there was a fair bit of mysogyny in what happened to Bligh. Tony Koch (multi Walkley Award winning journalist and respected elder of that fraternity, for those south of the border) brought it up again on local radio this morning. His fellow panellists, Janine Walker and Graham Young, didn’t disagree.
He thinks that with Gillard in charge, Labor will be lucky to win a seat. Problem is with anyone else in charge it will probably be the same result. That’s 30 seats to the other mob.
Local economist Michael Knox put an interesting view later in the program. He said that three years ago the Labor Govt withdrew subsidies to local government to assist with installing infrastructure on new housing estates. It basically stuffed the home building industry, which is more important in SEQ than other parts of Australia. Knox reckons the swings were biggest in the outlying suburbs where unemployment is highest. He blames the withdrawal of subsidies as a factor.
Janine Walker (ex ALP activist) reckons the one that Newman has appointed as under treasurer ( a woman, I think) is an absolute cracker. So maybe she’ll fix all that!
Fran at #129, you have a point… but then when ever are two cases exactly analogous? My point was that if something was wrong, then passing of time doesn’t in itself make it right, and that a small but dedicated minority hammering away at the issue aren’t necessarily lunatics. If you remember 1982, try to imagine how arguments that the Prime Minister should apologise to Aboriginal Australians might have been received.
Also re “profoundly affected the lives of thousands of people still alive in 1980″… if you are going to advocate indigenous rights, then basing ethics on a head-count (and on policies leaving more people alive) might be inadvisable. Is it really better if the victims are a smaller number, or if they’re all dead?
And here’s the C team.
Mr Springborg’s gonna sort health. How hard can it be?
His 2iC Chris Davis, is/was a medico, a geriatric medicine specialist in the QHealth juggernaut. He was also state rep of painters and doctor’s union, (and apparently has no hint of desert island royalty in his pedigree), so looks good to me on paper, given that most high cost medical services are, naturally, consumed by geriatrics, so he should know a fair bit about the problem space from his own clinics. His union rep time will equip him with the exquisite knowledge of the solution vendors’ agendas. Queensland will have bestest practice non-waiting times for QH->procedural specialists cheques clearing for sure. Cynical, moi?
Lawrence will surely have a cockies’ good sense when trapped in the yard with a micky bull to keep out of the way and let someone who knows what they’re doing take over.
Then again, he was a tad keen to go in early and hard with the dozers to start cleaning up the beaches of the oil spill that saved Anna last election, giving her the chance to look at least half smart by waiting for the highest tide first.
Tom R said:
I didn’t use the term ‘lunatics’. Yet one ought, in my view, to have regard to what can usefully be done for those who have been wronged. If a wrong cannot be substantially corrected, that is regrettable but attempting to divert substantial public resources into an entirely futile exercise is not sound policy, IMO.
Public policy must have regard to how much good or harm it can do and set its priorities accordingly. Beyond that, I’m not sure where you’re going with the remark.
Brian @ 130
If the result is going to be about the same whether its Gillard or a man in charge then its bit hard to claim the problem Labor is facing is misogyny isn’t it?
The federal election is 18 months away. No doubt there’ll be a generous budget next year too. I think its way too early to write off an entire state yet, especially since they’ll start blaming anything that goes wrong in QLD on Newman.
Just saw the new cabinet lineup. Health a poison chalice? Not likely – it’s a high-profile portfolio to stage The Borg for a comeback and create a positive image. He’s not in a position to make the mistakes of his predecessor, and I’m sure he’ll have enough ‘eyes on’, that it won’t be an issue. Newman obviously gives us a few terms before retirement. Never mind. Our first female speaker? Who cares. Hopefully she’ll do a good job. I can’t see that she won’t, given the numbers.
Ros Bates and Rob Molhoek’s appointments – clearly Newman is determined to keep the Gold Coast on-side, and these are two portfolios where the Gold Coast is weak. Interesting.
Ministry here. Newman seems to have appointed a medico as assistant health minister.
Chris, it was Koch’s perception about misogyny. I wouldn’t know, but he’s probably right.
I think Gillard as a brand is stuffed in Qld, so is the ALP. I can’t see Shorten, Smith or anyone else changing that by 2013. The ALP has 8 out of 30 seats here. Poll Bludger in the link in the post said that Qld had “a two-party deficit of 59-41, with Julia Gillard on 25% approval and 65% disapproval.” Realistically the ALP will lose seats, whereas it simply must gain them in Qld to get government. Anything Gillard does to win us over will remind people how much they dislike her.
Newman will be cut a bit of slack. Outside a complete meltdown, which is unlikely, whatever he does won’t change anything much.
Any way, that’s how I see it.
As far as I can see, I think you’re spot on, Brian.
The next thing to consider is when will the election be held?
That speaker Newman appointed sounds pretty extreme.
In some bright news for QLDers the Townsville Crocs had a massive upset in Game 1 of their NBL semi-final series over the NZ Breakers in Auckland tonight and now have the chance to wrap up the series against the defending champs/minor premiers in Townsville on Thursday night.
I thought that stunt the ALP pulled in the lead up to the election at a Cairns Taipans game was pretty funny too:
http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/sport/basketball/around-the-nbl-all-stars-to-shine-again/story-e6frect3-1226293003470
On the upside, only a dozen or so LNP MPs need attend parliament, leaving the remainder to work on their allotted portfolios and/or attend to the needs and concerns or their individual constituents.( or is there a quorum issue there?)
That’s great.
Pairing will be redundant( although if 8 ministers need pairing, what then?)
I will have a chuckle when I first hear the Speaker announce ” Division required, ring the bells…….”
I guess the LNP don’t need these “dirt files” any more.
Part of the Anna Bligh one;
WEAKNESSES
* Government has been in 20 years
* Relationship with own faction and unions in it including ETU and CFMEU
* Asset sales
* Her ministerial record, asbestos in schools, child safety
* Hospital payroll
* Federal president of ALP in a conference year
* Holidays in Sydney that were not declared
* Financial position of the state
* Flood reconstruction and flood inquiry
* Seen as being tricky and liar
* Can be very volatile, not strong under pressure has tendency to lash out, though she managed the flood issue well.
Jumpy,
Goes to show the “Dirt File” was preety much on the ball.
Jumpy,
The mind boggles at the ALP Opposition. I don’t think we will see too many divisions for the next few years.
The ALP Federally looks like going down the same way with no seats in Qld. after the next election. I will stick my neck out now and say that Rudd will not see out the next election. He will resign well before that. Rudd has such a media driven ego that when he is protrayed for what he really is (a grub), he will pull the pin on the ALP. The by-election will be lost by Labor and the Gillard government will fall.
The ALP have really dug themselves one almighty hole. It’s a shame really because parliament needs a good Opposition in both State and Federal politics.
The big lesson to learn for all politicians is that when the electorate loses the trust of its elected representatives, it spells disaster.
Speaking as someone who normally votes informal …
I can see credible scenarios in which the ALP wins in 2013. Sooner or later, mainstream voters are going to tire of Abbott’s mug on the TV. You can only whine for so long before people start wishing to see less of you. It’s all very well when you aren’t the PM, but when people think about that concretely, a lot are going to be turned off.
Now that both the NSW, Victoria and QLD are in coalition hands, anyone who by 2013 is having buyers’ remorse is going to be looking for an excuse to vote ALP, and that will shift votes in QLD and NSW where thre ALP did poorly in 2010. Abbott is going to have to campaign on massive budget cuts and tax rises — don’t forget that the compensation package kicks in before carbon pricing comes in.
He is also going to have to get specific about where he is cutting expenditure, and it is going to have to be savage. By contrast, the regime will be able to point to 3 years of realtive stability in the economy, some real successes (from a conservative POV) and present itself as the adults in the room.
And of course, the coalition can’t really claim that it will be able to rescind carbon pricing, or the NBN in any event, or even start nominating areas that won’t get the NBN. Throw in the idea of Barnaby Joyce as Deputy PM and acting PM over Christmas …
So while the coalition looks the better bet in the short run, the longer this plays out, the worse it looks for them. If the ALP doesn’t win, it probably won’t fall short by much, and then, with Abbott as a precedent it starts running the troll that Abbott did in reverse. It claims to be “holding the government to account” and with control of the senate in its arsenal. I don’t see Abbott surviving that very long. One minor disaster and the ALP’s chances of being back in front in 2016 would be excellent.