Conservative pundit Andrew Bolt has shut up shop on his prolific Herald Sun blogging activities with a cryptic “announcement from the seat of Higgins”:
Stephen Mayne has been onto this story for a while, and for once he’s close to the truth (from the linked article, written in 2006: “Maybe Bolt’s main chance will be in Higgins if Costello ultimately decided to spit the dummy and walk”). Given that I’m told he’s planning to write about this again, probably as soon as this morning, I want to say something here first before he does. This is it for the blog, at least for now. I can’t pre-empt the announcement that my local member and friend, Peter Costello, is about to make, but it would clearly be a conflict of interest for me to continue to write about politics here if I’ve privately agreed to become a player.
An April Fools’ Day joke would, of course, be highly out of character.
UPDATE: On the stroke of noon, Bolt reveals himself to be more fond of a jape than I had realised. He is however Still Not Sorry, at least with respect to me (see the third update on his post).
Other news: The chances of a rematch in McEwen have surely been greatly boosted by the disclosure that eight people in the electorate voted twice, although the case does not return to the Federal Court until May. And for those whose interest runs in that direction, Antony Green offers a post on contentious changes to electoral legislation in the ACT, which will make like difficult for independents wishing to run group tickets.
360 Comments
Pages: « 1 2 [3] 4 5 … 8 » Show All
By the way Possum has a couple of interesting graphs for the fawners before they Bolt back to the security blanket of the Herald Scum.
http://possumcomitatus.wordpress.com/2008/04/01/political-advice-by-the-column-inch/
Phillip Coorey, Sydney Morning Herald, 13 March 2008
http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/liberals-accused-of-hypocrisy-on-bonus/2008/03/12/1205126014056.html
Yes… and your point is? What is so bad about agreeing to remove rubbish like annual leave loading (getting paid *more* while on holiday)? What were the individual circumstances around some of the other removals? And what is the corresponding average increase in wages negotiated through AWAs? You’ll find that information in wage growth statistics, which is typically left out of these discussions by the ALP and its disciples.
103 [You’ll find that information in wage growth statistics, which is typically left out of these discussions by the ALP and its disciples.]
Err Jack, I think you left out the the statistics yourself!
Jack Kerry
If you care to look at the statistics real wages fell after the introduction of workchoices.
I have the stats. Just to let you know that you need to provide evidence for your claims.
You go first, show me the evidence that real wages have risen due to No Choices.
And that will be the first test for the Bolters who are now resident here
Frank, it’s a test they can’t pass.. next!
Nice try fellas, but a fail at economics 101. What’s the difference in wage between a job and no job? That’s right, it’s +100 percent. The real wage growth is reflected in the increase in employment which occurs when you reform the labour market and remove distortions like ‘annual leave loading’. Yes, you get short-term falls in areas like hospitality – because these jobs were artificially overvalued by mandated distortions like shift-penalties. But the real benefit of labour reform comes from long-term wages growth in real terms, while *containing* short-term nominal spikes (which otherwise leads to things like, you know, higher interest rates and stuff). Not to mention more jobs overall. Here’s a question for you ALP disciples. If removal of unfair dismissal (a key element of workchoices) is so bad, why has the ALP kept it for a year? Do you lot seriously believe that labour market reform is not necessary in any way to lower the rate of unemployment? What happens when we fall into recession? Do you want an environment in which it is easier for business to hire, or more difficult?
Jack, see 104 Where are your stats?
Where are your stats, Steve? Show me unemployment rising because of workchoices, and not falling. Can’t do it? Should I ignore all your arguments as a result?
Jack,you made this claim at comment 103. Back it up with figures.
“You’ll find that information in wage growth statistics, which is typically left out of these discussions by the ALP and its disciples.”
The Liberal government spent $121 million dollars of public money promoting their WorkChoices experiment. (Did the Liberal Party at any time spend any Party money promoting their policy?)
The ACTU on the other hand spent just $14 million opposing it.
http://news.theage.com.au/work-choices-dead-says-nelson/20071219-1i1i.html
http://www.news.com.au/business/story/0,23636,23401969-462,00.html
“WAGES grew by 4.7 per cent over the year to January, the most in over three years, despite talk of an economic slowdown”.
Now care to actually contribute to discussion? If not, kindly stop wasting space here.
^ directed at Steve @111
drink
Jack I see no statistics, just a change of tack. You seem to have a thing about annual leave loading – do you agree that business should charge “peak and off peak” tariffs for their services? Poor hospitality workers not getting paid for public holidays when their employers still charge a holiday surplus.
Actually the difference between a job and no job is not 100% in many cases it is about 40%.
I presume you think JWH was unfairly dismissed
Can you cite anyone credible who thinks Australia is headed for a recession. Note the word credible.
Jack – sorry -I don’t see any mention in that article of higher wage growth due to AWAs or the removal of unfair dismissal laws in that article – could you point it out please?
Carl
Professor Gregory Peetz and co from Griffith University did all the major studies into the IR stuff – and the overarching evidence was clearly against keeping them. Because of the differences in power between a person and corporation, AWA’s have been proven to be basically for the business and economic elites – even in the mining sector, when they averaged out 3per cent less across both industries…if you want specific evidence of this i can get it – online opinion.com.au if you look at Gregory Peetz this is available.
As far as jobs go, there was never really any evidence that it produced any, at best if you can crush the wages of the bottom half you can create some casualised working poor jobs – but like in the US people will not be able to live on 5 bucks an hour, 5 hours a week at the local cafe. We already have a high income disparity here, long term ramificatons would be that it would of become extreme – producing more crime and social dislocation
I was also privy to reading the Senate Submission from our top labour market academics – the words extreme and radical were not usual and against ILO conventions -eg. right to strike provisions etc…it was 90 per cent of power to the employer 10% of power to the employee -
Chris in LDN: I see no mention in that article of higher wage growth *not* having anything to do with labour market reform. Could you point it out, please?
Anyone here care to address the substance of my arguments regarding the long-term benefits of removing artificial distortions in labour markets, or have we all just given up, mmm?
Jack Kerry @ 113 –
And what was the proportion of the workforce on AWAs in the year to Jan?
Jack – you were using that article to prove your point -which it clearly doesn’t as it doesn’t reference your points. An argument like that might cut the mustard over on Andew’s blog, but you’ll need to prove your point here unfortunately.
Look there wage growth in the UK too, where are the AWA’s and removal of unfair dismaiisal laws here – oh wait – maybe it’s that wages are pretty mucch growing e-v-e-r-y-w-h-e-r-e…….
http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2007/nov/15/economy
117 We can see the effects of skills shortages and capacity constraints especially in the construction and mining industries but IR reform – I don’t think so.
Liberals block release of information on planned WorkChoices 2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wm5DMYxGcw
Well, at least ruawake at 116 hasn’t given up with actual discussion and thinking. Ruawake, I’m not in favour of supply-side distortions either – remember, two wrongs don’t make a right. If businesses are exploiting monopoly conditions, then they should be regulated. However, forcing businesses to pay things like annual leave loading just lowers the overall employment rate. If you can’t afford to take on another worker because of artificial provisions like that, then somebody has lost a job opportunity. It’s a matter of finding a balance by keeping basic standards, like a minimum wage, workplace safety, recourse for harrassment etc.
Jack
I am more than happy to address your arguements – no matter how fallacious they are.
Wages, we need to compare real wages – ie wages less inflation, unfair dismissal has never been an issue – any competent business will tell you so.
Can you tell me how No Choices simultaneously increased wages and also stopped wage based inflation?
I am still waiting for any evidence to show that No Choices increased real wages, a hint try the ABS not News Ltd.
Jack – I don’t think anyone here is discussing leave-loading apart from yourself? You still haven’t backed up your assertation that AWAs increased wages. Please prove your point.
Jack: – see my post at 118, just above yours
When you say “Labour Market” Reform – its like common sence Jack- like there is no ideology behind it – it was a far right IR policy – Australians have rejected the values outcome in this – you obviously do not, but enough people do
If you go and look at the ABS Statistics, you will see many jobs being created before they destroyed the social democratic structures, in fact there was more jobs 2 years created before the IR stuff changed, than there was the year after it changed. All they really needed to do was slightly tweek those unfair dismissal laws – all else was working fine. Unless of course, you completely wanted a US Society – which you do, but again, others do not because they value other things other than economics takes all. They value others things on top of profit making such as justice/fairness and do not want the values of the market place bought into every area of a society.
Australian’s have decided thatyour half a point does not outweigh the other 30 points that I am bringing up and a no to US style working poor
Here’s to holidays, Jack.
http://petermartin.blogspot.com/2008/03/suunday-dollarssense-heres-to-holidays.html
Ruawake: “unfair dismissal has never been an issue – any competent business will tell you so.”
Got evidence for this? Hint: try any source, even the ABS! See, two can play this game.
Have to leave for dinner now – it’s all been good fun!
Just saw the other comments. Steve, who’s arguing against holidays? Please look up the difference between annual leave and annual leave loading.
And before the ‘oh you’re running away’ crowing, nobody here can provide a basic argument against removing labour market distortions. Can anyone here justify annual leave loading? Anyone?
Cheerio comrades
Misha Schubert, The Age, 13 March 2008
http://www.theage.com.au/news/national/pm-attacked-over-minimum-wage/2008/03/12/1205126011449.html
“99% of private sector firms won’t need to comply with unfair dismissal laws: Businesses with up to 100 staff are exempt from unfair dismissal laws. ABS data suggests only 1.1% of private sector employers have more than 100 staff. This means employees in more than 575,800 private sector businesses now have no unfair dismissal protections under the Government’s new IR laws.” (ABS Small Business in Australia 1321.0, 2001)
Rx,
Careful about quoting from Fairfax, lest you’re accused of supporting those Bolshie Leftards
For the Bolties, Rupert is the ONLY source
Kina has compiled quite an archive of WorsChoices stories at the OzForums site:
http://ozforums.com.au/viewtopic.php?id=28
The amusing thing is that he couldn’t back up his claims, when pressed to back them up started spouting about leave-loading (WTF?!) as a defence, only to be ’saved’ when his mum called him for dinner……
Here’s the story of the Cloncurry Mayor being elected similar to the way the Winton Mayor was decided a couple of weeks ago.
http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/news/queensland/now-a-pingpong-ball-decides-election/2008/04/01/1206850903073.html
Jack Kerry, provide us with a skerrick of evidence that employment growth and the current state of full employment in this country has anything to do with Workchoices. The fact is, it is entirely due to mineral exports and the China/ India trade boom, not the ideologically driven fanaticism of your conservative heroes.
The only things to increase, short or long term, as a result of such Government repression of working conditions and wages is the profits of the previous Government’s core constituency, and the determination of those suffering as a result to remove that Government. And the proof of that has been laid bare for all to see.
As far as keeping certain aspects of the repulsive workchices in place transitionally is concerned, perhaps you should revisit politics 101, or a high school civics course on the effects of impulsive implementation of policy and the benefits of compromise, so as to understand and learn from the mistakes of the previous administration.
Please don’t presume to lecture us with your facile, self assumed intellectual superiority.
As the Arabs say, the higher a monkey climbs a tree, the more he exposes his backside.
“Can anyone here justify annual leave loading? ”
To the best of my recollection annual leave loading was introduced by the Whitlam Govt. as compensation for the fact that business had imposed holiday surcharges.
This meant that when a family could take holidays (christmas, easter, school holidays) that suddenly everything was more expensive.
You can’t have it both ways, either business charges the same rates or workers get extra.
I guess you believe that business should be able to charge whatever they like?
Frank #133, the Truth according to Neo-Cons? No thanks. Blah!
Sorry to ‘Bolt-on’,
but,
a) is there a specific word for a self-serving joke that is designed to blow smoke up your own arse?
and
b) doesn’t the fact so many people were prepared to believe Mr Bolts ‘jape’ just highlight the paucity Liberal talent?
‘Swap a hack for Costello? No worries.’
I’ve seen Maxine on telly, and you sir, are no Maxine.
Not even half a Mike Bailey.
Shamaham for PM I tells ya.
Anyone want a WC mouse mat?
Well, the Bolt admirers clearly think they’ve belted the hell out of the Bludgers. Very amusing. Truly the new opposition, in the absence of any real one. Possum’s column is a cracker!
I keep getting this image of this crew as a couple of Westmoreland Terriers marching up and down, barking importantly at any new visitor, absolutely impotent to do anything about said visitors. Except they’re the new visitors.
Don’t leave us, guys. You’re such fun. Your reasoning is so superior. Your arguments so convincing.
Oh, bugger, why is Dolly on the 7.30 Report? Who gives a rats what he thinks?
Would make excellent Soundproofing material for Neocons to wail like banshees without being heard, and also to stop them injuriing themselves while banging their heads against the wall.
Re Jack Kerry – I actually felt like he was saying, just name 10, just NAME 10!!!! Must be Boltspeak
Flogging a very very dead horse here. Howard’s biography already revealed that they knew WC was going to harm people and sundry admissions after the election by Nelson and Kevin Andrews especially was that WorkChoices did harm people and they were sorry for it and that they knew it would. Even the horses mouth, now dead and being beaten, admits to WC harming people.
I believe one of Peetz’s (many) analysis of the mining industry showed that those without WC AWAs were considerably better off in contrast to the propaganda. The effect on the retail industry was also devastating, but we are not going to keep digging out the data every time someone wants raise Howard’s flag. The battle has been debated long and hard and lost by Howard, Andrews and co and, they got punished for their ideological adventure into 19th century IR.
There are a number of sites with the data and references and a search of even the papers will pull up a great many articles revealing the dirty laundry of WC.
At least Jack tried to show some intellectual rigour, it’s just his rigour was not very intellectual.
Bludgers tend to back up stuff with data, or at least some kind of basis for the comment.
I find it odd that the Jack’s of this world are big on rhetoric but shallow on detail, must be a smirkey kind of attribute.
There are 171 posts here dealing with WorkChoices and a sundry collection of articles and data as they appeared.
http://www.ozforums.com.au/viewtopic.php?id=28&p=1
I found it amusing that the Canadian back in June 07 court threw out WC type laws saying that collective bargaining was a human right.
OTTAWA — In a landmark ruling, the Supreme Court of Canada on Friday declared for the first time that collective bargaining rights are protected in the 1982 Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/news/story.html?id=f55f272e-34b8-464a-aa12-b6b2a972aa86&k=78774
Kina
That’s because Canada has a bill of rights in its constitution, its time we had a similar amendment.
I think Mr Bolt would be the first to oppose such a move.
Here is the short statement from the Reserve Bank Governor following the decision to keep interest rates on hold.
http://www.rba.gov.au/MediaReleases/2008/mr_08_04.html
ruawake at 148 ‘I think Mr Bolt would be the first to oppose such a move.’ No if you tried to do it while he was personally trying to dam the Mitchell river.
(What is that all about – have I missed something?)
Pages: « 1 2 [3] 4 5 … 8 » Show All