The latest Essential Research survey has Labor’s lead down from 58-42 to 57-43, remembering that this is a two-week rolling average which was half conducted before Malcolm Turnbull replaced Brendan Nelson. Also included (just from the last week’s sample) are various questions on leadership and one on industrial relations (45 per cent think the government moving “too slowly”).
Reflections on the Miracle of Democracy at Work in the Greatest Nation on Earth
762 Comments
Has an opposition leader ever had a one week bounce in the polls before?
I am happy to resume discussion on the constitutional arrangements of Andorra – or perhaps San Marino, or Liechtenstein if people prefer. Would anyone like to know why Castle Liechtenstein is in the suburbs of Vienna and not in Liechtenstein?
ruawake – there appears to be 2 things that you have failed to understand.
This is “a two-week moving average”
This was “half conducted before Malcolm Turnbull”
Both of these things would appear to mitigate any bounce.
Do tell, Adam.
SA
I was talking about next week
Govt working with greens & Idps to get Luxury car tax bill passed,
Opposition left out in the cold.
“The Senate has rejected an opposition proposal to have the government’s planned luxury car tax increase applied only to vehicles worth more than $90,000.
All seven balance of power senators sided with the government to vote down the coalition amendments, 36 to 34.”
http://news.smh.com.au/national/coalition-fails-to-amend-luxury-car-tax-20080923-4mby.html
The Liechtenstein family, who take their name from the castle near Vienna in which they lived from the 12th century, bought the County of Vaduz in 1719 in order to give them a seat in the Imperial Reichstag of the Holy Roman Empire. The county then became a sovereign state within the Empire, and with the fall of the Empire in 1918 it was recognised as the independent Principality of Liechtenstein. The princes didn’t actually move from Castle Liechtenstein to the Principality of Liechtenstein until the Nazi annexation of Austria in 1938.
Interesting responses to the “X is more honest than most politicians” question:
Rudd 53%
Nelson 25%
Turnbull 25%
Conclusion: only rusted-ons buy Turnbull at this point. He’s got all the work to do.
The attitudinal research on Talcum is dreadful, sure he does better than Brenda but will this slip in the weeks to come?
How long until the Libs figure out picking Talcum was an error?
hehe. too early to conclude anything, ruawake, but you’re right: they arent good at all!!
We have had three polls, one poll reported a 3 point movement, another a one-point movement and this one, unless Labor had a ‘bounce’ their way in the first week of polling, no bounce either. This Turnbull bounce is a myth.
Looking at his mediocre personal ratings it would be easy to understand why.
I think the more important question is if they do, what do they do about it?
There’s really no one else. Who? Abbott, Mesmerelda, Hockey, Pyne?
This is probably as good as it gets for them.
Who would want to be a Liberal supporter with this lot to barrack for and provide constant excuses for the incredible level of incompetence and lack of talent?
Trustworthy honesty level of Turnbull is especially dangerous because it is linked with a high arrogance rating. Just how does he improve perceptions when most dont trust him?
Not surprising really, given he no doubt sees himself as a legend.
The Liberals problem was, as Nelson’s spill was all about trying to deal with Turnbull once and for all, the old leadership could not run anyone else. Hockey would do better, even Abbott. At least they would have had the party behind them.
In regard to public perception and Turnbull’s honesty is the latest pensioner gimmick.
Turnbull is going on about how important it is now but earlier in the year he dissed it and when in cabinet voted it down. You would think Labor would be going hard on this point with the little sting in the tail – how can you trust this man.
My point is when actions and perceptions become aligned they are reinforced.
yeah, 12 years to do something about pensions – and now the yabbering. People arent stupid. This wont pay dividends.
The real danger for Turner’s is that Rudd is looking like actually keeping his promises in his quiet, methodical, and evidence based, boring way.
That will hang over the Libs tilt in 2010 like a solar eclipse.
If I was Turnbull, I’d be having a quiet word with the HoR’s camera crew and get them to cut back on focusing the cameras directly on him when he is seated and copping a spray from Government Ministers.
He either looks arrogant or has a somewhat “shell-shocked” appearance and both do not fit the profile of a competent, confident leader.
Wonder how Smirk feels about his brother always sticking up for Kev.lol
“WORLD Vision chief Tim Costello has backed Prime Minister Kevin Rudd’s decision to head to New York to talk about global poverty with other world leaders.
Mr Costello said it would be “embarrassing” for Australia if its prime minister wasn’t at such an important meeting.
The rest of the world who are taking this seriously would scratch their heads in disbelief,” he said.
http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,24388881-29277,00.html
No 16
More to the point, how can you trust our conceited Prime Minister?
No 7
Adam, I also note that your Andorran thesis was not an argument.
Yeah, Im surprised Hockey wasnt mooted, given how much the Howard right hates Talcum.
My guess: right after the 2010 election loss.
No 20
What’s more embarrassing is that after all the talking about solving global poverty, more talk is still to come and still no sufficient action.
(23) My guess is Mumbles is right, they won’t wait till then.
GP, just saying it doesn’t make it so
They need to bring in a completely new face and play steady as you go. Hockey to me looks like damaged goods. Don’t know what Howard did to him the other year but he seems to have changed a lot.
The main problem for the Libs is the bad blood between the key players from the previous Government. The Turnbull team has been played out as a win for his side and a lose for the old guard. Yet they are still around, waiting for Turnbull to falter and then move against him. Electoral poison!
Until a few more leadership contenders have their throats cut, it’s chaos and disunity for the Libs.
In the mean time, Rudd and Co get on with the job of Government.
Hawkey got it right when he said, “how can you govern the nation, if you can’t govern your own Party?”
Of course, he’s Mr WorkChoices.
So GP, if Rudd is “conceited”, then what which of Turnbull’s traits are dragging him down compared to Rudd as preferred Prime Minister by 45/25? Or is “conceit” irrelevant to being preferred as PM?
I think too many people have forgotten that Hockey was sacked by Howard from his first portfolio after an absolutely woeful performance and being publicly humiliated.
Most probably Hockey was told by Howard just how much the whole Coalition Government was depending on a high level performance in IR and that his whole career hung in the balance.
Hockey dutifully sold out his principles and proceeded to try and sell the sh!t sandwich which was workchoices. As a result, Hockey doesn’t have any credibility in the wider electorate and I suspect with his own colleagues.
Hockey is yesterdays man the same as most of the remaining members of Howard’s front bench.
All true on Hockey but Turnbull’s main problem is that the party is not behind him so he is stuck with policies that he has already criticised and this makes him vulnerable to the government. They have to pick someone from the right I would think. Fun to speculate anyway!
No 32
If they were not behind him, they would not have elected him. His supposed lack of support is a nonsensical beat up by bloggers here trying to distract from the Government’s baseless attacks on the opposition.
No 29
And Gillard is Ms Workchoices-Lite.
GP,
Oh, they are behind him all right. With knives unsheathed ready to show the thrust of their support.
Again GP, just saying it does not make it so
Gillard had Turnbull nailed when she said today even as he asked the questions you can see he doesn’t believe them.
No doubt he can’t for this parliamentary session to be over sdo he can go off and find some of his own policies (which form what George M was saying on Insiders, seem mostly to do with tax).
Fine GP, I’m sure Turnbull would have no trouble bringing in his views on climate change for example, so solid is his backing. Anyone watching the Liberals will know that Turnbull’s narrow win said more about Nelson than support for Turnbull.
32
GP, does that mean that the 40+ Liberals who didn’t vote for Turnbull are not behind him?
Tax is about the only policy he believes in that he can raise without annoying the party.
Any leader or aspiring leader of the Libs would kill for a similar mandate from their colleagues that Rudd has.
Unlike Rudd, any leader of the libs cannot achieve the level of authority or mandate that Rudd enjoys and consequently has to juggle a range of factional differences and somehow try and overcome a prevailing “Howard influence” which still hovers ever menacingly over the party.
This was clearly evident in his choice of the front bench and the amount of time it took to put together.
We could very well see a repeat of the early Hawke years when the Libs were virtually rudderless and were continually fighting over the spoils of defeat and the leadership. Many interesting days ahead me thinks.
40 – Shrike too true.
No 36
I didn’t say it. But George Megalogenis made the point quite well on Sunday.
GP
Turnbull only just fell over the line against the most dismal leader since Downer. His support was nothing to write home about. And Julie Bishop already looks like she needs to be put out of her misery.
I quite like Turnbull (I might get banned for saying that) but he hasn’t got a lot to work with. It’s going to be a long road back.
No 38
The Liberal Party supports an emissions trading scheme. Our view has always been that we should not be pursuing the policy with needless haste.
The poll responses show Turnbull as more demanding and much more arrogant than Rudd.
So the seemingly never-ending media pieces, from a month or two ago, painting Rudd as a control freak and aggressively demanding, seem not to have rung true for most Australians. They could’ve even done him a favour now Turnbull is on the scene for comparison!
The interesting thing, though, is how Turnbull could have generated such confidently negative responses on these two questions (59%/56%). I’d say the voters have a fair idea already of what they think of him.
And expect the 48% “Out of touch with ordinary people” to take a hit with the completely “out of touch” Roosters howler.
Turnbull is much the best leader the Libs have and they should stick with him. Whatever current polls show he is the only Lib who could pose a serious threat to Rudd in 2010 if the economy turns turtle in the wake of the Bush Recession in the US.
…but doesn’t believe in it
No 44
The ballot was always going to be close by virtue of the fact that Nelson called a snap spill. Had Turnbull waited the month or so, as was suggested by “Liberal insiders” in the MSM, he may well have secured a much better margin simply because Nelson was going from bad to worse and simply wasn’t cutting through.
No 46
Rubbish, Bryce. I don’t think mainstream Australia particularly cares which team the Leader of the Opposition or the Prime Minster follow in their occasional sporting sojourns.
No 48
More rubbish.
GP
I agree with the snap poll argument. Everyone applauded Nelson for “showing courage” and “settling the issue” but I though he wasn’t doing his party any favours creating a desperate dash to the line. It’s like calling an election and not allowing any time for campaigning. It was pretty ordinary IMHO.
45 “The Liberal Party supports an emissions trading scheme. Our view has always been that we should not be pursuing the policy with needless haste.”
Funny one GP!
Penny Wong pointed out in Senate Question time today that not only are Turnbull’s economic credentials shot with the poor appointment of Mesmeralda but worse for him is his environmental credentials have been hit for six too. Turns out the two old climate change denialists Robb the Googler in the HoR and Minchin is his representative against Penny Wong.
Turnbull if he has a credibility/trust problem as it seems then his tax policy can suffer from being associated with Workchoices as in ‘the workchoices of taxation’ regardless of the detail. The tag will stick and create doubt.
I agree he is the best thing for the party but only if he can break the control of the right otherwise he will just lose more credibility.
The Turnbull/Hewson comparisons are getting eerier. Just off the top of my head…
Both went to Sydney Uni.
Both merchant bankers.
Both in parliament just a few years (4 and 3) when elected Leader.
Both members for Wentworth.
And now the hint of Turnbull also having tax as his raison-d’etre.
Any more?
Hewson lost the unloseable election in 93.
Don’t know whether that’s good or bad news for Rudd.
But as Peter Brent opines – Turnbull may well be a plucked rooster by then – replaced by another from the stellar Lib cast.
No 52
Diogenes, I was among those that applauded him for finally settling the issue once and for all. Yes, it was partly a last-ditch attempt to save his leadership, but it was also an effort to save the party from suffocating media speculation.
Compare and contrast the analysis during Nelson’s leadership with that under Turnbull. Now the focus is more on policy, not whether there are surreptitious efforts to undermine his leadership.
I wonder how Samantha Maiden is feeling this evening after writing this.
Boy, another one who thinks Robb is “a delightful and talented political strategist”. And she finishes with this;
It could be a long wait if they keep up their current performance.
http://blogs.theaustralian.news.com.au/samanthamaiden/index.php/theaustralian/comments/turnbull_deploys_women_and_young_guns/
No 53
Steve, firstly, no-one denies that there is a climate and no-one denies that it changes. The skeptics, by and large, are critical of the human contribution. There is nothing wrong with skepticism, especially in science.
That said, whether Robb denies anthropogenic global warming or not, the reality is that both the Government and the Opposition agree that an emissions trading scheme should be introduced. Penny Wong should stop dithering and start giving Australians some information.
{Compare and contrast the analysis during Nelson’s leadership with that under Turnbull. Now the focus is more on policy, not whether there are surreptitious efforts to undermine his leadership.]
Give it time, GP, give it time.
I thought the ALP was going too fast… make up your mind GP
Loved the Helen Demidenko of Australian politics line by Swan today.
Bishop’s office have fessed up to the cut-n-paste
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24391138-5013404,00.html
Bishop says:
code for: my former speechwriter is now cleaning toilets at the Liberal Party headquarters.
GP at 50
The question, if you missed it, was “Out of touch with ordinary people”
How out of touch can you get, I hear 5 million Victorians saying.
No 60
Yes it is going too fast and there is surprisingly little detail given the haste at which they are proceeding.
No 62
Bryce, the football team preference of our leaders is inconsequential to the outcomes of elections. If you continue to pursue that line, I will have to conclude that you are delusional.
No 61
Well, I must say that Bishop has not started well. Plagiarising the WSJ and forgetting the official interest rates are, really, unforgivable gaffes for treasury spokeswoman.
How can it be going too fast if there isn’t any detail? GP, you are a walking contradiction.
GP with Robb and Minchin a snails pace would be too fast. They haven’t quite made it into this century yet and the further the debate goes the more out of touch they would look. They are both eminently unqualified for the climate change issue on any criteria.
code for = ” I told that speech writer today, thanks for taking the hit” and then let him write my next “impromptu utterance”
No 66
We know it’s going too fast because it intends to introduce the scheme in 2010. Firstly, there is no sufficient modelling, we don’t know the ETS framework, we don’t know the implications for heavy emitters, we don’t know whether the world will even reach agreement.
If I’m a walking contradiction, you’re living in a sphere of abject ignorance.
Thomas Paine @ 27
Please, say it isn’t so! Joe Hockey is the Avuncular Bear, the Barbecue Clown, the Grinning Aussie Trier (who can bring hurrahs and posh pig meat to any Lavender Bay fundraiser)!
(But yes, I concede, he’s also Howard Spawn.)
(I’m still gunning for the plastic comb salesman, Christopher Pyne.)
Well Turnbull has fallen at the first hurdle as far as I can tell, Julie Bishop, Andrew Robb and Nick Minchin are poor selections for someone who was relying on the economy and the environment to distinguish himself from Nelson’s feeble attempt as Leader.
Just on the pensioner squeal, it is somewhat worrying that the clerks of the House of Representatives and the Senate are of diverse opinion as to the constitutionality of the pension bill.
lol
how do you know what modelling has been done?
wouldn’t want to rush it GP
So we shouldn’t implement an ETS if the world doesnt? Is that Liberal policy?
No 71
Steve, just be honest: Turnbull will always fail in your eyes and spare us the senselessly foreboding commentary.
It was only a cheap stunt GP. The Bill was a scam to hide the do nothing of twelve years under Howard and cabinet rejecting Brough’s cabinet submission for a pension increase last year.
GP
Ones Lab and ones Lib. I’d be worried if they DID agree.
It’s a non event GP. The high court has acknowledged that there is an argument on both sides but that it is not in their juristiction and should be decided by the HoR. That’s the end of the stunt. And to be honest I don’t think Talcum will be sad to see the end of it.
Turnbull will fail in all eyes with this Shadow Cabinet GP. Pathetic is what it is.
Their opinions are completely irrelevant. It will never be brought on in the House, so it will never go to a vote, so it will never make its way back to the Senate.
No 73
Australia’s emissions are diminutive, so I would certainly argue, as an individual, that we should not act until the world reaches agreement.
However, the Liberal Party position is that any ETS should not be pursued with haste; rather that as much work as possible should be done to ensure that the policy framework is correct and proper to ensure that our economy is not harmed. Whether that results in Australia implementing and ETS before or after the rest of the world is not of concern.
Steve,
Considering Rudd won with probably the most pathetic opposition cabinet since 1977, I really don’t think it matters.
You need not worry about acting with Robb and Minchin with both feet on the brake, inaction will be the norm from this pair of denialists. The rest of the world will have no trouble staying ahead of their timetable.
No 80
Good point.
By the way, what ever happened to that “national broadband” I was expecting?
AC this change was supposed to enhance the Liberal’s electoral chances and they have bombed out.
No 81
What is your problem with skepticism? In no other field of science have I seen such dogmatic ad hominem attacks against those who dare offer a contrarian opinion.
Doesn’t say much for Howard’s cabinet if that’s your opinion AC
Contracts issued early next year
Much as I hate to agree with GP, he is right that all this frothing about Turnbull and his shadows is of no relevance to anything much. Rudd will win in 2010 if the electorate still has confidence in his leadership, and that will depend on the state of the economy and the effectiveness of his response to economic issues, which includes IR and the ETS. If the electorate no longer has confidence in Rudd, he will lose, so long as the opposition leader is minimally credible as an alternative. Turnbull is much the most credible leader the Libs have at present, so they will have to stick with him. Nelson was an accidental leader, and the last ten months have been a mere entr’acte between the Howard and Turnbull leaderships. The real contest to win in 2010 began last week.
Not much enjoying the debate over which shadow cabinet was the more “pathetic”. Find something interesting to argue about please.
Just thinking back on today, you’d have to say it was a pretty ordinary performance by the Opposition.
Poor questions, silly gaffes, endless points of order (all refused), adolescent interjections and finally the failure of their set-piece pensions bill to even be debated by the House.
Really, quite terrible. Let’s hope the Opposition improve and at least try to make a serious contribution.
We are PART of the world! You write about the world as if it is everything excluding us!
Oh we know this; we had 11.5 years of lack of haste.
Because what you are espousing is denialism which you are simply calling skepticism. Your belief that creationism is a possible alternative to evolution demonstrates that you do not understand how science works as an epistemology.
WONDERFUL! THANK YOU! You just gave it away; you are just being contrarian, you aren’t actually proposing anything supported by evidence. I congratulate you for finally being honest.
No 88
Hear, hear.
Not so sure, Dario. Several frontbenchers (including Howard himself) had ministerial experience. Unlike their 2007 counterparts, they could articulate policies, actually developed theoretical underpinnings and didn’t rely on vacous and quiet frankly irritating catchphrases like “education revolution” and “I have a plan for the nation’s economy” (LOL!)
Steve, where’s the “bomb out”? Don’t tell me your relying on that ridiculous Essential “Research” poll which is quite frankly laughable. Anyone who honestly thinks that the Coalition’s primary vote is 33% should be put down.
No 90
Bushfire Bill, it seems you have a short memory regarding the adolescent and indolent behaviour of the Government regarding Turnbull’s wealth, ego and his Venetian sojourn. Albanese, the principal offender!
Being skeptical about whether there’s MSG in your wontons is a little less dangerous than being skeptical about the threat of global annihilation (as Nietzsche might have said).
(Stakes, old son. Consider the stakes.)
Sorry, William. Just got your message after I posted.
Turnbull might be the most acceptable face available to the LNP at the moment (though those personality polls say something different) – he could however lose further credibility fast if he has to be careful of the right or if he follows Nelson’s tactics. They could ruin their own best bet.
FWIW I think his attack on Rudd going to NY was silly and counter productive considering the environment. It may backfire as images and stories come back from there on his activities etc. I know he was trying to downsell the importance of the trip and thus downplay any Rudd kudos but…it was counter intuitive.
The opposition shadows are just new in their positions so will need a little time to get up to speed and the same with Turnbull.
No 91
You have completely misrepresented my argument as to creationism v evolution. I did say during that argument that so long as evolution was taught as the principal scientific thesis, I had no problem with children also being exposed to other views.
Furthermore, I’m not repackaging denial as skepticism. Those are your words. I’m simply saying that your virulent distaste and vulgar denigration of people who old opposite views is as absurd as it is obscene. Science is not a religion; and nor should it be expounded religiously.
GP at 53, well done on having the guts to criticise Bishop. Youve gone up in my estimation!!
No 99
I still think she has the capacity for the job, however. If these errors continue to emerge, my view may change though.
The disappointing thing about the way a no-change Newspoll and a PPM that was just 24% (alebit it up from Nelson’s 6%) was spun as great news for Turnbull is that those at the OO, Sky news, 7 news etc, seem to have learned nothing from their failed analysis and predictions re: Howard and Rudd. They just cant seem to accept that their darling lost, and dont seem to care about any pretence of balance
sorry meant Nelson’s 16%
No 101
Andrew, your analysis is absurd. Everyone knows the Liberals lost.
You heavily implied that you thought that students could be taught creationism in the science classroom, which demonstrated that you don’t understand what constitutes a scientific theory.
Well, that is what you are doing whether or not you are aware of it.
But when we ask you for evidence you don’t have any! You are having this about five different ways.
So why do you think children should be taught creationism as if it is a scientific theory!
GP,
I think what Andrew is referring to is the fact that whilst Labor still leads 55/45 in the Newspoll on TPP, more and more commentators are saying that there is increasing evidence that Rudd will be a “oncer”.
How a 55/45 lead in Newspoll equates to a losing position in an election is beyond me – a 55/45 result for the Howard government last year would have had the scribes out saying that Howard was cruising to another landslide…
No 104
You can draw whatever implication you wish from my argument, but you’d be wrong to suggest that I think creationism should be taught above evolution.
Arrogant dribble. Do not pretend to know what I think and put words in my mouth!
I don’t. Again, those are your words.
These were not interjections, or frivolous points of order. They were in the ordinary run of debate. From memory, Albanese made precisely ONE point of order today, which was agreed to by the Speaker.
Contrast this modest performance with the Opposition’s literally dozens of points of order, I think only one of them agreed to by the Speaker (who is regarded as no government partisan like the last hack).
The Opposition is being clearly disruptive, while the overnment is being clearly humorous. I mean “Merchant of Venice”? “The Helen Demidenko of Australian politics”? These are genuinely funny and enliven an otherwise plodding and disrupted QT.
Adam was right earlier. Turnbull is by far the Liberals’ most credible leader (this football thing, pur-lease, didn’t he even correct himself in the same sentence?). The next election will be competitive if there’s a recession, and will be a canter for Labor if there isn’t.
Bishop’s had a crap start, though, no point in denying it. Fancy not knowing the cash rate.
To be fair, from reading the transcript, I think it was more that she was not sure of it.
Dyno @ 109,
Agree completely. As a self-confessed “liberal”, I’m waiting for Turnbull to start spelling out his social policies – if he’s going to revert back to Howard capital-C conservatism, he can forget it, but if he actually acts like a true “liberal” (socially liberal, economically liberal), then I’m more than willing to switch my vote to the Libs in 2010…
No 105
The beauty of a democracy is that you are free to hold your own opinions. Opinion writers are but a slice of the news cycle and most people here seem to give them more credit or status than they are owed.
At the end of the day, Shanahan and Ackerman (for example) have been beating from similar drums for years, but their commentary had no influence on the outcome of the 2007 election.
GP @ 85
“What is your problem with skepticism? In no other field of science have I seen such dogmatic ad hominem attacks against those who dare offer a contrarian opinion.”
Absolute nonsense.
History is filled with attacks on those who have used science to develop new theories and explanations. The sceptics were the ones who argued that the world was flat, that the earth was the centre of the universe, etc, etc.
No 107
Oh I see, it’s humour when it’s from the Government, but it’s adolescent when it’s from the Opposition.
Shameful double standards BB.
You don’t have an argument! If you did you’d explain what it was, but instead you just revert to evasion and obfuscation.
Creationism doesn’t even constitute a scientific hypothesis, so it doesn’t belong in at all in a science classroom. The fact you can’t even acknowledge that demonstrates you have no idea what science is.
You don’t realise it, but you are espousing an extreme relativist position where all propositions of the truth are considered equally good and equally flawed. Your idea (I can’t even call it an argument) is completely self defeating.
Unfortunately, GP, Shanahan isn’t there to provide opinions (unlike Ackerman) – he’s there to interpret Newspoll and (for better or worse) sets the political climate for the day.
The problem is that he’s not very good at it. He was the great exponent of the infamous (and non-existent) “Narrowing”, he predicted the day before the election that Howard would win again and he’s running around now saying that Rudd is doomed (2 years before an election).
I’d expect that analysis from a commenter on this blog – not from one of the chief political writers in the country. I’m sorry, but the standards are not the same for everyone…
Either way, its the first thing you should know when you take the job
Let just modify that sentence GP. GP just be honest: Swan will always fail in your eyes and spare us the senselessly foreboding commentary.
Seems that all these polls are only good news for the libs insofar as they show better numbers than under Nelson. So in a relative sense its great for them.
In an absolute sense they are still a non-competative rabble, abeit with possibly more potential than a week ago.
So Turnbull is going to make Tax reform his thing??
“The new Liberal leader, who plans to elevate tax reform as a key issue in the 2010 election, has boosted his economic team while stressing the importance of the environment and sustainable development.”
Rudd and Co have already got that well covered with their review of the whole system and it looks like being one of their “evidence based” policies. Boring , but the process is likley to mean that when they do generate a policy to take to the 2010 election it will be well backed by research and evidence.
Are people really going to trust a merchant banker’s ideas on tax reform by then? After all the fallout from whats happening now? And by 2010 will he have been busted for his involvment in the HIH thing?? Will be interesting to see what he comes up with, but i think he’s missed the boat here.
“Fancy not knowing the cash rate.”
I wonder what would happen if Wayne Swan had been similarly uncertain last year…
No 110
If “socially liberal” means ending same-sex discrimination, then both sides are already in agreeance, even when Nelson was leader.
You’d have to repeal the marriage act to get rid of discrimination based on sexuality.
He wouldn’t be treasurer.
Bishop’s funnier gaffe was her plagiarism from the Wall Street Journal, something she has now blamed on her staff:
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24391138-5013404,00.html
110
I don’t care how many times I hear it – I can’t accept that “agreeance”is a word.
imacca,
We’ll see “in due season”, but I’d be amazed if Rudd can make his “root and branch” tax review achieve anything much. It’s very hard to get any meaningful change through the MSM’s “winners and losers” filter, without inciting a whole lot of fear and loathing.
On the other hand anyone can understand a tax cut, and most people like them. But whether we’ll be able to afford more big tax cuts, well that’s a different question…
The LCT bill has passed the senate
http://news.smh.com.au/national/luxury-car-tax-bill-passes-senate-20080923-4mby.html
Winston, “agreeance” isn’t a word. The word is “agreement”.
Other social issues are where he stands on immigration, human rights (i.e. civil liberties – a core issue for true liberals) and (possibly) the ETS. If he opposes it by saying climate change doesn’t exist, he can forget about me (and quite a few others) – if he’s got a proper reason for opposing it (which I can’t currently envisage, but I’ll keep an open mind), then it’s a different story…
Boy Lateline hammered the Opposition… wow
Well, according to Megalogenis there is now 100,000 fewer high income earners getting government hand outs. So I think that’s a good start for the first budget:
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,,24387904-2702,00.html
Dyno @ 126
Tell gp
No 126
Agreeance is a word.
Winston, cheers. It’s a word which grates with me too.
From Dictionary.com:
Main Entry: agreeance
Part of Speech: n
Definition: the act of agreeing
Example: Usage of the site constitutes agreeance with these terms.
Usage: considered obsolete and a bastardization of ‘agreement’
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/agreeance
So while it’s technically a word, it isn’t really now…
GP, “agreeance” is a word that is considered obsolete and a bastardisation of “agreement”, according to http://www.dictionary.com
SL, beat me to it!
131 & 133
Look, I don’t care how much evidence you produce or how many experts you trot out I maintain my right to be a sceptic about “agreeance”.
No 134
The point is that it still exists and I have used it correctly.
Can we move on please.
GP,
If you wish to use “agreeance”, I shall reserve the right hereafterward to use the words “hereafterward” and “begat” (amongst others…)
No 139
Please do.
ShowsOn, actually if you read the article closely it says further down that the net figure is 44,000 fewer families getting hand outs. But no matter, still not a bad number.
Can we please have a thread on the ACT election?
Dario @ 128
Why is that?
On the gaffes. Gave them a full run and made the Opposition look very, very bad.
Mr Costello was cringeworthy on Lateline, so much so that he was nearly drawn to tears on the leadership question. Pathetic performance from our greatest treasurer.
Dyno @124
I reckon if they frame it properly as making the system simpler and fairer they may be able get through more than you think. That would tie in nicely with their theme on IR and hey, maybe the MSM will declare that they have a Narrative then!
I agree though that the “MSM’s “winners and losers” filter” will be a problem as it always seems to be for any policy. Could come down to simply making sure that most of the losers are from whatever demographic that they think isnt going to vote for them anyway.
Lucky for them then it was Lateline and not the News or 7.30 Report when people might have been watching.
Rebecca: I’ll put something up on the weekend.
I should correct the earlier poster who stated the LCT package has ‘passed the Senate’. It hasn’t. The Senate has requested amendments be made by the House of Representatives. After these amendments are made the Senate will vote on the final LCT bill’s third reading. If either Senator Fielding or Xenephon chose to vote against the third reading the bill would fail to pass.
The again their main demographic – pensioners may have been up late watching the ABC.
No 149
And hopefully they come to their senses and block the shameful tax binge.
But that won’t happen, because they voted for the amendments. It doesn’t make sense for them to vote for the amendments, but then against the bill when it gets back to the senate.
Well that’s what you’d think. However, the Opposition put up amendments in full knowledge that they wouldn’t support the bill with them. I believe Senator Xenephon always said he was willing to have the committee stage (where they consider the bill in detail) and reserve his vote on the third reading on this package and the Medicare Surcharge bill.
True, though, that it seems that it would be a waste of time bothering amending a bill and then not supporting it.
151 – of course GP you do realise that “tax binge” is working?
No 154
Yeah, it’s working to grease the wheels of class warfare.
Xenephon supported it BEFORE the amendments, it was only Fielding who was holding out. But now Fielding is onboard, so the bill is going to pass.
You just had to hear Erica Abetz attacking Fielding to understand that the opposition no longer had the numbers to block the bill.
The cold war is over mate, move on.
145 Generic Person – I mean this sincerely GP. For you to say that about Costello he must have been bad. If anyone else here had said that I would have thought it was bias speaking. I’m sorry I missed it now.
No 157
You wouldn’t think so listening to Kevin Rudd, Lindsay Tanner, Anthony Albanese and others pontificating on the need to steal money from the wealthy.
Costello is not a very convincing talker. Avoided sticking it into Turnbull over his silly recommendation. Too bad.
Nah, they just do that to piss you off. Class warfare has nothing to do with it.
GP @ 145,
If there is one thing that I am grateful to Howard for it is that the Australian people were spared the indignity of having Costello at the helm.
Tonights effort by Costello was abysmal and reinforced Howard’s judgment.
One of my mates is looking into installing solar panels. He asked the supplier how business had been since the changes were made by the government. His reply was that they have never been busier.
SNIP: Poor quality comment deleted – The Management.
He’s a worse writer. Try reading his book, it is like an op ed piece.
I’ve got a feeling he just jotted down dot points and Coleman converted it to disjointed paragraphs.
ShowsOn, please don’t tell me you paid 50 bucks for it?
Hahhaahhah Costello says Turnbull deserved his go, even though he voted for Nelson.
Costello on Lateline – its hard not to think he is just trying to spruik his book. Must have hoped for a best seller. He keeps harking back to his time in office and avoids comment on current affairs, except where they prove his past views right. He’s deluded over his own importance. Tony Jones is getting a bit frustrated with him: “You haven’t lost any of your skills in avoiding the question”. Funny for all the wrong reasons.
Rudd would have killed him in the last election. Howard was the best only chance they had.
That was painful. Please look away.
He whines too.
No 158
The fact is that if he really wanted the bloody leadership he would have challenged. I’m so sick of hearing the “ifs, buts, maybes” concerning the possibility of Howard handing over midterm. No-one comes to the leadership without a contest and Costello simply didn’t want one.
I admire him for his great work as our best Treasurer, but frankly his recent antics have crystallised the opinion that he is not leadership material.
No. Borrowed it from my uni library.
Yes, because he’s gutless.
Yes, because he’s gutless.
I realise I’m wasting my time here, but I would like people to do better than simply inflicting abuse at particular public figures. If your comment contains no intellectual content, take it somewhere else.
Costello is gutless? Pathetic? Painful? He whines? Who cares.
SNIP: Name-calling deleted – The Management.
No wonder Wayne Swann did so well against him at their debate last year.
The worm never lies!
Maybe Costello has dodged the leadership because in reality there has “never” been any support for him to take over the leadership.
His colleagues would know him better than anyone and may not have endorsed him as leader, straight after the election loss after all.
SNIP: Whinge deleted – The Management.
His mum?
Will there be a Morgan Poll out this Friday?
If so it will be interesting to see how the events of the last two days play out.
SNIP: Enough already – The Management.
Cossie is headed for the door. Why would he bother staying on now?
Morgan is conducting “special” research this week on the Turnbull “honeymoon effect”, which I guess will be released on Friday or Monday.
Surely Costello is now about the least relevant person in Australian politics we could be discussing? Unless some one starts a thrread about lazy treasurers?? Its the Mal and Julie show now!
Wonder if Julie Bishop has learned anything from the Cossie saga. Will she ever challenge for the leadership? Or will she wait for the party to decide they need a woman up front, they then beg her to take the post, and she condescends to accept it?
Thanks William.
Looking forward to it. The next few weeks polls will certainly tell the story.
I wonder how long Malcolm’s honeymoon will last?
imacca,
Funny day to be talking about Bishop challenging for the leadership!
In all honesty, though, Mal’s only 50/50 to get to the next election. Not that there’s anything particularly wrong with him as a leader (he has faults, so does everyone), just that 2 years is quite a long time for an Opposition Leader to hang on.
If JB can regain equilibrium after this week’s stuff-ups (and she probably can) and look reasonable as Shadow Treasurer, she could be in the right place by the first half of 2010. (Or after the election, which may be better for her).
It might very well be over now, Gary.
I wonder if Sportingbet is offering odds on it?
Did anyone have money on the length of Nelson’s term?
Gary the honeymoon will last as long as there is confetti for the msm to throw.
Samantha Maiden seems to have a difficulty with the difference between the NSW State Senate and the Federal HoR’s. Ms Neal was never on the Federal front bench.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24383020-2702,00.html
Guess what? Now it’s the governments fault that people stopped their private health cover BEFORE the legislation was passed and now have to reconsider their options. It was the backflip by the government that did it?
http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,24390644-952,00.html
How about the fact that the Senate dominated by non Labor wouldn’t pass the bloody thing and forced the government to make the changes.
No 191
Wrong scorpio. She was a senator for NSW in the Federal Parliament.
I’m not doubting your word GP. When was she a Senator?
Brendan seemed to be enjoying himself in parliament today. No pressure, enjoying the attacks on Turnbull no doubt.
I think the problem Bishop might have as leader is that she will always be compared to Gillard who as deputy is far more impressive. You could imagine Rudd would use Gillard against her and stand to the side all presidential like not deigning to lower himself to argue with her.
No 194
I stand corrected GP. At least you got one win today.
What portfolio did she hold?
Don’t worry GP – I found it. 1994 -8
No 196
The whole notion of Bishop assuming the leadership is utter lunacy, sorry to say.
No 197
The Minister for “Don’t you know who I am?!”
Consumer Affairs, Local Government, Housing and Childcare.
GP,
If you don’t know you should just say so. Such an inconsequential political figure didn’t really stand out, did she.
Thanks, William.
No 202
I did know, but plugging it into wikipedia yourself would have made you seem less lazy.
What, GP.
So now you aren’t interested in interaction with other posters or contributing in a meaningful way to civil intercourse.
Of course I could have done so, but you seemed to wish to converse.
Sorry I misread your intentions.
GP @ 196
I find the notion of any of the Liberal Front bench as leaders of anything more involved than a sewing circle slightly lunatic (but maybe i’m biased, just a bit……).
I am however genuinely interested in why you think Bishop assuming the leadership is lunacy as i am sure you would be looking at it from a different perspective to mine??
I think a good nights sleep may cure this laziness.
Night all.
No 206
The probability of Bishop assuming the leadership is so low that is unworthy of legitimate discourse.
Looks like the Libs are backing another loser.
{MOST Australians want the hefty alcopops tax to stay and would support increased tobacco tax if proceeds went to disease prevention, a Newspoll shows.
A survey commissioned by health and anti-smoking groups has found the 70 per cent tax hike on pre-mixed alcoholic drinks is supported by 57 per cent of adults irrespective of how the money is used.
But support rose to 84 per cent if most of the revenue funded programs to help prevent diseases such as heart disease and cancer.
“Eighty-four per cent is an extraordinary majority, particularly for an issue like paying more tax,” said Professor Ian Olver, chief executive of Cancer Council Australia, which funded the research with the Heart Foundation, Public Health Association of Australia (PHAA) and Action on Smoking and Health.
“It sends a strong message to politicians.” ]
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24394572-12377,00.html
Ok GP @ 208, i know thats your opinion. I was wondering what reasoning leads you to form such opinion? She is after all the Deputy, so the libs must think she has some potential??
No 210
The fact is that Turnbull is leader; unless he drastically stuffs up, he’ll be pretty safe for the time being.
Bishop has talent, but frankly is not leadership material. Heck, Bronny would be more popular.
Ahhh GP, i see comrade, you make good joke! Less popular than Bronny?? HaHa!!
South Australian Newspoll post.
GP,
I agree with you that Turnbull is safe for the time being (at least a year, I would think). He has more energy than Nelson, is more articulate and the party will be much more reluctant to dump him. That option will mainly come into calculations when the next election is looming and (if) the polls are still looking dire for the Libs.
I wouldn’t be as quick as you to write off Bishop, though. Shadow Treasury is a chance for her to make a mark. Sure, she’s off to a shocking start, but two gaffes of this nature hardly constitutes permanent destruction of a political career.
Good to see that Australia has jumped 2 places in the Transparency International Corruption Perceptions Index from 11th to 9th since the Sergeant Shultz brigade got turfed out of office.
Stupid, stupid woman on ABC Sydney radio with air-head Brissenden talking about the Bishop plagiarism business. She opined that the reason Swan may have found this plagiarism is because HE was about to use it himself, and so had it readily to hand! Totally spurious and mischevious fantasising, completely made up and blurted out with no evidence (or rational thought) whatsoever.
Later on she ventured that if the “Missy higging” story had been true, at least it would have given Rudd something to do on his trip that wasn’t boring.
How vacuuous! Is this where the maniacal search for pseudo “balance” gets us? When you don’t have a thing to criticise the government about, you just make it up like some dumb suburban mum having a latte and a gossip with the girls after tennis? Then you broadcast it to an audience of a hundred thousand?
Very poor, ABC,…VERY poor.
Of course it is the Liberal ABC – but, your not allowed to complain about it apparently.
I did complain about it.
Got the usual platitudes and references to the Code Of Conduct. Quick response but useless anyway.
Deborah Cameron’s politics segment (just after 9am) with Brissenden is all about mutual giggling at the “circus” etc. etc. in Canberra. Her feedback segment , after 9.30, is mostly about mothers, babies and recipes.
Deborah Cameron feels free to make up whatever she wants to. Maybe in conversation that’s OK, but not on taxpayer funded airwaves which are supposed to report something approaching the truth, or keep quiet about it.
Bishop was caught-out. Whether or not the listener views this as serious, or even worthy of comment is up to them. But this does not give ABC journalists (both Cameron and Brissenden make much of their “credentials”) the right to make up empty-headed crap to achieve some sort of phoney “balance.” So sick and tired of seeing govenment, especially in these dangerous times, depicted as “boring”, “silly” or the appropriate subject of schoolgirl giggles and nothing else.
Sorry if this has been raised somewhere else. Former Senator Robert Ray will be conducting the review into the WA ALP election campaign. The terms of reference are wide-ranging and will be completed by 15 Dec 08.
218
Take a chill pill Bill
I note Tim Costello quoted today in the SMH saying that Rudd SHOULD be in New York for the U.N General Assembly, because they are discussing global poverty!
Indeed, he said that IT WOULD BE AN INSULT IF THE AUSTRALIAN PM wasn’t there!
My oh my! Not the first time Tim has been at odds with his brother!
But, of course the Libs don’t give a _______ about poor, starving people in underdeveloped countries, they would much prefer sticking up for Porsche drivers and the private health industry.
I know this is US news but it’s very relevant to this thread, esp with Rudd in NY. The Paulson Bailout looks dead in the water. There might be a different Dodd version but constitutional law problems have now been raised. The stock market isn’t going to like this.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/24/business/economy/24fannie.html?_r=1&hp=&adxnnl=1&oref=slogin&adxnnlx=1222214762-w74Zfx9k6KjCh+qwGMgyNg
220
Where did you spring from, Wet?
Seems Congress has learnt from the Iraq affair and realise you just cant say here you go we will trust you on it. This was going to be another of those con jobs with billions disappearing into the void and nobody know where or for what. Congress should play hard ball on this to ensure the funds go to the righ places in the right amounts with the right conditions and so forth. I certainly wouln’t trust Bush and his mates with $700bn in the last months of his adminstration.
For a simple debunking of the Paulson plan go and have a look at Peter Martin’s blog.
Bill Clinton was pretty good on Letterman the other night too.
223
I’ve been lurking in the shadows… just for the record i think you probably make a few good points around these parts but i think you over reacted to the comments on 702 this morning.
Readily to hand? Even though she made the comments on Monday, and Swan called her out on them on Tuesday?
Obviously that journalist doesn’t bother to actually watch, listen, or read what happens in parliament.
Murdock is meeting up with Rudd, maybe this is why the opposition is frothing at the mouth about this trip-do you think they might be wary of losing Murdock’s patronism??? weeel just a thought lol.
bugga i forgot the link, sorry.
http://abc.com.au/news/stories/2008/09/24/2372556.htm
Is QT on? I’m in the dark here.
Judith @ 229
It would indeed be very amusing should murdoch change his position and sent down riding instructions to his Australian papers to end their Liberal leanings.
I did mention the other day that I saw an interview with murdoch (and probably Murdoch had arrange to be interviewed on whatever show it was) where he endorsed Obama with a number of very positive comments and got down on McCain. Now that might be because of the Wall street meltdown and a desire to dissociate himself from Republicans or it might be a change in thinking or he might just think Obama is the right guy. Now that Howard has gone and the remainder being fairly mediocre he might reassess the tendency to support the right here. One can only hope. It would be fairly shocking to not find an over abundance of partisan reporting from his stable.
Interesting…
Anthony Albanese has asked the Speaker to investigate a discrepancy between what Julie Bishop actually said, on the House tape recording regarding her now infamous “Wall St. Journal plagiarism”, and her words as reported in Hansard.
He wants an explanation as to why the two records are different.
Don’t know what’s at the bottom of this, but for the tape and the printed record to be different ther’d have to be a good explanation. Any Hansard junkies out there who might have some ideas?
TP @ 230, QT is on per normal
Obviously Bishop contacted Hansard and got them to change it.
Page 37 of Monday’s Hansard says:
I see no attribution to the Wall Street Journal there.
Sorry for being slow… but you’d think she’s get them to change Hansard in her favour, not in a way that would support the charge of plagiarism (by not including a reference to the WSJ)?
I think it was the original tape – i.e. her actual words, as spoken – that gave no attribution to Hansard. If the Hansard reflects that actuality, then where’s the change?
Tape:
“In my speech I was referring to the United States plans. In fact the words I used were the technical explanation from the US Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson which have been published widely.”
Hansard:
“In my speech I was referring to the United States plans and in fact the words I used were a technical explanation of US Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson’s plan which have been published widely.”
The matter of contention is was she explaining Paulson’s words or the reporting of his plan?
Oh dear, so she can’t even understand who she plagiarised. She plagiarised the Wall Street Journal, not Henry Paulson.
Ah ha! I see… a subtle difference. I suppose her argument would be that she “mis-spoke”, or didn’t express her meaning clearly, and sought to have the meaning … er… clarified in the printed version…. except that she was reading her speech, was she not?
The world wonders: what are the protocols for having Hansard altered away from the original tapes of the spoken words? You’d think these should go through the Speaker or some formal process, not just a visit to the Hansard office by the member in question, a cuppa tea and a bikkie, and a quick edit while they gossip away?
Yeah… whoever she plagiarised the WSJ or Paulson, it wasn’t attributed. Her Hansard statement is more accurate, but still does not attribute.
In other words she ws trying to make herself out to be an economics whiz, by pretending that the “technical explanation” was hers and hers alone, not lifted word for word from another source.
Looks like the Naughty Corner for Julie.
apparently Costello gave Swan a mild pat on the back–dunno whether Swan should be flattered or wary.
http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/story/0,22606,24394980-5005962,00.html
I think Members can ask to have Hansard changed as long as it does not change the meaning of the words said.
Yep Naughty Corner for Ms Mesmer again.
I’d like to see Swan run that “Naughty corner” phrase back at her in QT. Wasn’t it him she first used it against?
This would be sweet, sweet payback.
(Waiting now for GP to chime in and lecture me that two wrongs don’t make a right).
Her original “blame the staff” excuse was more convincing.
She should have just shut up in the first place, it would be forgotten about already if she had.
Caught the end of Julia & Swanny’s press conference on sky news. When they crossed back to the studio the comment was something like, Swanny was crowing over the big tick the IMF had given his budget.
Interesting to read Cozzie’s radio comments (referenced above) on the “economic tsunami”. I’ve always believed they delayed the election so long hoping it would hit hard in time to save their bacon. They then could have made an argument that “Now is not the time for change, no matter how you feel about Howard.” Might have worked, too: the “Dennis Connor” gambit… sail into the spectator fleet and hope the other bloke rams into someone before you do.
Also interesting to see his pretty flat-out statement that he’s not interested in the Leadership anymore. Hinted at a job of public service (not IN the PS, OF public service). His latest part-timer with the world Bank (is it?) as some kind of malpractice invigilator indicates Cozzie is interested in doing good works.
(a) This would give him an excuse for not attracting a salary befitting an ex-Treasurer,
(b) Would at least be a job he could use to redeem himself in his own and the public’s eyes.
My prediction is a job with Brother Tim in the island missions or similar.
Congratulations everyone – 21.283 million:
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24395667-12377,00.html
Its Tim’s to stand in Higgins for the Labor party!
Good to see that the growth is heading west and north
Turnbull’s office linked to Julie Bishop plagiarism row:
“MALCOLM Turnbull has been dragged into the plagiarism row engulfing his deputy Julie Bishop, with revelations it was his office that cut and pasted words from a Wall Street Journal article.”
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24395710-601,00.html
I wonder what other publications we are likely to see used in Liberal Party speeches from now on.?
Yeah it’s always the staffers’ fault
*mutters darkly*
Mein Kampf?
This is gold! ‘Wall Street Journalgate’?
QT is going to be fun!
-gate would have to be one of the most overused terms
Turbull kicks QT off on the pensions again… they just don’t learn
Julie Bishop pinched from the Wikipedia article on Clyde Cameron for her condolence motion
So she blames the staffer but she’s taking the flak. And she’s been caught misleading parliament. And then tries to cover up the fact that she mislead parliament.
TP@231, i wouldnt hold my breath but you never know!
perhaps Cozzie’s hanging out for a cushy ambassorship-ah la Vanstone, i heard the pays really good and perhaps Tanya would enjoy being the lady of the manor seeing she missed out on Kirribilli, come to think of it though, why would Rudd get rid of him when he’s doing such a good job for the labor party just sitting there at Talcum’s back?
If she was a racehorse she’d be scratched
Why cut and paste when it so easy to just rephrase what was written?
Or just preface the comments by saying “As a Wall Street Journal op ed stated on the 20th of September…”
Obviously she didn’t do that because she wanted it to sound as if it was her own analysis of the bail out policy.
Let alone the fact that the bailout package is now coming under severe criticism. Gee, I really wish our govt had followed Turnbull’s advice and initiated the same bailout package for our banks that don’t need it.
BB
Ms B is getting upset!
Bishop trying to pin plagiarism on Swan. Did he lift 8 paragraphs from the Assistant Treasurer’s speech in June?
“Yes. We are members of the same government!”
General alarums from Libs. Brushed off.
Gee Swan has earned some respect in my books.
A fair analysis would show that early on he was struggling but now,like gillard,he seems to grow more formidable at each appearance.
As a matter of interest have the fibs released any new policies since being in opposition
Tuckey kicked out lol
At last!
Tuckey sent to the Sin Bin, without warning for a dumb non-Point Of Order. Hope this is the harbinger of more sudden death red cards to follow.
To be fair to Speaker Jenkins, that’s now the third time he has kicked him for frivolous points of order this year.
BB
wilson is a serial offender, i think in some schoolboy way he thinks he is being “cool’
Should be a few more, starting with Uncle Joe.
People in his electorate consider taking a pointless of order, and getting kicked, participating in democracy.
BB
but hockey is so avuncular LOL
You know you suck at Shadow Treasurer when even Crean starts attacking you.
Why this plagiarism thing is getting so much airtime is beyond me. It was a stupid error – let’s move on lest the Treasurer explodes in a fit of hubris.
YAY! The hubris criticism is back! I hadn’t heard that criticism since early last November.
GP
If Ms Mesmer had not got up in a fit of hubris and claimed to have been misrepresented the plagiarism fiasco would be yesterdays news.
It was her stupid actions that have fuelled the media pack.
Because the media gets so bored with QT and is too lazy to actually follow the goings on that they pick on any trivial slip by either side to fill their column inches. Sad but true.
Also because no-one much likes the snooty Mrs B and they are glad to see her fall on her face.
I don’t consider plagiarism trivial. It’s enough to get someone kicked out of uni if they do it repeatedly.
It’s the coverup, GP.
I have no idea how she got this reputation for being a great minister or parliamentary performer. What exactly did she do as education minister?
I always thought she was a token female cabinet minister after Mandy Vanstone, Kay Patterson and Jocelyn Newman resigned to the backbench.
Truss gets walloped:
Truss: “Why do XJ Jags have an LCT exemption?”
Swan: “Because you made us amend the bill to include them.”
Yeah great answer.
Uhm….” to EXCLUDE them”.
No 287
The class wars are obscene. Again Swan is using the porsche driver line. Disgusting.
I mean 286.
Dear oh dear Mr Ferguson needs lessons in diction and elocution.
I think the idea is that if you can afford to pay a lot more for a car, then you can afford to pay a little (8%) extra tax. This is, of course, in the best interests of the country, given these hard economic times, as the IMF has so fulsomely recognized just recently, as has the Senate.
Why else WOULD you introduce a luxury car tax? Did your mob refuse to collect it? No. All they have done is force anomalies into it and then ask why there are anomalies. LOL.
Poor old Truss. What a thick-headed hayseed!
It gets worse. It’s Plibersek, the lady who proclaimed that the NSW Government has talent.
No 290
BB, I have argued against the LCT and I disagreed with its introduction. Costello should not have introduced it.
I’m not sure that the current vogue for running commentary of question time is a healthy development. It’s leading to a lot of very boring comments like 289. I’ll be chopping them quite liberally from now on if they aren’t any good.
Yes, that’s right, your mob actually introduced the LCT! I forgot to mention that.
Double hypocrisy.
No 290
That argument is as equally absurd as you earn more, so you should be taxed more.
No 294
And defending the increase by saying we introduced it is not an argument.
SNIP: Boring comment deleted. See 293 – The Management.
No 297
BB, more rubbish
Treasurer: The opposition stands for porsche drivers.
Double standards mate.
SNIP: Comment of the kind that led the commenter to be banned recently deleted – The Management.
i thought Cozzie said he was supporting his leader, hmmm, sniping in the background aint going to do it, the cracks are showing already, Shanahan is in NY with Rudd, lucky Rudd, now we’ll get first hand accounts of how Rudd wasted his time and our money–betcha!
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24395351-2702,00.html
And she accused Bronny as being the member for Macarthur!
Kate Ellis’ main problem is that she is letting the Opposition’s argy bargy get to her. She needs to not react directly to Coalition MPs. Nothing a bit more experience won’t temper.
I cannot fathom the rationale behind abolishing Australian Technical Colleges. Surely it would be much more costly to have every school in Australia teaching trades, rather than having specialised colleges around Australia.
SNIP: Boring comment deleted. See 293 and 299 – The Management.
297
Fair cop guv.
That’s the spirit, BB.
The Member for Maranoa agrees with me that Hawkie introduced the LCT.
No 307
The Member for Maranoa and Ruawake are both incorrect.
GP the Australian Technical Colleges are costing us 100, 000 dollars per child so far. Good value?
No 309
It would be no different to the cost of supplying a university a degree.
sorry should read “supply a university degree”
at costs of over $100k per student and barely 20% of the originally estimated enrollments you don’t see the rationale? lol
For the introduction of the LCT take a look at the legislation that brought it in. Also note the date.
http://www.aph.gov.au/Library/pubs/BD/1998-99/99bd156.htm
GP is correct.
No 312
But would it be cheaper than making every secondary school teach trades? I think not.
No 313
The pertinent sentence:
GB
Hawkie was the first to impose a tax on Luxury Vehicles, via Wholesale Sales Tax. When the GST was introduced it was supposed to replace the WST, but in the case of luxury cars it did not.
So to keep the revenue raised by the WST on luxury cars, Hammock introduced his LCT.
If Hawke had not raised the rate of WST on luxury cars, Hammock would not have introduced the LCT.
No 316
ruawake, luxury cars were simply subject to a higher WST rate. There was no additional separate tax.
I understand what you are saying but your last sentence says it all. Cossie did introduce the LCT.
Why would you need to make every secondary school teach trades? Plenty do it already and can be expanded, or the facilities added to existing schools. This specialisation that clearly wasnt thought out nor planned well (as per usual) was a dismal failure.
There was no need for a separate tax. That is why the GST is a dogs breakfast.
A fair point Dario. Why start from scratch?
No 319
Dario, read the ALP policy yourself:
http://www.alp.org.au/media/0507/msedutloo101.php
$2.5 billion for trades in every school. A far cry from the $440 million spent on Australian Technical Colleges.
OK how about this
Hawke taxed luxury cars at a rate of 23%
Hammock taxed luxury cars at a rate of 25%
Rudd taxed luxury cars at a rate of 30%.
No 322
So, Ms Gillard’s attack on the expense of ATCs was baseless.
No 323
Ruawake, Rudd intends to tax them at 33%.
GP
Yep you are correct.
What is it with ABC Radio News?
They announce that BOTH sides are guilty of plagiarism. They run Bishop’s question to Swan re. the June speech, including her last line, “Just who is the Treasurer and who is the Assistant Treasurer?”, and then fail to run Swan’s devastating answer to it: that the speech was writeen for EITHER the Treasurer or Asst. Treasurer to deliver, or both, as the occasion warranted.
They are clearly reporting pure spin from the Opposition in order to claim “balance”.
As I said GP, you don’t need to put trades in every school as it already exists in many so it can simply be expanded or improved at much less cost than building new specialised structures that can only service a much smaller number of students (due to locality factors), and couldn’t even manage 20% of their intended enrollments! An abject failure in anyone’s language.
No 328
Dario, the ALP policy is exactly what Gillard intends to introduce. By our own admission, the policy is a waste of money.
BB,
They probably picked it up from the Oz.
Turning the tables on the Treasurer during question time, Ms Bishop had a “gotcha” moment of her own after she revealed Mr Swan had lifted significant elements of a speech delivered by Assistant Treasurer Chris Bowen.
A clearly flustered Mr Swan seized on revelations on The Australian Online that Ms Bishop’s recent plagiarism gaffe had been linked to Malcolm Turnbull’s office but struggled to explain his own actions.]
Notice, again, no mention of Swan’s answer. Just a strong inference that Bishop got one up on Swan. Humbug.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24395945-601,00.html
other than showing they only managed 20% of intended enrollments, blew the original budget by $150 million and cost $100k per student…
How so GP? Making things up again?
No 332
Your words:
ALP policy:
The ABC can sometime be dishonest in their eagerness to support the Liberal party and are basically run by Howard’s hacks. There are however bastions of honesty holding out in places. They are of course at the moment trying to cover Bishop’s problem. But why bother? It would be immediately forgotten if they shut up about it – or maybe they just cant resist trying to stick a pin into Labor.
No 331
And the ALP’s answer is to spend 5 times as much money putting trade centres in all schools, instead of working to improve enrolments in the specialised trade colleges.
No 334
TP, the ABC is not an eager Liberal supporter and I’m astounded you accuse it of being as such given the well-known Bolshevik crusaders that regularly report for it.
That doesn’t say they will be newly built in all of them. Schools have to apply for the money and can expand their existing facilities if they already have them.
Let’s have a quick look at the program’s website…
http://www.tradetrainingcentres.deewr.gov.au/
You fail
by giving existing schools more money to do more, rather than plod on with a failed project which couldn’t manage even 20% of expected enrollments, blew its budget by $150 million or so and cost $100k per student
As for The Australian I dont read the trash and you don’t have to most of the time anyway as their angle is so predicable and do not very often bring anything valuable to the debate. They have ruined their own reputation. But I will be interested to see if murdoch is changing his attitude and some of the hacks get the boot. Maybe we could all sign a farewell card. (I did see Fox News crticising the McCain side yesterday!). But I wouldn’t hold my breath.
I tend to agree with Adam – we don’t have to read the thing anyway. And manay of those who do probably have well formed political opinions in anycase so wont be so easily duped or changed.
On another subject I believe it is time for Rudd to start economising his words and resist the temptation to supply all the gorey details. He also needs to add and or change some of his mannerisms and turns of phrase. The average Joe just wants to here the gist of it – not the whole structure. IMO
GP seems to be arguing against putting more money into education. I wonder where we’ve heard that before.
So instead of having the states and feds work together, you want them to compete against each other for enrollments?
I remember a time when conservatives believed in less government!
The Assistant Treasurer gave Swan’s speech. So Swan plagiarised his own speech.
No 340
I have no argument against additional spending, but the spending should be properly targeted. Putting trade centres into all schools will not do anything to a) increase the status of trade qualifications & b) stop the exodus out of trades and into university degrees.
No 341
Federal models entail decentralised power and competition between the states. So I fail to understand your point.
GP
Think of it this way, you are at school, you don’t want to be a lawyer or doctor, you want to be a sparky or chippy or dunny diver.
So instead of leaving at yr 10 you stay until yr 12 doing subjects that will help you in your chosen career. Good idea?
Or are yrs 11 and 12 only for those who want to go to university?
Opinion based on…?
Great use of jargon, but WTF are you talking about! They were separate technical colleges set up, funded, and run by the federal government.
We had state tafes and technical colleges, but instead of giving them more money as tied grants, the previous federal government set up a whole new federal bureaucracy to compete against what the states already had. It was big government conservatism at its absolute worst.
I remember a time when conservatives believed in less government!
No 338
Also, the Chamber of Commerce and Industry said that the ATC model was good and not the failure that Gillard thinks it was.
http://www.acci.asn.au/text_files/ACCI_Policy%20Review/2008/APRIssue4_May08.pdf
Who cares what the chamber of commerce and industry thinks. They spent nearly all of last year campaigning against Labor, then started sucking up after Labor won.
If they were a less partisan organisation they would be taken more seriously.
So who is the pretty boy now?
If you recall, one of the big differentiation during the last election was:
Howard’s Experienced Team of Ministers Vs Rudd’s L-Plate Pretenders. In particular Swannie, Gillard and Tanner were targetted as the weak link.
Well, the former has all but disappeared with the remnant of Abbott, Hockey, Robb and Bishop looking decidedly shaky. Whereas the L-platers, especially Swannie, Gillard and Tanner, looking confident and flying high.
GP
Thanks for bringing our attention to the locations of the ATCs.
The ACCI is simply a union with a more glorified title.
I watched QT this afternoon! Swan, Gillard and Chris Bowen were all over the Libs like a rash, you really didn’t notice the PM’s absence!
Who cares what you think? Your elitist denigration of opponents is obscene.
Hahhahah so the chamber of commerce and industry is an opposition group.
Well, that was my point.
Union thugs, you ain’t got no union thug, I’ll show you union thugs.
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/3297753a-8982-11dd-8371-0000779fd18c.html
Generic Person: still defending your Porsche driving mates?
“Your elitist denigration of opponents is obscene.”
And confected outrage? It is disgusting, despicable and unimaginably vile!
GP gets pretty funny when he falls in a heap
Fair go, confected outrage is easier than reasoned argument.
GP
The location of ATCs in National Party, Liberal Party or marginal seats is obscene.
As a close relative of a person involved in trades training policy development may I add a little to the debate. The main problem with competing state and federal systems of trade training is a long standing shortage of qualified trades teachers who are prepared to teach (despite the turndown in the economy tradespeople are still in very high demand). Having a few mega schools puts too large a strain on the teaching resources of a defined area, trades in schools requires only one or two teachers in whatever school district decides to participate in the scheme in order to be effective.
The new federal trades schools were to be trades only schools therefore giving students an either/or choice of continuing to HSC level or going to trade school or doing both cumulatively, where the trades in schools system will allow attaining a HSC and trade training simultaneously. The appeal of the trades in schools which has in effect been implemented over the years in a piecemeal fashion by the States is apparent, the students have voted with their feet.
Props to Inner Westie for 357.
By running directly to Brendan’s arms post 24-11, former ACCI chief executive, Peter Hendy, dispelled any silly talk about his impeccable impartiality.
I think ACCI was probably happy to see him go. They’ve been trying to repair their relationship with Labor ever since.
Hopefully now they realise that they can be a more effective pressure group if they aren’t constantly so partisan.
So who is the pretty boy now? Sorry WB, it’s off topic but it’s just too good to miss.
What was our Nic thinking? I always have a suspicion that Keith baby is rather useless. Somebody should bottle it.
http://www.straitstimes.com/Breaking%2BNews/Lifestyle/Story/STIStory_282010.html
That reminds me. Did Turnbull keep Hendy on as “his” Chief of Staff?
One of Nelson’s firs acts upon becoming leader was to engage Peter Hendy as chief-of-staff. Hendy, it must be remembered, was one of the originating architects of WorkChoices, as per the following article:
http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/last-push-to-realise-a-dream-of-30-years/2005/10/14/1128796712441.html
By the Liberal leader taking this action it is reasonable to conclude the Liberal Party is as committed as ever to radical workplace “reform”.
“WorkChoices” is dead by name only: its spirit burns hot and deep in the Liberal Party.
Has no-one explained the facts of life to Our Nicole?
I think I heard Brenda say “all my staff are unemployed”.
Maybe Nic was doing a bit of a tourism promo for Kununurra?
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/09/24/2373338.htm
Govt should be defending Joint Strike Fighter.
“Now the JSF is a very, very good aircraft for Australia and there’s a whole host of people who have said that.
“To compare it with the Russian Sukhois and Migs, the flankers as they’re called, is really not comparing apples with apples.”
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/09/22/2371412.htm
New fighter jets ‘could leave Australia vulnerable’
A Federal Opposition MP is demanding the Government’s plans to buy joint strike fighters be put on hold, saying there are serious concerns about the aircraft.
“Even against aircraft that are current and indeed superseded … for instance an F13 which was introduced into service over 30 years ago would comprehensively outperform the joint strike fighters.”
So in two days we have two completely opposite views from the rabble. Which is it? A good plane or a dog?
Well, the answer is no one knows, because the final capabilities haven’t even been decided on.
Re ’stand alone’ tech schools.
Many of these were to be established in regional areas. This means that they would have ‘bled’ students from smaller regional centres.
Take a student out of a small regional school and you threaten its very existence.
With every student that goes, the school’s ability to offer programs for those remaining contracts – staff numbers fall, and thus the number of subjects available. This creates a vicious circle – a student who doesn’t want to leave to go to a tech will leave because, for example, the local school is no longer able to offer music courses.
Tech schools also cut off options for the students who go there. I’ve worked at a school which recently split into two campuses – one tech, one academic. Students had to choose their subjects accordingly, and most of them were furious.
Just because you’re planning to do law at Uni doesn’t mean you don’t want to do Art in Year 11; similarly, just because you want to do Fashion Design or Mechanics doesn’ t mean you also don’t want to do Australian History.
By offering tech courses at ‘normal’ schools all students have a wider range of options available to them and can explore subjects not directly related to their area of study – which in some cases can lead to the discovery that, damn it, you don’t want to be an auto mechanic (or a lawyer) after all, because you’ve done that very interesting semester of graphic design.
Channeling children – because that’s what they are – into careers too early does not lead to a flexible, adaptive work force. Making major life decisions at fourteen or fifteen is really asking a bit much, especially in today’s world. Students should have as many options available to them as possible and should be encouraged to explore these.
Tax Laws Amendment (Medicare Levy Surcharge Thresholds) Bill 2008
Commenced 5:38 PM
Negatived at second reading Senate divided: Ayes 33; Noes 33
Dennis Jensen says its a dog, David Johnston says it will “dominate the region”. I bet Dennis has had a phone call. “Hey Dennis we don’t need JSF skeptics”.
If you’ve been watching any commercial free television lately, you’ll know that the ABC Shop is currently flogging a truly fabulous collection of songs called BBQ Kings – Fellowship of the Grill.
Joe Hockey (the original barbecue tenor) makes a stunning guest appearance on track 8, Let It Go; Christopher Pyne – a slightly less accomplished barbecue performer – provides some sweet harmonies on track 4, Bugger It; but here’s the real surprise, Peter Hendy, blasting out a faultless falsetto scat on track 14, It’s All In The Swing.
If he must quit Canberra, I have no doubt there’s a big future for Hendy in casino cabaret or regional RSL work. The man is an undiscovered genius!
No 374
Excellent.
Steve Fielding and the Rabble will have to explain to 300,000 people why they did not get to reduce their tax burden.
Jensen is the one who thinks we can all relax because global warming is happening on Mars.
No 359
There was no reasoned argument when you discarded the opinion of the ACCI, which is interesting considering that the document to which I linked was written in May this year, after Hendy left.
No 378
The only rabble is the ALP who cannot fathom the reasoning behind the levy: to encourage private health cover take-up.
No 364
Their efforts must have been monumental because Gillard has simply implemented Workchoices Lite, sans AWAs.
I thought Liberals were all about choice? If people value private health insurance they will keep it, if they don’t they will opt not to have it.
Why force people?
No 383
No-one is being forced or coerced.
Furthermore, the ALP has failed to explain the impacts on the public health system and the subsequent increase in private health premiums as a result of a mass exodus of people to the public system.
384
As I’ve said before, GP, by that argument private health premiums should have fallen dramatically and the public health system improved vastly when the levy was introduced. These things didn’t happen.
One can only conclude, therefore, that there is no link between them.
To add to 384: http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/take-pressure-off-hospitals-nsw-auditorgeneral/2008/09/24/1222217291060.html
Get Private health insurance or get taxed more – I call that forced.
How many people with Private Health insurance say they have no insurance when they go to a public hospital? Most of them.
Would you agree to legislation linking Private Health status to Medicare records?
So the “choice” is between a costly commercial product that you partially fund by way of tax and a free public service that you fully fund by way of tax?
Where are the Sink-or-swimmers with conviction these days? They’d see this for what it is …
No 385
Not at all zoomster. Health costs don’t suddenly fall because their privatised. The difference is that the private system can provide health care more efficiently, rather than rationing it as in the public system.
By removing the levy, everyone except the Government agrees that their will be a flood of patients going back to the public system. That can only mean higher premiums and poorer public health.
Public health funding does not come from thin air.
Proof?
Yes.
GP, but that’s the way the Howard Government – who had access the exactly the same modelling the present govt. had – sold it at the time.
Private health was going to become cheaper and public hospitals were going to be under less pressure.
Obviously the Howard Government’s prediction was wrong.
If a policy doesn’t work out the way it was supposed to, surely it should be adjusted?
GP
Get real, Private Hospitals in Australia do bugger all, the centers of excellence in all major health areas are in public hospitals.
The only Private guy I use is at the Mater Private Medical Centre in Brisbane – because I could not get an appointment with a heamatologist on the Sunny Coast, (they were all taking no new patients) but all my treatment is done at Nambour Hospital.
If I had Private Health insurance I would still be treated at Nambour. Private Health insuarance is a con and it costs the public health system $4 billion a year.
Btw, in 389, they’re not their.
No 392
Meaningless platitudes.
I wouldn’t call Dr Jayant Patel a “centre of excellence”, nor would I call Royal North Shore hospital in Sydney a “centre of excellence”, wherein babies are miscarried in toilets.
“I wouldn’t call Dr Jayant Patel a “centre of excellence”, nor would I call Royal North Shore hospital in Sydney a “centre of excellence”, wherein babies are miscarried in toilets.”
Misleading selectivism.
RNS has the leading spinal injury clinic in Australia. You really are out of your depth GP.
Which of course is modelled on the Sir George Bedbrook Spinal UNit at the Shenton Park Campus of Royal Perth Hospital in WA
No 396
ruawake, I appreciate you’re a Queenslander, but RNS has been in and out of the news in NSW for years thanks to its mismanagement and scandals.
No 395
What’s misleading? Are you disputing that Dr Jayant Patel’s heinous treatment of patients in QLD? Are you disputing that RNS allowed a lady to miscarry in the toilets?
Someone should give Joe Hockey a tape of his performances in QT. Maybe then he will realise how he comes over as a puerile lown.
I meant “clown”
BK, as part of the new order around here, I’m requiring that comments have a bit more meat on their bones than “politician X is a puerile clown”.
Fair enough William – no more like that.
But he still should have a good look at himself.
GP
While I have empathy for the poor lady involved a similar thing happened to a friend of mine 30 years ago in Canberra. Its not pleasant but it happens every day. The triage nurse made the correct decision, it was not a life threatening situation, unfortunately the foetus was dead.
Patel should probably not have been doing the operations he did, but as he is before the courts I will let them decide.
Can you explain what Private Hospitals do? Can you explain the benefits of Private Health Insurance?
Fair enough. Jackie Kelly’s involvement in the fake leaflet debacle last November implied the whole LP campaign was dysfunctional?
(Actually …)
WB, clearly you meant “puerile lown”.
I have know many lowns in my life, but only a minority of them were puerile.
No 404
1. choice of doctor
2. choice of hospital
3. ambulance cover
4. cover for non-urgent operations and other things like dental, podiatry, home nursing etc etc
There are more benefits and we could discuss them forever. The fact is that private health cover does not leave patients to the whims and rations of the public system.
I am strongly of the view that the public system should merely exist as a safety net for the disadvantaged. Everyone else should pay for their own cover.
Wrong, you get the same doctor in private or public. You think they don’t work in both?
Try getting a bone marrow transplant in a private hospital
I live in Qld. Covered by a levy on my electicity bill.
So you can get these things if you pay extra? Is this worth $4 billion a year?
1. Choice of doctor – absolutely never in any circumstance have I had any problem getting ‘my’ doctor (not that I’m that fussed anyway). But a friend of mine, who took out health insurance just so a particular doctor would deliver her baby, unfortunately gave birth whilst he was on holiday…
2. Choice of hospital – ditto.
3. Ambulance cover – dirt cheap to get without private health insurance. So I have it.
4. For which you pay extra (and then extra).
A few years ago, a friend went to buy private health insurance locally (expecting first child). The salesperson (a bit of a misnomer, as it turned out) asked her why, saying, “You’ll end up in the same hospital with the same doctor. If anything goes wrong, you’ll be flown down to the Royal Children’s. Whether you’ve got insurance or not won’t make a bit of difference.”
As it happened, her baby had a major lifethreatening congenital condition – they were flown down to the Royal, spent something like six weeks there. There were follow up stays in the following years, and constant intensive monitoring of her next pregnancy, overseen by world class specialists. Cost: nix.
I have had a couple of major operations myself over the last ten years. I have never ever been told that I would be better off if I took out private health insurance.
ruawake @ 371 -
Which is it? A good plane or a dog?
Depends on what you plan on doing with it. The critical sentence in the article you linked is:
“To compare it with the Russian Sukhois and Migs, the flankers as they’re called, is really not comparing apples with apples.”
The Russian aircraft are large air superiority fighters designed to take on the opposition’s best fighters and guard against penetrating bombers.
The F-35 is a multi-role fighter primarily suited for ground attack (the give away is the wings which are optimised for trans-sonic speeds or below), but with some stealth characteristics and a better than average radar and electronics pack. If you like an A-10 that can defend itself. It’s the aircraft the USAF would send in to support ground operations after the F-22s have sweep the battle area of all the enemy fighters they can find with the expectation the F-35 might handle the odd missed A-S fighter. But I doubt they’d fancy its chances against a number of them.
The problem with the F-35 limited internal weapons capacity – 2 bomb/missile bays, one of which we would probably need to fill with an auxiliary fuel tank, plus 2 smaller bays for short range side-winder class air-to-air missiles. Of couse you can hang extra ordnance/fuel tanks off wing pylons, but that immediately destroys the stealth. How much this matters is a matter of debate. We won’t be getting the full kit with radar absorbing coatings, apparently Howard’s special relationship with GWB had limits, and the air-intakes and nozzle (which reflect radar the most) profile is optimised for X-band radars. Against radars operating outside the band it might be less effective.
Another potential problem is that to get anywhere near reasonable performance out of the F-35 its single engine will be running far hotter than any military engine has to date. What effect this will have on reliability is anyones guess.
And that is not the only thing that is subject to guessing. The final production design still hasn’t been finalised. Until it is we can’t know if it’ll meet whatever requirements we’ve set. Anyone signing on the dotted line ATM will be buying a pig in a poke, lipstick optional.
We should have taken a long hard look at the Eurofighter Typhoon, the RAF’s choice for the A-S role but the then Defence Minister Robert unilaterally decided on the F-35 before the RAAF had even looked at the Typhoon, or, as a lower cost option, the F-15s the Koreans are building.
I would like to stand up for the NSW Health Service.
3 months ago I had a grandson born with CHARGE syndrome. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charge_syndrome
CHARGE syndrome is a genetic defect that leaves a fair proportion (varies with acuteness) of the “”plumbing” of the body, from the groin to the skull, deformed. It is a 1-in-10,000 birth defect that has no known cause. In other words: just bad luck.
This little guy, Drew, was born with a co-arctation of the aorta (think of a pinched garden hose, restricting flow), undescended testicles, dual lower abdominal hernias, defective hearing, defective sight, probable intellectual disability, an inability to suckle or swallow and severe growth retardation. Since day #1 he has been connected to tubes: tubes to help him breathe, to eat, and to defecate. It’s likely he’ll have 20 major surgical procedures before he’s 6 years old and then he still might not make it.
To fix his aorta the NSW Care Flight service flew him and his mother immediately from Port MacQuarie (where he was born) to Randwick Women’s Hospital. The operation was performed by a specialist pediatric heart surgeon flown in urgently from Melbourne (where he was on holiday). His care – three weeks intensive – was arranged without delay or demur. He had a 24-hour senior nurse at his side (and his side alone) for the whole of that time. His mother was put up in the Nurses’ home for the whole period. At the end of his convalescence he and his mum were flown back to Port MacQuarie.
The whole process was repeated for his abdominal surgery, except the surgeon was local and not flown in from Melbourne.
He has been hospitalized ever since, on drips, tubes and life support. Tomorrow, three specialist surgeons and physicians, plus DOCS, Medicare and local social workers will attend Port MacQuarie Hospital to deliver their assessment of his condition and an interim prognosis.
In all this effort to save the little guy’s life the only thing his mother – or any other individual – has had to pay for has been her food and the odd packet of cigarettes, plus some baby clothes for her son.
I don’t know about you, but I reckon that’s a pretty good deal from a supposedly totally dysfunctional NSW health system. It makes me rather proud to be an Australian, hokey and maudlin a sentiment as that may seem.
There’s a bit of disinformation here about health from both sides.
1. Choice of doctor? Basically you get whoever your GP sends you to in private. Most of the public and GPs don’t know who’s good (most of the time it doesn’t matter). In public, you are going to be treated by a trainee registrar if your problem is simple and a consultant if it’s difficult.
2. Choice of hospital? No. You pretty much go where the specialist operates.
3. Cover for non-urgent operations. This is a HUGE reason to have private health insurance. My department has 1500 patients waiting to get into outpatients to be seen, let alone being on the waiting list. Public hospitals have basically stopped doing non-urgent operations. Being able to choose WHEN you have your surgery is also a big thing for some people.
4. The stillbirth or Patel could have happened anywhere. Serious stuff-ups are MUCH more likely to happen in PRIVATE hospitals. Basically, there are no checks and balances in private. You can do whatever you want. There’s quite a few wackos there who have been thrown out of public hospitals. If you are really sick, have complications or require complex care, you’re much better off in public although private hospitals now have excellent ICUs.
No 408
Yes, they work in both. But your claim that you have no choice of doctor is rubbish. If you want Dr X, you will have a good chance of getting Dr X. In the public system, you get whomever is assigned to you – there is no choice.
Point taken. But nine times out of ten, you can choose your own hospital.
Not covered in NSW or VIC. Not sure about other states.
Many non-urgent operations are not covered by Medicare and have large up-front costs which are in most cases covered by private health insurance.
I agree that the subsidy is questionable, but the result has been an increase in health insurance take up from 30% in 1998 to 43% today.
BB
Well said, our public health system is the best in the world – it would be better if we could get over the ideological crud.
As some know I have incurable blood cancer (leukeamia) I have never had private health insurance, I get world class treatment that is the envy of others in different countries.
GP should look at the facts, not newspaper headlines. Or would he prefer the US system where health insurance can cost more than a mortgage, or where people move states to get coverage under medicaid?
Yes! I have friends in California who pay $2,450 US dollars MONTHLY for health insurance. Lucky they can afford it.
No, I do not advocate a US system. No-one should die because they cannot afford healthcare.
I’m in a Victorian country town (as do the cases I’ve cited). So I know I’ll get whatever doctor I ask for. And, as I said, ambulance cover is dirt cheap (just paid it for the family, can’t remember the amount, but about $50 a year).
Two years ago, I had sinus surgery (obviously non essential – one of those ‘must be fixed up sometime’ things). Was referred to the specialist of my choice, saw him within the month, having had a MRI at the local regional hospital in the interim. Came out of the specialist’s with an agreed date for the operation (matter of months), could have been earlier if I’d wanted. From the day I requested the reference to the post-op visit to the specialist was less than three months.
My mother saw one of the top ENTs in the country recently. He said he didn’t care whether she had insurance or not, if he decided he needed to operate she would be in the hospital within days.
BB
My daughter was in a similar situation. I would only use public hospitals for her conditions.
GP
Public hospitals cover the cost of all of these operations but they hardly ever perform them. The up front costs occur when you have them done in private.
BB @ 415,
We have two children, now 7 and 10. [I've 2 older children 22 & 19 from a previous marraige]. For those younger two, they were both born in the US. We had health insurance and in spite of that, still had between $3000 to $5000 OUT OF POCKET expenses over the course of the whole pregnancy and delivery. The US health insurance [or lack thereof of a proper coverage] really needs to be fixed. I hope that between people like Hillary and Senatory Kennedy and others, that they can fix this under an Obama presidency ….. You wouldn’t have those kind of out of pocket expenses here in Australia.
BB
Or where insurance companies decide which doctors you can see, try seeing an “out of network” doctor in the US. The $2,450 is common plus they have a co-pay.
GP you may not be advocating a US style health care system but:
Can only result in a US style system.
Oh dear. Fielding is living in bizzaro world:
http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,24396616-421,00.html
I believe he was also concerned about how the luxury car tax and the highest income tax bracket, may impact on low income earners.
So you want the Liberal policy circa 1984.
At least they’ve moved on.
If Rudd wants a DD trigger up his sleeve the MLS is the one. Feilding knows his re-election is very unlikely – his seat will turn Green in a DD.
Time for a bit of blowtorch. Re-introduce the bill without amendments. Do the Fibs really want a Medicare election?
Fielding is a puerile lown.
This poor hayseed from a church that has as one of its basic tenets “enterprise theology” (i.e. Jesus wanted you to be rich) is way out of depth in the Senate. Those glasses don’t help, either. They reinforce the “bunny in the headlights” look about the poor sod.
He is now holding back direct tax benefits to tens of thousands of Australian battlers who could use the savings to pay off their mortgage, or maybe get their kids’ teeth in braces, perhaps even go one better than instant noodles for dinner every second night.
And who’s this all for? A few pensioners who think (and whom have got Fielding to SAY he thinks) they need private insurance. At least that’s his stated objection.
Senator Abetz last night read out the Riot Act to Fielding in the upper chamber. The pressure was naked. “Perform buddy, or its your damn head.”
To me, Fielding is weak. He has not much spine left. I believe that if Labor show him the implements of torture he’ll cave. There is so much latent joy in looking into the finances of Hillsong; the way they have squandered government grants; how they have manipulated their position into one of patronage under Howard (now gone of course). I don’t believe it will take too much more energy to get the Fundie Senator to flip. He must know he’s a dead man walking. He should do some good before the axe falls.
Labor will play softly, softly with Feilding until he has shown his hand on all the bills before the Senate. Alco-pops and condensate to go.
Then he will need to check his gonads frequently because Labor and Libs will be after them.
Fielding was interviewed on local ABC radio recently. He referred to the ‘massive’ demonstration in Melbourne in support of a rise for pensioners – turned out he was referring to the two hundred? (if that) who turned up to strip off in public.
If he thinks that’s massive, then perhaps three pensioners ringing him up about the Medicare levy is his idea of a grassroots movement.
Interestingly, after the interview the lines were thrown open for public comment. Now, this is a very conservative electorate. Normally they’re slavering at the opportunity to lay into a Labor government. In this segment, however, every one who rang in (and this included several pensioners) said it was better to wait and have it all sorted out properly.
Absolutely! The common wisdom is that all pensioners are chafing at the bit to oust Rudd and his bunch of class traitors as soon as practicable.
The same “wisdom” said that the alcopops tax was a no-brainer loser for Labor. Yet a Newspoll today showed 57% in favour of the rationalisation (I refuse to call it a “hike”) under ANY circumstances, and a whopping 80% in favour if the alcopops tax was directed to health expenditure.
Methinks “common wisdom” might not be so common. Of course the polls evidence my contention, yet the MSM keeps on writing “Labor is reeling under the pressure of xxx” articles.
Clowns would have an excuse. Lowns do not.
‘Get Up’ have a ‘Project Democracy’ site that will inform you of the activity of your selected member in parliament and allows you email them.
I sent Xenophon a raz the other day though he is not my member. Fielding will no doubt cop a bunch of complaints too.
http://www.projectdemocracy.com/?dc=499,7897,3
“Lown”.
Sounds like Barnaby may be easier to shift than Fielding:
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24396663-601,00.html
Oh OK, if private health insurance is that important, why don’t we give everyone a 100% rebate on their private health insurance bills. Or why don’t we nationalise it, and call it Medicare II.
Whether or not people join or stay in private health insurance is a private matter for individuals to decide on based on their weekly and monthly household budgets. Subsidising private companies isn’t a job for government, especially when they are effectively in competition against a publicly funded system.
Shows On
But then there wouldn’t be need for those great ads with the umbrellas – you know the ones that promised if we were all “encouraged” to join before we were 30 the premiums would stay low… Must check to see how that’s going…
Don’t the Libs believe in private enterprise. That government should keep it’s nose out of private companies? That private companies should be allowed to flourish or flounder on their own merits? Hmm, but the Libs want to prop up private health funds.
I think it is Libs believe in anything that gives money to big business including taxpayer money.
Gary
In the UK, the private system is totally separate from the public system. Medicare (or whatever they have) doesn’t contribute to private health, to the best of my knowledge. So private health is really expensive and only about 10% have it.
They don’t believe in true competition, just look what they did with Telstra. If they had any sense they would’ve broken it up before selling it, but they just wanted a few big payments, instead of actually restructuring the sector to improve competition.
That’s why broadband in our country is a mess. I live on the edge of the metro area but can’t even get ADSL broadband because it won’t work with my phone line.
Intersting Question Time today (well ok, not really but…) Turnbull seems to be letting others ask a lot more questions than Nelson did; at least today they didn’t sdo their usual schtick of asking each quesiton using the same into (eg “does the government really understand…”) – although yestarday it was all “Why can the PM go all the way to NY but he can’t …
I can’t say Turbull is any better than Nelson thus far in parliamentary terms. And I think Turbull is much less comfortable with the “on indulgence” speeches (though admittedly Nelson just lived for them).
No 436
ShowsOn, structural separation would not have solved your woes. Every other major telecommunications company in the world is vertically integrated because it provides cost synergies in an industry where high capital costs are involved.
A structurally separated incumbent would result in duopolistic market conditions as the biggest players in the market would be favoured over the smaller players. The current market, despite its flaws, is highly competitive with hundreds of ISPs offering fixed line and wireless services. Furthermore, regardless of size, every ISP has equal access rights to the Telstra copper network.
No 431
I agree. But the issue here is not the private health care rebate, but the medicare levy.
Oh OK, so lets copy what everyone else in the world does even if it is really stupid.
I guess that gives you SYNERGY with your approach to climate change!
This is not what I was suggesting. I was proposing a system where any company that wants gets access to the same hardware at the same fee. Instead of the current system where Telstra sets the fee, and then charges its own ISP – Bigpond – lower fees than it charges every other company. Face facts, it’s a complete mess created by the Liberal Party’s communications policy.
This is absolute rubbish because ISPs have to rent Telstra’s DSLAMs at inflated prices. They can pay to install their own DSLAMs, but now Telstra is saying that they don’t have enough space left in their exchanges!
It’s actually the Medicare surcharge levy – a tax introduced by the previous government.
You know, that government that supposedly didn’t like taxing people.
ShowsOn @ 441 -
A t..ttt..tax? But….but… isn’t that legalised theft??
The previous government also introduced, wait for it, the luxury car TAX! (25%)
They also introduced the wine equalisation tax
They also introduced a 1 cent per litre tax on every litre of milk as compensation for industry deregulation.
They also introduced a tax on imported ethanol!
That previous government enjoyed legalising theft.
What a cop out. You don’t have an argument.
That’s exactly what happens now. The problem is, it’s always one rule for Telstra and one rule for the rest. Why do you think broadband investment has stagnated? Because it’s cheaper to gain access to cheap, regulated copper than it is to invest in new networks.
Rubbish. Telstra cannot sell retail broadband services at a lower price than it wholesales those services. Also, how do you explain the fact that nearly all competitors sell broadband at cheaper rates than Bigpond?
That’s just a delusion, not a fact. Australia has a very competitive broadband market with hundreds of companies supply services via wireless HSPA, DSL and HFC cable.
Rubbish, if the prices are so inflated then explain how all those competing ISPs manage to supply those wholesaled Telstra services at prices significantly below Bigpond?
Not even Telstra can defy the laws of physics.
Diogenes,
Thanks for your contribution at 412. It really cut through the crap!
My better half (also a medico) always reckons you definitely want private if you think you’re going to get that troublesome knee replaced, etc, etc.
But if you wake up at 3 in the morning with severe pain in the chest and left arm, don’t stuff around, head straight for the nearest large public hospital!
Now, now ShowsOn, to hightlight the Liberal’s hypocracy on tax is one thing but to rub GP’s nose in it, that’s another. That’s gold.
No 443
The new government, even more so.
Because Telstra doesn’t want to face more competition.
So instead they just don’t let other companies access things like their Foxtel cable network, which should be open to competition.
Thank you for supporting my point. They shouldn’t OWN the exchanges. If they didn’t they wouldn’t be able to hold other ISPs to ransom.
Wow! All of a sudden taxation policy isn’t so black and white…
OT but latest US Poll, Obama out to a 9 point lead over McCain.
No 448
Nonsense. Terria, one of the major consortium’s bidding on the National Broadband Network is seeking a protected monopoly to stop anyone competing with their investment should they win the tender. Telstra is not seeking one.
News Flash: Optus has had a competing HFC cable network for the same amount of time. The ACCC need not intervene where there is already infrastructure competition.
In reality your idea is that Telstra should do all the investment, but let everyone else leech of the network. Sorry, but not only is that absurd, it’s not even real competition because everyone would simply compete on price rather than on innovation and new services.
I don’t support your point because it’s arrant nonsense.
Yes they should. Telstra shareholders paid for them.
More rubbish. All the ISPs below Telstra, particularly iiNet, Internode and Optus, are experiencing massive growth.
The idea that they’re being held to ransom just isn’t supported by the reality.
scorpio, it’s the narrowing…
The Libs introduce a GST (”T” standing for “legalised theft”) on just about everything, along with ShowsOn’s list and Labor “enjoys legalising theft” even more than the Libs? Is this man serious?
It does, because it’s principal argument for the recent tax increases is that the Liberals introduced them.
No 454
Its not it’s.
No 451
consortiums/consortia not consortium’s
Gp -Oh, that explains it then. What are you talking about?
No 452
Dario when is the first debate?
Friday night US time I think… Sat morning for us. Should be on ABC TV.
No 457
The ALP enjoys stealing from people more so than the previous government, otherwise we’d have a better argument underpinning the tax increases (LCT, alcopops etc) than “well, the Libs introduced them”. Oh, so that makes it all better….
If Rudd and Swan were serious, they’d abolish these dumb taxes (yes, dumb, even though Cossie introduced them), and actually walk the walk on their “root and branch” reform of the system.
Debate screening info
http://www.abc.net.au/corp/pubs/media/s2369375.htm
No 461
Cheers Dario.
So giving $30b tax in income cuts while raising other taxes only by a billion somehow means this government taxes more than the previous one? You need to check your maths GP.
that should have read ‘$30b in income tax cuts’
GP
The Labor Government’s tax take as a % of GDP fell by a full percentage point in this year’s budget, so even it it true what you say that the ALP enjoys stealing from people, they do so to a lesser extent than the former government: 06/07 26.6%, 07/08 26.9%, 08/09 25.9%.
Let me get this straight GP, because the Libs introduced a “legalised theft” and Labor wants to increase or decrease it (Medicare levy for some) that means Labor “enjoys legalising theft” even more than the Libs who introduced the GST as wellas that tax in the first place. I don’t get it.
No 465
This is getting boring. Who cares.
There seems to be huge volatility. Early last week McCain was up by 20 E.C. votes according to this:
http://www.pollster.com/
Now he’s trailing by over 60. It seems that the bad economy is working for Obama, which makes sense, last time there was a Democrat in the White House the budget was balanced, and the economy was actually growing. And of course Democratic administrations going back to the 1930s produce – on average – higher economic growth than Republican administrations. Curiously, Republican administrations on average spend more than Democrats.
http://articles.latimes.com/2005/apr/03/opinion/oe-kinsley3
{Dario when is the first debate?}
GP, what happened to Google.
Not getting lazy again are you?
This is wrong. The tax to GDP ratio of this years budget shows a reduction compared to the last budget of the previous government. Therefore, by your absurd standards, the previous government enjoys stealing more than the current government.
I think a process of self-reflexivity has occurred!
I still can’t believe Fielding voted to keep a tax on middle class families, even after an extra $600 million has already been put into public hospitals.
I hope the Victorian ALP refuse to do any deals with him at the next election. In fact, they should go out of their way making voters aware that he voted to retain such a stupid tax on families who aren’t rich.
Hello!
“The previous government also introduced, wait for it, the luxury car TAX! (25%)
They also introduced the wine equalisation tax
They also introduced a 1 cent per litre tax on every litre of milk as compensation for industry deregulation.
They also introduced a tax on imported ethanol!”
Not to mention
the electricity delivery tax
the plumber tax
the water delivery tax
the motel tax
the telephone provider tax
the electrician tax
the hot but not cold chicken tax
the heater repair tax
the internet provider tax
the concreter tax
the roofer tax
the computer repair tax
the air conditioner repair tax
the carpenter tax
the cable guy tax
the builder tax
the brickie tax
the interior decorator tax
the carwash tax
the dogwash tax
the hogwash tax
the all the services I cant think of at the moment tax
and of course, the tax on tax
ShowsOn,
It’s not just about the money. You also have to turn the money into doctors, nurses and facilities.
Not sure how much I trust such glorious institutions as the NSW Health Department to be able to do that.
ShowsOn, I note you’ve admitted defeat by not continuing to debate broadband.
Sure, but I think the public health system will work better with $600 million going in, rather than the previous decade which saw $1 billion in real terms taken out.
Oh so sorry! You were BORING me, so I no longer CARED.
I was going to reply to it in detail, but I read this:
I couldn’t stop laughing, because most of Telstra’s phone exchanges were actually paid for by Australian TAXPAYERS, using money appropriated out of general revenue when Telstra was called P.M.G, and later Telecom Australia.
ShowsOn @ 467 -
And of course Democratic administrations going back to the 1930s produce – on average – higher economic growth than Republican administrations. Curiously, Republican administrations on average spend more than Democrats.
So do the Libs. Both have this carefully crafted image of being the parties of small government, low taxes, and all round fiscal conservative superior economic managers, but in reality they are the exact opposite.
Unfortunately, the Big Lie techniqu