The latest weekly Essential Research survey (which gets its own thread in Newspoll off-weeks when there’s no Galaxy poll on the Sunday) has Labor recovering from an unheralded dip over the past fortnight, its two-party lead increasing from 56-44 to 58-42. Also featured are questions on leadership preference, which find Julia Gillard favoured over Malcolm Turnbull 39 per cent to 34 per cent and Kevin Rudd favoured over Gillard 63 per cent to 14 per cent, and expectations regarding the economy.
UPDATE (2/12/08): Today’s Courier-Mail provides further figures from yesterday’s Galaxy poll of 800 voters in Queensland, showing 38 per cent would like to go back to John Howard and Peter Costello, against 54 per cent preferring Kevin Rudd and Wayne Swan.
706 Comments
We don’t need to cut emissions by 100%. But we do need to cut them more than Wong and Rudd’s target.
Doesn’t matter which one the Libs trot out as leader, does it?
….
OT to federal polls but on topic for WA (and Antony was moaning about Tasmania going to fixed terms) …..
If successful, the legislation would mean the Barnett government sitting for almost four and half years.
If I recall correctly, when Lablor proposed such a move, it was opposed by the now Liberal government.
Haha
Mesmerelda’s cat claw outburst today in the house at Julia the magnificent shown on Ch 9 news in sydney. As I said at the time old mesma realised she had been sprung by the camera just after the dummy spit.
TPD and the limited news mob are not going to like that.
That should be of course Labor
JULIE Bishop has the stench of political death about her.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24733596-5013871,00.html
Love it.
The Oz don’t appear to be too happy after Bishop’s latest spray at them and Chris Mitchell.
They have reprinted Peter van Onselen’s well directed retort at Bishop in the The Sunday Telegraph. He didn’t miss with this well directed broadside. Today’s QT will help him along with a bit more ammunition.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24733596-5013871,00.html
After all this and the Essential Research figures comparing her to Julia, I don’t think she will be able to hold out too much longer.
I would love the next couple of Polls to do a comparision with Swannie.
Did they compare Julie to Julia?
The new WA parliament could sit for almost four and a half years in any case – if the Assembly’s first sitting is after August 31, its term expires on January 31 four and a bit years later.
Julie Bishop’s interview with Virginia Trioli is a good example of what Peter Onselen was pointing out about Bishop’s relationship with the “Peter Principle”. She thought she was answering “Dorothy Dixers” in QT, going by her responses here.
I feel sorry for Glen though. She is somewhat of a heroine to him. GP has been a bit quiet on it too.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24732796-5013871,00.html
Funny how this one was picked up and printed in the on-line Oz also.
but of course this would only apply to the Legislative Assembly, the Upper House would still have fixed terms as at present.
Sorry, OZ, my bad. Julia V Turnbull. Although I’m sure I saw a comparison between Deputies somewhere.
Frank @ 3
I’m pretty sure Barnett wasn’t leader when they opposed it, because as far as I can remember he’s always supported fixed terms. (Well, at least since he’s been leader second time around.)
Are the OO always so careless?
Re
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24732296-5013871,00.html
Climate meeting is in Poznan not Ponzan.
And the Nationals are not crossing the floor to vote with Labor as far I understand it.
I don’t know why people bother with these ridiculous Essential Research polls. They’re hideously pro Labor – so much so that one is lead to believe that mostly ALP and GetUP! members signed up to their database.
“I don’t know why people bother with these ridiculous Essential Research polls. They’re hideously pro Labor – so much so that one is lead to believe that mostly ALP and GetUP! members signed up to their database.”
Maybe we’d listen to you if the polls were in normal territory. But at ALP 55%+ for all polls, we do not.
A very telling paragraph.
Their response to the financial crisis would be to cut corporate tax and reintroduce Workchoices.
Peter van Onselen writes:
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24733596-5013871,00.html
So she was given the Shadow Treasurer’s job why? The token female on the front bench? The Julie to “match” Julia?
“They’re hideously pro Labor”, “obsene” even. lol
Wow, I just saw it on the ABC news, Bishop lashed out at Julia exactly like a cat.
The hate in her eyes. She must resign ! I’m telling you she was a cat in a past life LOL.
“So she was given the Shadow Treasurer’s job why?”
As deputy leader of the party, she had the right to choose.
And take away the independence of the Reserve Bank by that comment.
Back to your WorkChoices, Julie. LOL
Julie Bishop. Australia’s Sara Palin.
A cat in a party of fans of a carrier of the Bubonic Plague? How can this be?!
I bet Turnbull would like to “workchoice” her at present.
Anyone know if politicians are on individual or collective agreements? If Workchoices was still around, would they also have negotiated their own contracts? And with whom?
Interest rates will always be lower under a Labor Government!
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/business/story/0,28124,24733615-5018001,00.html
Amigo Ronnie,
The person who took this famous photo:
http://www.smh.com.au/ffximage/2008/12/01/mumbai_gunman_wideweb__470×368,0.jpg
said the gunmen were shooting at the railway station for about 45mins before any police or military arrived. The “SAS” of India took 9 hours to reach Mumbai and then it took them 3 days to flush out 10 terrorists.
To blame Pakistan for this attack is like to blame Saudi Arabia for 9/11 because the majority of 9/11 terrorists were from Saudi.
The Indians should really have a very good look at themselves. Too many Chiefs and not enough Indians in India.
Oz, no they must be under an Award. Hockey said that under a Statutory Contract that he would be on at least double what he was currently paid.
Pity they pushed that workchoices so hard. he is now on far less than he was on prior to November 24th, 2007.
The Finnigans,
According to a report I read, there were 60 police on duty at the railway station when the “two” gunmen attacked.
A discussion on the Bishop balls-up over at Larvatus Prodeo
http://larvatusprodeo.net/2008/12/01/live-by-the-sword/
Celebrate last year’s result at John Howard’s Commanding Performance” where “The Poll that Counts” video series is being reprised.
Well the 7:30 Report just reminded me of a fact that should be compulsorily knowledge before anyone’s allowed to support the Liberals on education.
Last 10 years of spending on education – Every single OECD country up! Australia down.
Mr van Onselen today laughed off suggestions that he was obsessed with Ms Bishop.
“Not that I am aware. No, no,” he said.
Asked what his wife thought about the suggestion, he replied, “My wife is closer to my age than Julie, there’s no doubt about that,” he said.
What Pete really meant is he has “lamb” at home and isn’t interested in “mutton”…..
Here’s the video of Julie B snarling and clawing at Julia for those of us who won’t watch TV news.
Duel of the Jules! Gillard and Bishop get catty
http://livenews.com.au/Articles/2008/12/01/Dual_of_the_Jules_Gillard_and_Bishop_get_catty
It is surprising that MUP’s publisher, Louise Adler, has been so breezily dismissive of suggestions that Liberals and Power be recalled due to its fraudulent content. I mean, a whole effing chapter was plagiarised! No doubt Norma Khouri, Helen Darville and even, gasp, the immortal Ern Malley, will be harassing Adler over the Christmas break in hopes of a new book deal …
wow
go bush for two weeks and the fiberals are doing more turns than a catherine wheel.
why has bishop gone feral?was she having a bad hair day?how in hell is she the deputy?who cares
Can’t you just see that on the front pages of tomorrows papers.
What goes around does come around
Gusface
Bishop has also told everyone about a charming episode when she was four. Her sister was on the swing and Julie wanted it. So she got an axe and hit the swing until her sister got off. I’m not kidding. That was just before she compared herself to Sharon Stone whilst lying down and followed by her uncrossing and recrossing her legs (she was wearing pants at the time). It’s getting seriously weird.
I still say tip is just sitting there waiting to be drafted.
This mob are all dead meat swaying in the breeze. They know, they HATE IT but can do nothing about it.
Almost time for the coward years
Remember how the liberals used to tell us that Latham hates, well nobody in the liberals hates, no!
I think Bishop has just had her Latham moment, goodbye Julie!
Get ready guys, The Howard Years is about to start. Two sets of seat belts for Bushfire Bill for the ride ahead!
Well, there you go. Edwina, the chinchilla, (silvery blond with big blue eyes, staring, staring, staring, will attack anything that annoys her, but regularly beaten by the door mat when she can’t extract her claws) has been channelling Julie Bishop! Or, as we have lately been calling the cat, the Shadow Minister for Julie Bishop.
BTW, Diogenes back on the Morgan thread, thanks for link to the Times article. I do wish Conroy would cease and desist with the stupid filter idea, election promise be damned. If you get new information that means you change your policy and action, surely that’s sufficient? They’ve had to do it with the impact of the GFC, why not the internet filter. I’m now more convinced of $ being spent on informing kids and young people about how the net can be a trap for the unwary, as a better policy.
As this is the last week of Parliament for this year and I do enjoy my fix
…. does anyone know have they posted next years schedule yet? When do we get it back?
Good grief, juliem. You might have to make do with the cricket, like me. Hope the Sith Afrikanns put up a bit more of a fight than did the Niw Zilanders.
“It’s getting seriously weird.”
You’re being unkind to a legion of Young Liberal men, who, stunned by the Sharon Stone comparison, are even more consumed by fantasy than when mummy and daddy promised them a Peugeot 207!
Juliem, we start again on February 3rd.
http://www.aph.gov.au/house/info/sittings/2009/index.htm
Let’s see what lies Fran Kelly allows to be perpetuated regarding the “Children Overboard”.
i had visitors and missed the question time dramas, the first time i’ve missed it, bugga, bugga, bugga!
You can catch the replay in the early hours of Tomorrow morning
http://www.abc.net.au/tv/guide/netw/200812/programs/NC0807H128D1122008T002500.htm
HSO
That article shows one facet of what is so wrong about the internet filter. No-one has any problems with banning illegal sites, but how do you define illegal? Sites that promote self-harm are banned. Anorexia is self-harm, on an unconscious level at least. So sites that promote anorexia can be banned. The decision to ban them under Conroy’s plan would be secret. No disclosure, no consultation and no input from any experts in the field would be needed. The list of sites banned is not published so we would be unaware that Conroy, or whoever, has even filtered them out let alone discuss the policy.
It’s Big Brother who knows best. Ignorance is Strength. Oceania has always been at war with Eurasia.
Nope, here in SA the Coward Years is about to start. Will the remote or alcohol poisoning win?
The remote by a hair!
do I want to hear that monotonous dead mechanical voice again/
NO I DON’T!!!!
You missed a goodie Judith
Check the u-tube version
http://livenews.com.au/Articles/2008/12/01/Dual_of_the_Jules_Gillard_and_Bishop_get_catty
Just watching reith on the coward years – what a low level for aussie politics. Truely reith is incapable of telling the truth
It was part of the deal to get her to swap her vote from Nelson to MT. Being Deputy had nothing to do with it, just a convenient excuse. If MT doesn’t dump her over the summer, it will be a good indication that he doesn’t have overwhelming support in the party.
The poll has made news.com.au:
http://www.news.com.au/story/0,27574,24735832-29277,00.html
thanks for the pointer Frank, i ‘ve just checked the TV book, dunno if its the senate or the reps though, i’ll keep my fingers crossed, i’m going to settle down to the Howard years now — all the time with visions of BB wrecking his lounge and his dog hiding from him lol.
Frank
http://www.news.com.au/perthnow/story/0,27574,24735596-2761,00.html
Colin Barnett warns against targeting Julie Bishop
strange days indeed!
And considering Julie Bishop’s Feline behaviour reminded me of this song, which could be her new theme song
http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=Zi1uLhcBhgU
Harry @ 45, I don’t get enough of the cricket either
…….
#31 -
But what were they doing? Sipping Bombay tea?
The more you watch the Coward Years, the more Effing good riddance of the lot. Especially, Peter Reith.
just watching howard and bush
“beef”
http://video.google.com.au/videosearch?q=meat&hl=en&emb=0&aq=f#q=red%20symons&hl=en&emb=0&start=10
Oz @ 47, thanks much
…..
Harry, there are two things that go into my schedule/day timer book other than appointments that are pertinent to one or more family members. Scheduled sitting days for parliament aka “QT” and all test and one day cricket matches
…..
Conveniently looking the other way I understand.
The poor old Commando’s get a bit pf a bagging for sitting around for 36 hours or so before they slowly and O so cautiously moved in.
Probably hoping the terrorists might die of thirst or hunger before they had to face them.
The article is on Al Jusira. Can’t remember the spelling.
The best thing about the coward years is the ending.
It is a happy event. Looking forward to next week.
Next week’s “The Howard Years is a must see. It covers the best part of his primeministership – his downfall.
One more thing…
I wonder if the mesma’s cat claw today is going to turn out like lathams handshake ?
Guess we can live in hope. Somethings going to give. old mesmas going to blow up.
Tomorrows papers will be interesting to watch
LOL! I had no idea Peter Cosgrove was such an expert on the epistemology of images!
THE HOWARD YEARS: SAME OLD SHIT, DIFFERENT ORDER
The best part about the Howard years is the ending.
Reith hasn’t got a good memory has he? Strange about that.
Just checked Peter Reith’s Wiki page*, where there is no mention of the Children Overboard affair. This despite the fact that, in an interview with Virginia Trioli on Oct 10, 2001, Reith committed one of the most colossal porkies in Australian political history.
A sample …
VT: Mr Reith, there’s nothing in this photo that indicates these people either jumped or were thrown?
PR: Now, the first thing to say is there were children in the water. Now, we have a number of people, obviously RAN people who were there who reported the children were thrown into the water. Now, you may want to question the veracity of reports of the Royal Australian Navy. I don’t and I didn’t either but I have subsequently been told that they have also got film. That film is apparently on HMAS ADELAIDE. I have not seen it myself and apparently the quality of it is not very good, and it’s infra-red or something but I am told that someone has looked at it and it is an absolute fact, children were thrown into the water. So do you still question it? … The fact of the matter is, this did happen and it was part of a clear intended response by those on the boat.
“An absolute fact” …
* If ever proof was needed that I have no life!
That was tough. I think I regret watching that one. I remember as soon as Latham’s mate (forgot his name) announced that “Mark Latham has been elected leader of the labor party” I thought, Howard would be thanking his lucky stars again, and he did.
But Centre, there is a VERY happy ending.
Yes GB, the next two episodes will be much better.
#61
Yes, Reith was bad over the waterfront and he wasn’t any better tonight. I remember that he first won Flinders in a byelection but lost it in the federal election that followed before he even got to take his seat in parliament. It would have been far more appropriate if his political career had ended right there.
On going to war in Iraq, I recall very well that Howard had prepared the country for it for months prior to the cabinet decision. All his rhetoric, such as defending the intelligence and insisting till he was blue in the face in parliament that WMD did exist, had made it very obvious that he would do George Bush’s bidding. Maybe an official decision hadn’t been made but it had certainly been telegraphed for so long that it would have been a shock if cabinet decided against it. Whatever he and the ministers say about it I think they knew in their hearts that the meeting was merely a rubber stamp.
I thought President Truman said that if you want a friend in Washington then get a dog, but Howard gave the impression to Bush that it’s an Australian expression (with the place changed, and “friend” changed to “mate” of course).
Way off topic but if you can drag yourselves away from the Howard Years and look at the sky, the three brightest objects are together tonight; Jupiter, Venus and a crescent moon. It won’t happen again for fifty years so it’s worth showing the kids.
http://www.news.com.au/gallery/0,23607,5036115-5007150-6,00.html
Diogenes @ 51. Agree, extremely and very bad. You could sign the Get Up petition. Just google Get Up.
juliem, you’re as sad a politico-cricket tragic as am I. Which is weird, when you think about it, because so was Howard, or perhaps the Howard pair more particularly.
Has anyone had a squizz at the Smiley face in the sky tonight? Looks more like a cow face to me. So it can’t be an omen relating to Julie Bishop, can it?
I’m just watching the bit of the Howard Years about THAT line “We will decide who comes to this country and the circumstances under which they come”, where he implies that he came up with the line on the spur of the moment.
But didn’t we hear almost exactly that line in episode one, in the maiden speech of a certain ex-Liberal?
Is this evidence earlier plagiarism amongst the libs? No wonder they don’t have any trouble with Julie doing it.
And it explains why JWH took so long to denounce that ex-liberal. He was absorbing her message.
We can only hope its a sign that we will not see the fibs back in that time frame either.
Either way many of little johnnies mates have gone along with him and most will never put their butts on the right hand side of the speaker ever again.
I can’t bear to watch “The Howard expletive deleted Years”. It was the longest 11 & a half years of my life. The Smiley face in the sky is preferable or watching the Shadow Minister for Julie Bishop unsuccessfully battle the doormat. Gawd, that cat is stupid.
Harry @ 77, cricket and parliamentary politics is infinitely more entertaining than the parallels in the US (baseball and the HOR) ……. Now I will be watching QT the rest of this week and then a countdown to Perth for the first SA test …..
night
FINNS
#29
“Amigo Ronnie,
The person who took this famous photo:
http://www.smh.com.au/ffximage/2008/12/01/mumbai_gunman_wideweb__470×368,0.jpg
said the gunmen were shooting at the railway station for about 45mins before any police or military arrived. The “SAS” of India took 9 hours to reach Mumbai…then blamed Pakistan…”
I Remember Indian cricket team gall of actualy blaming our cricketer ‘Roy’ for there bowler Harbajan Singh racially calling our cricketer Roy a ‘monkey’ Is India also a country with a racial caste system too India blames everyone but themselves Not th way to learn from mistakes…or take responsibility
To ignore th CIA etc intell is bad , but not to hav th will to thereafter fight is always fatal So therefore they will not also hav th will for future prevention , nor to look at th terrorism seeds of discontent Perhaps Chinese need to take up cricket pretty quick
yeah, Howard years much the same as last wo: Costello a loser, Reith a liar with convenient dementia, selecting advice they want, rejecting others, then saying ” we received advice”. Boring!
so Turnbull is on 14% 2PP. Now that he is getting Nelson’s numbers, will HE be put under the leadership spotlight?? I wouldnt bet on it
How close was the leadership ballot again? Can Turnbull afford to drop Bishop?
45-41
Dropping her might actually give him more support. You never know with these nutty Libs.
“The list of sites banned is not published so we would be unaware that Conroy, or whoever, has even filtered them out let alone discuss the policy.
It’s Big Brother who knows best.”
Th last sentence is reely th unfettered Libertarian argument Let everyone see whatever they want in there houses
Bit about banned sites is fluff Of course they will be secret to make it harder for th culpritts , geez
As to governance and sensible overview as to what should be banned , thats a separate issue , no red herrings
Guys who hav solely technical reservations …alone… I can appreciate there viewpoint
So people here ar suggesting Turnbull will commit his own politcal suicide by ’sacking’ his Treasurer….that would be enough if her power base was one shadow cabinet vote
(and tink her consevative power base is stronger than that anyway)
All politicans can count numberz , if nothing else Best Turnbull can hope for is a ‘reshuffle’ next year , but only if she is willing as it would self ends her ‘career’ very top 4 jobs chanses
Perhaps more to the point, the WA Liberals account for a third of the party room.
20 per cent, anyway.
Ron
We’re letting Conroy decide exactly what he wants to ban. The free speech argument is important. To some of these people their website, which may be quite legal, could be their lifeline to the rest of the world or people like them. It could be their PB. Imagine a world where you could wake up and find PB filtered because Conroy’s stupid program triggered it as a rampant racist, sexist pro-terrorism site due to the words that crop up here. So we get a dimwit like Conroy being the controller of free speech in Australia.
Big Brother knows best.
Well Ronster will replyy for Uncle Ron
If you look at 2nd last para , thats addresed NO legislation at all reely would pass th Senate without that requirement , assumiing th Greens , Dr X and Fielding could actualy agree Queston therefore is to support it with that governance
Whats hoped for is Libs support it , so likely crazy ideas for extra ridiculous exemptions of Dr X and fielding lay in senate’s dustbins
I really wish Ronster would make his posts easier to comprehend… it always feels like trying to dissect a 5 year old’s scrawlings
The cracks are starting to widen quickly now.
Aparently he doesn’t want employers to be held accountable to the laws of the land. ie Keep union officials out of workplaces so they can’t inspect wage records and employment conditions and ensure that people aren’t being ripped off or working in dangerous and hazardous conditions.
http://livenews.com.au/Articles/2008/12/01/Liberal_MP_defies_Turnbull_on_IR_bill
“I really wish Ronster would make his posts easier to comprehend”
For many here comprehension is th least of there problems Capacity to objectively think heads th list
#93…….I think it is called “Dan Murphy” punctuation….
Precisely, so it would be nice if it was easier to read so there are fewer problems to deal with
Suppose th experts on Dan Murphy would know alot about dregs
“so there are fewer problemS to deal with ”
most who can not comprehend can not even deal with a single problem , let alone multi layered ones It all comes back to objective capacity to think and reason I’m here to educate th dears
Whatever happened to that Liberal was making a big fuss about creating another rural based splinter party?
It was an incredibly stupid idea which is why I’m surprised he dropped it.
“and tink her (Julie Bishops) consevative power base is stronger than that anyway”
William Bowe
“Perhaps more to the point, the WA Liberals account for 20% of the party room”
I downplayed th numbers in that quote only to reely highlight almost insummountable reel life politcal problems Tunbull would face in any event trying to ’sack’ his treasurer , which seemed to hav been overlooked Cabinet size of WA Liberals makes th suggestion pie in sky now , with later ‘reshuffle a thin window out On other hand Treasury is a dificult portfolio and Julie Bishop may improve , things ar possible , and do not tink she comes accross TV medium genericly as poorly as some feel , its more her handle on job itself at moment eg arguing Lib GFC alternatives
What a pity that Essential Research did not ask head-to-head questions about Julie Bishop and Julia Gillard as PPMs! Miaworr.
In trying to sort out the decision-making processes in the Credible Alternative Government I believe I have identified the following factions, but would be interested in other views:
The Fud Faction (Hockey, Abbott, Minchin, Robb), the Nat Fud Faction (pretty well all of the Nats), the WA Mostly Crazy Right Faction (Bishop, Iron Bar, Haase, etc with help from individual Crazy Right folk from the other side of the Nullabor (Sophie, Alby et cetera); the Young Turks Faction (Hunt, Dutton, Keenan et al). Turnbull and Costello are factions of One, each; the Odds and Sods non-Faction – folk like Broadbent who really no home in today’s Liberal Party, and Joyce, ditto for today’s National Party.
For what has become a very narrow church they certainly have a lot of different congregations.
With Pakistan as an ally, who needs enemies?
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/01/washington/01bioterror.html?_r=1
More Pakistani’s, soldiers and civilians, have shed their blood and lost their lives in the so called “War on Terror” than any western country. Statements like that are ignorant and only highlight how token the “coalition” effort to tackle the problems of extremism is.
Oz, interesting point of view…and, yes, probably a bit too much of a smart-arse comment from yours truly. On the other hand, how would you rate the role of Pakistan’s security organisations in the rise of the Taliban and the failure of Pakisatani central authority to assert itself in the tribal regions?
Yes Oz, but as far as I can make out it was American bombs that killed them.
“What a pity that Essential Research did not ask head-to-head questions about Julie Bishop and Julia Gillard as PPMs”
Wouldn’t mean much evidensed by Gillard only leading Turnbull 39/34 whereas Rudd leading Tunrbull 63/14 I tink PPM is just Shanahans baby to irrlevantly talk about , approval ratings ar more important
Essential Research seems to hav had past success , but wonder why they go for 50/50 male/femle when thaats not Aussie gender split Also wonder if they will decalre what th voting intentions ar of there total online panel seeing they did not use traditional off line methodologies to select th lot
Tink you ar being restrictive on Liberal Party , which is reely a split of conseative and liberal and 1/2 ways …broken up by econamic and social leanings sometimes criss crossing , which Howard by strengh of personality & position moved Party completely consevative econamic and social….time is needed for many members to regain there former varying stanses , and at least 30% of Party follow th Costello position thats different to ‘howardism’ and especialy socialy That may take more than one opposition term subject to politcs and GFC As for Nats yhey’ve always been cowboys , often agricultural socialists but even more consevative socialy
On the first point, pathetically. But two things have to be said about that. First, one can not neglect the role the US played in creating and supporting various extremist groups in the area, including the Taliban, and using the ISI as their proxy. For the majority of its history Pakistan has merely been a tool used by the US through corrupt dictators. The other part is regardless of elements within security services that are playing their own politics or being played by the US, the sacrifice and general level of crap most Pakistani’s put with up in terms of terrorism can not and should not be understated. We can talk about Bali and John Howard being in Washington during 9/11 all we like, but those guys are experiencing it almost every day. Just because they’re a developing, Islamic nation doesn’t mean that they somehow feel the impact less than we do.
The “Pakistani central authority” is so corrupt, decadent and bloated after half a century of sucking on Washington’s teat that it can’t assert itself in the capital let alone in the tribal areas. Tribal areas, it should be noted, where the locals are a different ethnicity, speak a different language and have different customs and laws. Tribal areas where the people were never really conquered or “domesticated” by the British. Tribal areas that are only part of Pakistan because of the hurried and botched caesarean section called “partition”.
Amigo FINNS
I’ve lost that song by some guy , something like ..can they hear me now , will they ever hear me , will they ever understand
US FA…supported Shah of Iran (what there now) , Gaza (what there now) , suported in 80’s Saddamm (but what he became) , Iraq war (what there now) , non suport democrat Lebanon ( Southern Lebanon is Hezzbala is what there now) , armed Afghan insurgents against Soviets (what there now) , encouraged groups in nothern Pakistan (what there now) , suported Pakistan dictators like Mussaref ( and so Pakistan people tink of US what rhere principals ar now)………and dynamites to come ..India & Pakistan ar nuclear …and US still supports despotic Saudi Oil Sheiks (what there now…will not be in future , sooner or later) and that song…can they hear me now , will they ever hear me , will they ever understand
Oz @ 108
“We can talk about Bali and John Howard being in Washington during 9/11 all we like, but those guys are experiencing it almost every day. Just because they’re a developing, Islamic nation doesn’t mean that they somehow feel the impact less than we do.”
Good point, and thank you also for the other comments.
I would be curious about your views on ‘failed states’, perhaps Somalia? Perhaps Pakistan? and possible pathways to the future?
Ron @ 109 That is one hell of a litany of “The US wuz here.” Not very inspiring.
That was also Howards and the rest of the libs big catch phrase, you can trust business to do the right thing, they don’t need all this regulation and imposition.
I’ll trust business when they initiate that trust and replace their cash registers with honesty boxes.
Amigo Ronnie,
that was Don McLean’s Vincent, about Goghie:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dipFMJckZOM
btw: on Pakistan. I just think there is a double standard here. Pakistan is an easy pick. Did anybody really blame and threaten Saudi with war even though the majority of the 911 terrorists were Saudis. Saudi’s wallet is too big for anybody to get upset with them.
Dont forget, Pakistan best hotel was bombed and demolished few months ago.
Amigos, The Dream Team is here!!!!
Ron 109
I agree. You could add dictators in Chile and Argentina to the list as well.
The problems in Pakistan predate the stupid US meddling. The invasion of Kashmir right back at independence in 1948 was home grown stupidity. A lot of Pakistani soldiers have died in a virtual civil war for control of the NW area. Debateable if that counts as a war on terror. Either way, the coutnry has been rife with fundamentalists for a long time. Does anyone remember the death squads in the 1980s?
As for Saudi Arabia, well I argued that they and Pakistan better met Bush’s “axis of evil” criteria than Iraq did BEFORE the invasion, but nobody listens do dumb engineers.
ohh bull butter
William, your intro is in error. The 63% to 14% result was Rudd over Gillard, not Rudd over Turnbull.
(Maybe we can amuse ourselves inferring the Rudd/Turnbull figures, though. Gillard on 14% is ahead of Turnbull 39% to 34%, so that puts Turnbull at around 12%.)
Oz @ 108,
Same arguement could be made that British colonial rule is the root (although not the only) cause of troubles in more than one place in Africa as well …..
Could somebody please let me know if theres a clip somewhere of Julie Bishop doing the “claw” thing. I think it’s all a bit silly, but I would like to include it in a video I’m making.
http://livenews.com.au/Articles/2008/12/01/Dual_of_the_Jules_Gillard_and_Bishop_get_catty
thanks dave @ 119
Looks like being another tough day at the ASX. In NY, the S & P dropped 9% on the back of news the US is officially in recession.
Stocks fall sharply on consumer spending worries, downbeat data on manufacturing, construction
http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/081201/wall_street.html
the Adelaide Advertiser has devoted a full page to the Gillard/Bishop incident with a huge pic of Bishop making the gesture, perhaps they’d better build a safety barrier in parliament, Bishop is so acting weird and erratic lately she might get a yen to bring her machete into question time.
Liberals, NDP and Bloc have signed a deal on a proposed coalition. Looks like the Conservatives days are numbered:
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2008/12/01/coalition-talks.html
The GG may just refuse to accept Harper’s resignation if it comes to that…or force another election…Itep
If Dion is made PM…it would be like having Simon Crean as PM what a joke…it’s because of the Sepratists that it makes it hard for the federalist parties to form government in Canada…i suspect the Canadian people wont be happy at Dion and the Liberals because they recieved their lowest ever % of the vote in the 2008 election since Confederation and just hold 70 odd seats the Tories were the most preferred party to Govern with 143 odd seats.
The GG would have no reason to do such a thing.
Yes she would…it is in her power to call another election or refuse Harper’s resignation or Harper could proroge Parliament…
If the same applies in Canada as in Australia, Antony Green’s recent comments would mean that a successful “no confidence” motion doesn’t necessarily mean the GG asks Dion if he can form a new Government. But if the coalition blocks supply, then it’s all over.
If all the other parties block supply then Jean would probably call another election…i think it is obvious the Canadian people wanted Harper to govern them he won 143 seats and Dion lost 30 seats…if this does happen and Harper stays on I believe the Tories would win a majority in the next election.
Mainly because the Bloc has said it would back the Red/Orange Coalition for 2.5 years…Harper could take it to the people that the Government was kept in power by people who want to destroy Canada…
Apologies if othes have seen it but there is a story about a Galaxy poll in the Courier Mail today, focusing on the questions on economic leadership. There is a clear preference for Rudd and Swan over teh previous Howard/Costello leadership team.
http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,24735233-952,00.html
Amusingly, 21% of coalition voters prefer Rudd and Swan on economic management.
the cracks have started.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24738393-601,00.html
Dennis has been told by Mitchell to give Bishop another chance. All this criticism might be good for her. Hmmm
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24737455-17301,00.html
You have to love some of the comments posted to that article… the usual denials of polls because ‘everyone I talk to says otherwise’. Classic!
What are those stages of grieving again? They have to get past the denial first….
Unaccustomed as I am to climbing up on hobby horses, I’m jumping aboard a favourite one of mine. Giddy up!
The Kubler-Ross stages of grief are denial, anger, bargaining, depression and acceptance. And they are WRONG. They don’t normally happen, they don’t happen in that order most times and they are not helpful.
The myth of the stages of dying, death and grief
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_kmske/is_2_14/ai_n28565933/pg_1?tag=artBody;col1
Dio
(just a joke I’m as skeptical of psycho-babble as the next philosopher). Actually thats great news – then there is no guarantee the Libs will move past their current irrational world view in the foreaseeable future.
Socrates
The Libs current world view is seriously at odds with the reality of their situation. They have chosen to ignore all the evidence that they need to move on and do something differently. This has created enormous conflict in their psyches ie cognitive dissonance. They have a lot more pain to go through yet. Even the Repugs have taken their defeat in a more intellectually mature manner. I see Palin, Romney and Jindal are now in a three way tie to be their next candidate. Palin was way out ahead a few weeks ago.
Agree on Palin – can you seriously imagine her winning in Florida, let alone California, New York and any of the other better educated eastern and western states which are now almost a lock for the democrats?
Likewise the Libs – to hear some of them still push the union power genie in recent days (echoes of Workchoices rhetoric), when most people are more worried about losing their jobs if we go into recession. At least Howard was smart enough to lie about his GST plans until after he won the relevant election. His successors seem to prfer to lead with the chin.
the opposition still cant believe they’ve been voted out by a fed up public and their born to rule mentality cant accept that they finally wore out their welcome, now they’re running around like headless chooks and the right hand cant seem to controll what the left hand is doing/saying or vice versa, their only hope is to get rid of the dead wood– theres quite a few swinging old logs there, they need to bring in new blood with bright modern ideas, until then Minchin, both Bishops, Iron Bar, Cozzie, Conan, Abbott and their ilk will only weigh them down
This born to rule crap is just nonsense! One could argue that after the ALP lost in 1996…it’s just a weak argument to use…
Say what you will about the tenants of Workchoices but unemployment was at 4% and under Labor’s IR policy it could got 6% +…not good at all.
This sort of simplistic nonsense reflects badly on you Glen.
It’s EASY getting unemployment low when the world economy is growing. It is HARD keeping unemployment low when most developed countries are either in recession, or on the brink of recession.
Which is exactly why you need more flexibility that WCs provided…especially in this GLC. If unemployment continues to rise and Labor’s policy does nothing to stop it then the Opposition can score points…
What!? The world economy is bad, so it should be easier to sack people and pay them less?
That’s dog eat dog, there is nothing fair or civil about such a policy.
And Labor will be able to say “oh, we know what the Liberals’ solution is – bring back WorkChoices, get rid of everyone’s pay and conditions.”
Turnbull is right, the less the Liberals talk about industrial relations the better for them politically.
So you still think Workchoices was the bees knees Glen? You don’t think the world economic crisis is having any effect on unemployment and that in fact it is all the fault of Rudd’s IR policy? Fantasyland my friend, pure fantasy.
Oh, I hope they try. I would love them to stand up for Workchoices at the next election.
Actually I’m very pleased to see Glen and other Liberals still support the ideas behind Workchoices. The economic evidence showing its negative impact is beside the point. The public hate Workchoices. That hatred will only grow in tough times. Its a political deathsentence, and proves everything Labor have been saying about their ideological obsession is true.
No i dont Gary…but the tenants behind it were good accept i would have simply kept the no disadvantage test on AWAs that came into being in 1996…Howard went further…bad move indeed.
Ah, Glen! I do admire your consistency! You are a rock in a tumultuous world!
It’s hard not to think that the Libs don’t really buy the legitimacy of last year’s election result, that it was all down to Howard hanging around for too long. “People Skills” Abbott is usually instructive in this regard (as he clearly has no control over when and about what he speaks), with his constant pleas that the Howard government “was a good government”.
I’ve posted before that the Libs feel that 2007 was a protest vote gone wrong, and that once they can make the Oz public see what that they can see – that Rudd is a phony and a fraud – then the electorate will turn back to the rightful governing party. Glen is right to compare this to the ALP post-96; people like me just couldn’t believe that anyone would vote for Howard, so we kept making excuses for his wins. In ‘96, Howard won because he wasn’t Keating, in ‘98, Labor won the popular vote, in ‘01, Howard won by exploiting xenophobia through Tampa …. it wasn’t until after 2004 that we on the Left started to realise, “hang on, the general public seem to actually like this bloke Howard”. The results of this realisation can be seen in Rudd’s approach last year, when he refused to engage in all the old wedges (NT, Haneef etc) and distanced himself from the “Howard Haters”.
On this analogy, it’s only ALP-1997 for the Libs, but maybe Senator Fielding will have an affair with Mesmerelda over the summer and jump ship to the Liberals (a la Cheryl). But it also means they won’t even have a shot at winning until they learn to accept that they are now in Oppostion, something they are yet to demonstrate.
What was the unemployment rate before WorkChoices came in Glen?
It wasnt a protest vote, the people wanted a change and we had a bad 4th term…
The Party of Workchoices remains committed.
As a Liberal you have a problem Glen, a big problem. You have Workchoices disciples within your ranks. Turnbull, the head, can say it’s dead but the body is saying otherwise.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24738393-601,00.html
Retail sales UP 0.7% in October
http://business.smh.com.au/business/retail-sales-in-surprise-jump-20081202-6pah.html
Glen
I don’t have the evidence to back this up but I firmly believe Howard would have won the last election if he didn’t bring in Workchoices. It was a dog with fleas.
153 – I agree Dio. He lost the last election once he introduced Workchoices. A terrible blunder, one that some Libs won’t or can’t recognise.
“It wasnt a protest vote”
Howard was only the second PM in history to have lost his seat. So everyone just wanted a change?
I can’t believe the Liberal party’s own internal polling hasn’t already told them that Workchoices was a disaster. Prohibiting right of assembly for workers was fundamentally undemocratic and even people like me who are often skeptical of unions were strongly opposed.
Glen it’s easy to have unemployment statistics at all time lows when it uses the fact that if someone is working for one hour a week they’re classed as employed, just how many of those jobs were part time or minimal time?
Perhaps Dio, perhaps…but we’ll never know.
For the Major Policy of the 4th term he picked a bad one indeed.
Glen, your argument is a little contradictory – you seem to accept that WCs was unpopular, and was a large part of the reason for the result in 2007. But the fire still burns bright, and you still argue that it was good policy (low unemployment etc). And therein lies the rub for the Libs at the moment: WCs was an article of faith for most of them – they genuinely believe that people are better off bargaining one-on-one with their employer, and most of them genuinely regard unions as illegitimate.
I actually think that the Libs don’t yet appreciate what an albatross WCs will be around their necks going forward. Indeed, public perceptions of WCs will only get worse with the passage of time. To give you an comparison, the ALP lost an election in 2004 based on the interest rates that were current in 1989; on this basis, Labor can beat the Libs with the WCs stick for another decade or more. And that’s leaving aside the fact that WCs is strongly held by most Libs as a good idea – core policy, if you will – whereas the Keating interest rates (and indeed the recession) were more of an outcome of policy, rather than the centre of it.
It’s gonna be while before your side are back on the Treasury benches Glen, so I’d console yourself with Victorian council elections for the time being (oh, and WA, which they tell me is part of Australia).
Love this comment.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24737455-17301,00.html
Annabel Crabb showing her admiration for Julie and her distain for Julia.
http://www.smh.com.au/news/opinion/chucking-a-britney-a-blue-steel-and-a-hillary/2008/12/01/1227979931722.html
I’m conjecturing that Howard “threw” the election. By which I mean he deliberately lost it, knowing the global prosperity boom he’d ridden was about to turn to a big bust.
He didn’t want to be left holding the parcel (economy) when it blew up in his face. He already had that humiliating experience in the 1980s when, as Treasurer, he’d presided over the worst recession since the Great Depression.
So my theory is that he used the unexpected bonanza of a Senate majority to pass the draconian SerfChoices, his legislative wet dream, guessing that decent people would reject it, and turf the Liberals out … leaving Labor to 1) clean up after them; and 2) deal with the GFC he could have anticipated was coming.
Hahaha, I don’t think so
“I do NOT have the evidence to back this up , but I FIRMLY BELIEVE Howard would.. ”
An athiest relying on “faith” ?……now I hope all yous athiests here ar on board diog’s new scientific concept discovery of “faith” …I suspect ShowsOn just fainted in horror
Hyacinth would not have let him throw it. It must have been very traumatic when ‘Kirribilli’ turned up to turf her out.
Last night’s episode just reinforces how much I owe Rudd for getting rid of that mealymouthed lot.
And I don’t believe it was just Workchoices. Many of us weren’t affected by WC but were absolutely desperate for a change in our national psyche.
Let me be absolutely clear about this, i support most strongly the principle of individual contracts.
the labor party are better off without this lot, unfortunately it still taints the brand.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24739392-601,00.html
This belts Glenn Milne’s theory out of the ball park. Remember, the one that says the electorate will hold Rudd to account for not being able to lower fuel prices.
http://news.theage.com.au/national/petrol-prices-fall-as-low-as-969-cents-20081202-6pdg.html
I have an individual contract Glen. It isn’t as if they have been eradicated.
How about… “Petrol prices will always be lower under a Labor government”. Sure it’s disingenuous, but what’s good for the goose…
166 – you are right Judith and it will happen.
165 – Glen, individual contracts that guarantee the minimum conditions?
GB (167) The lower petrol prices are good news for all Australians, including Rudd Relishers. Let’s rejoice and be glad in it.
160 GB – Annabel is a pretty big fan of Julia
cf
http://www.smh.com.au/news/opinion/annabel-crabb/when-kevs-away-killer-gillard-comes-out-to-play/2008/11/13/1226318836092.html
she just thought yesterday’s QT was a bit of a mismatch.
Someone wrote a post expanding on that theme at the board OzPolitics.
http://www.ozelection2007.info/forums/viewtopic.php?id=4413
Look for post #4:
#160
Crabb left out Julia’s last and best line: “You do not buy credibility; you earn it.”
I wonder just how much longer the Authorities can hold out on having a proper inquiry into this lot.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/12/02/2435500.htm?section=justin
172 David Charles – not up to your usual standard “Gary Watch” statement David. Your point is? I thought my post was exactly conveying that very message, as well as showing up Glen Milne for the dill he is of course (surely you can’t disagree with that).
“Rudd Relisher”? – Hang on David, now I get it. It gave you the excuse to put me down for my political stance. Good one. Very Petty.
Grog 173 – I’m not so sure. Annabel seems to have this one theme going on in regard to Julia at the moment and it appears in the first few sentences of that article you linked.
I don’t recall her having the same problem with Abbott or Costello and I don’t mean the comedians, or do I?
The most heinous crime being the bankrolling of Howard’s 2004 election campaign (to the tune of $320,000).
What did this mob expect in return?
I shudder to think
Maybe it was just 300K’s worth of Prime Ministerial prayer?
(”God, help me win. God, I must win. God, tell me I’m a winner. God, tell me I’m clever. God, tell me I’m not a loser. Oh, yeah, and God, sling a bit of good fortune the Elect Vessel’s way eh! God, help me win. God, I must win …”)
Triton @ 116: corrected at last.
The hypocrisy of a group that won’t allow it’s followers to vote but is happy to donate $320,000 to a political party beggars belief.
Ronster
Us atheists believe in lots of things, such as Enlightenment values, reason, science blah, blah. We just don’t believe in God. Every religious person is basically an atheist in that they don’t believe in 99.99% of deities except their own one. We just go one further.
See if you can work this one out, from the ’staff writers’ at news.com.au:
http://www.news.com.au/business/money/story/0,28323,24739445-5016110,00.html
And what did the data out today say??? Spending was UP by 0.7% Who are these idiot staff writers???
177 Milne is, of course, a Rudd Resister rather reviled by Rudd Relishers. Government for Rudd and his colleagues is difficult enough at the moment (Global economy ‘in the toilet’, NSW in the doldrums, major challenges in infrastructure funding, introducing and then implementing a carbon emissions trading scheme et. al.) It would be even more difficult for his government if he had the added (political) burden of unpopularity in the opinion polls.
Everyone’s interest is looked after if Rudd governs well and then no one will care what Milne and any other Rudd Resisters relate.
Oh I disagree GB – I think that is a line that shows AC gets a lot of joy at watching JG. – Also the last sentence of the article really rams home her admiration:
I dunno about that. Cheap, plentiful petrol is going to do a lot more harm than good. In fact, it already has.
At least the Government now doesn’t have excuse to leave petrol out of an ETS.
RBA cuts by 100bp
RBA cut by 1%
record lows…
How unexpected.
Swan tells parliament that the CBA is passing the full cut. Too easy. Costello must be crapping himself seeing Swan getting to bring this kind of news to the parliament.
Oz (187) I understand your point without embracing it. I agree that petrol should be included in any ETS.
Fair enough.
Things must be very grim. Bought unleaded petrol for 98c per liter this morning. And now RB cuts interest to 4.25%.
Is Nicola Roxon turning Buddhist? She is wearing the Zen Buddhist monk necklace.
Yup. Another Howard fallacy officially put to rest. Never again can the interest rate scare tactic be used against Labor.
NAB passing on the full 100BP, ditto CBA… Westpac only 80BP…
Wetspac you scumbags!!!
With the interest rate cut and the pensioner and carer payments to go out next week it will be interesting to see how things pan out in the next two months. There is probably still a need for a fiscal stimulus but these moves, combined with lower oil pirces, should have greatly reduced financial pressures. At this point the main thing the economy needs is probably positive psychology rather than major changes.
Gary…yes. But id not reinstate unfair dismissal laws.
Dario
There may be some logic to the comments on “only” 0.7% increase in retail trade figures. They need to distinguish between actual and trend changes. At this time of year retail sales always go up due to christmas shopping. A small increase is actually a poor result for many retailers.
The 0.7% was a seasonally adjusted figure
Boy, and aren’t the people up in the grandstands enjoying every minute of it.
http://www.smh.com.au/news/opinion/chucking-a-britney-a-blue-steel-and-a-hillary/2008/12/01/1227979931722.html
dave @ 67
I hope not, I want the Rudd Gov to win the next election and I’ll take anything I can get to help make that happen.
I prefer JB in her current position
Gordon Brown receiving some favourable polling. The Tories won’t be too happy though. It’s the narrowing!!!
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24738544-2703,00.html
Glen, if a new government can be formed in the existing parliament, the GG should surely only call an election if it asks for one. Even in 1975, the GG did not dissolve parliament without the advice of a Prime Minister. I also don’t imagine that it would be tenable to refuse to accept Harper’s resignation – the Liberals/NDP/Bloc could after all block supply and otherwise make his government unworkable.
Dario 202
If it was seasonally adjusted then you are right – that is a ridiculous story. If retail trade in Australia is still (even slightly) trending upwards in seasonally adjusted terms, that is one of the best results in the OECD right now.
Why the silly names David? I thought you would have been above that.
My criticism of Milne is not based on his criticism of Rudd but his sheer one sided approach to his articles. This is a Liberal man masquerading as an objective journalist and presenting articles based on everthing except fact. Sorry if that offends old son too bad.
As for your bias David, one I’m sure you will deny, where is your response to people like GP and Glen who are clearly Liberal through and through, AS IS THEIR RIGHT. Why do you not call them some inane name and challenge their views? Why just me and my side of politics David? If you are indeed unbiased I would expect a challenge from you to anyone who holds strong political views for one side or the other but no, it doesn’t happen.
By all means David challenge my views but don’t pretend to be an objective observer because that you aint.
Surely Harper’s Administration is more stable than a three headed monster that includes Socialists and Sepratists…also the Canadian people didnt vote in a Coalition and the NDP and Liberal Party said they’d never do such a thing…GG Jean should either call another election or refuse Harper’s resignation and send him back to the House of Commons with another fiscal stimulus package…
Why should the GG bend over backwards to protect a government which has lost support of the House of Commons?
You have a highly curious view of the role of the GG, Glen.
Am I missing something? Has Harper offered his resignation?
No – our discussion is rested on the assumption that he will do so if he loses a confidence vote.
No Gary but if Parliament is not prorogued and he lost a vote of no confidence next week…he’d have to go to the GG and tender his resignation at which point GG Jean may just tell him to go back to the House and reintroduce a fiscal stimulus package to regain confidence…either that or Harper will be on his knees begging her to call another poll.
But chances are if the Libs/NDP Coalition does happen, id just about eat my hat if Harper didnt win a majority next election…
From my understanding in this time of economy crisis Harper is the only Government following a policy of trying to maintain a sulpus at all cost.
A policy that not only failed in the 1930s but also failed in the 1890s.
Normally I support having a balanced budget but their is a time for that policy position to be changed on the condition that it is for a short time only.
The best Harper can hope for is that he can get GG Michelle Jean to support Parliament being prorogued until his Government can introduce it’s first budget of its term in January and hope cooler heads will prevail…either that or just so he can say he’s been PM between 2006-2009 instead of 2006-2008. The Federal Liberal Party of Canada is a joke and they’ve got no money and cant raise any like the Tories can and yet they and the NDP (socialists who want to strike down business tax cuts to stimulate the economy) and the Bloc who want to screw Ottawa for every dollar it can get for Quebec without any thought to the rest of Canada…it is one bad Government if it happens.
Hey, Glen,
Have you finished eating your last hat already?
I havent had to eat my hat on anything ive bet eating my hat on scorpio….
Today’s 1% cut in Interest rates policy is welcomed, I see the CBA and NAB moving to pass on the full cut, I see Westpac have passed on most while the ANZ are reviewing the outcome.
I for one feel with this move remembering the RBA do not meet again until Feb 2009 that is strenghtens the chances that Australia will avoid a recession, a prodiction I have had since March 2008 and while from time to time I have felt I might finish up with egg, I’m starting to be confidence.
What is needed now is for the Rudd Government to remain focus.
And I’m enjoying the battle of the Jules.
Why on earth would the GG offer policy advice to Harper?
I dunno about that. The Liberals/NDP/Greens got more than 52% of the vote at the last election. If the new government, if it comes into being, can deliver on some positive outcomes like help Canada right out the storm in a Rudd-esque kind of way, which wouldn’t be that hard considering Canada’s banks and financial institutions have been rated highly along with Australia’s and they also have their resources to rely on, I don’t see why that vote would decline.
Glen! So you didn’t eat a hat last Novemeber.
Thanks for that. I don’t think any GG should be protecting any government.
I don’t know about the Canadian system but I thought the job of the GG was to be above politics.
Here are some details about the proposed coalition:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20081201.wPOLcoalition1201/BNStory/politics/home
And the document itself:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/v5/content/pdf/1201policy.pdf
I haven’t had a chance to read it. Someone want to browse through and see if there’s anything that particularly stands out?
Heh, I wonder what this means for the perception that MMP is unstable and FPP is conservative and safe.
I didnt bet that then…
OZ Harper has got about 143 seats…the Liberals have 77 and NDP 30 so even together they have about 40 seats less than Harper and would have to rely on the Bloc to pass anything…hardly stable thats why Jean might not accept his resignation because the Dion plan is a joke.
OZ if it werent for the Bloc Harper would easily have a majority…they’ve ruined everything because they take seats away from federalist party’s trying to win government…FFP creates a stable system if you dont have a party wanting to destroy the country take 50 seats out of 300.
Quite so, MB. If a government can be formed that can obtain confidence and supply, the GG should commission it. If not, he or she should appoint ministers willing to advise a dissolution. He or she should certainly not be dispensing orders about fiscal stimulus packages.
William but the people didnt vote for that…the Liberals and NDP both said they’d not engage in a Coalition and its only that they lost they then try to steal power…the will of the Canadian people was a strengthened Harper Minority Government not this not this William no sir!
Jean should send Canada back to the polls…
Glen, you keep asserting the GG should be making political judgements. She shouldn’t. I also don’t understand how she’s supposed to refuse the resignation of a PM who has lost the confidence of parliament, and thus cannot secure supply.
Glen that doesn’t mean anything. In a Parliamentary democracy whoever can get supply and confidence pretty much becomes the Government. The majority of elected representatives in Parliament don’t have confidence in the Conservatives and want to replace them with a Liberal/NDP coalition. It’s not really that complicated.
That’s a silly statement. The Bloc does exist and it has seats in Parliament because the people vote for it. It isn’t magically put there. Regardless of all that, you realise that either way the Government is going to be supported by the Bloc? The Conservatives and the coalition would both need them, so there’s no point in saying only the Libs are doing a deal with the devil.
Why? The current elected Parliament has managed to find a potential government they can have confidence in, which is one of the points of Parliament. The fact that the potential government is not of your political liking is, frankly, irrelevant.
Back to Australia politics for a second, what was Albanese’s address to the Press Club about? What’d he say?
William the Harper Government has only just been re-elected and it recieved a vote of confidence in the throne speech.
The most she should offer Harper is prorouging Parliament to at least let tempers ease.
Then if he loses a vote of no-confidence in January so be it.
mmmmmmeeeeeooooowwwww
Regardless of whether or not there is another election in Canada, it is by no means certian that Steven Harper will be the conservative leader:
http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/article/546661
Oz @ 233, I don’t know all of the details of the speech, but it had something to do with the aviation industry in Australia.
http://www.npc.org.au/speakerArchive/antanl.html
William Bowe
#206
Posted Tuesday, December 2, 2008 at 3:21 pm | Permalink
“Glen, if a new government can be formed in the existing parliament, the GG should surely only call an election if it asks for one. Even in 1975, the GG did not dissolve parliament without the advice of A Prime Minister”
I can remain silent no longers
“without the advice “A” Prime Minister” ?….”A” prime minister (Fraser) unelected ….A prime minister (Fraser) who did NOT hav th confidence of th House…as proved by successive no confidence motions
1975 had nothing at all to do with traditional “confidence” of th House of Reps nor of a queston of majority Party in HoR …it had all to do with th unrepresentaitive Swill (Senate) withholding “Supply”
“A” Prime Minister (Fraser) REPRESENTING th unrepresentative majority Senate swill was who 1975 GG took advice from …who guaranteed supply and to call an electon
So do not agree with your analogy William to Canada
In Canada those who ar th elected majority (WHOEVER combination of Partys there ar involved) BOTH decide if no confidence motions pass AND decide if Supply passes , thats quite diferent to th 1975 shame where former decided in Hor and latter decided by unreopresentative Senate swil
I seem to recall Bob Dylan wrote a song called: “Dont Think Twice, It’s Alright”. The Indians must have adopted that attitude.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/US_warned_India_twice_about_sea_attack_on_Mumbai/articleshow/3782923.cms
So unlkike 1975 , if Harper loses no confidence and wants to resign , GG should accept it and require an electon …assuming another combination of Partys can not secure confidense of house
Glen, I lived in the US, specifically Michigan outside of Detroit, for 43 years. Close enough to Canada I feel like an honorary Canadian. Cutting right to the point, I’ve seen lots of Canadian politics up close and personal over the years and since the major implosion of Canadian politics in 1993, no one can take a trick over there. The various factions and parties are becoming more and more set in concrete and I don’t see any easy fixes for them no matter which party rules. The political landscape has become way too polarized in the last 15 years. Others can correct me if I am wrong, but I think Canada has a first past the post system? That, in and of itself, is part of their problem.
Agree with Ron on 1975 and either way, Harper is in trouble in Canada. Glen, as we all know the role of PM is not even defined in most British Commonwealth style parliaments. The only thing that matters is a majority in the House. If Harper is defeated, speaking of the Harper government is a bit like talking about dead parrotts.
I seem to recall somebody offering to eat their hat if Maxine Mckew beat John Howard in Bennalong!!
Thanks Juliem!
Didn’t Curtain become PM without an election? I don’t see why a new election is necessary as long as a government can be formed. Surely that’s what representative government is all about.
Here’s an interesting article on the constitutional situation in Canada. There is no doubt in my mind that the GG should refuse a dissolution if Harper advises one at this point, but a request to prorogue would indeed open a can of thorny potatoes.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20081201.wgg02/BNStory/politics/home?cid=al_gam_mostemail
Ron, Fraser had a commission from the GG to be prime minister, and that made him prime minister. I’m not asking you to like it, but that is the indisputable legal fact of the matter.
Juliem with great respect…think of it like this.
That in Victoria that some separatist party wins 30 out of 37 seats and whose platform it is to break away from Australia. Then they can hold to ransome Parliament and make it impossible for any federalist party (ALP or Liberal) to Govern…
That is how bad the Bloc are and they are supporting the Liberals/NDP! The left of Canada ought to be ashamed!
The political voting system has nothing to do with it Juliem…it has to do with the traitorous Quebecers.
You still haven’t answered the fact that the whoever gets confidence, the Conservatives or the left coalition, will need votes from the Bloc. So jumping up and down about separatists is irrelevant.
No Oz they recieve votes from the Liberals as well…
The situation is clearly different from that of Australia’s constitutional crisis. The only similarity is that both governments have lost the ability to govern as parliament stood. Fraser, however, was also incapable of governing, leading to both parties having a majority in a single house, and neither able to guarantee stable government. Canada, on the other had, has a coalition ready and able to govern the moment Harper is toppled, making an election entirely unnecessary.
As others have noted, this is much closer to the situation in 1941, where the coalition government was brought down by a no confidence vote when two members crossed the floor, and Curtin was subsequently sworn in as prime minister,governing for two years before the next election.
You can argue all you want about mandates and the will of the people, but this seems to me to be a perfectly legitimate move by the left wing bloc that has formed. The only thing I can’t understand is why they didn’t do something like this during Harper’s first term.
Glen
The GG agreeing to prorogue parliament is basically the same as installing a dictator. Harper has to be accountable to the democracy. And it looks like he won’t get another election. After all, they only just had one.
Because Zedar the NDP and the Liberal Party dont have a habbit of getting along in fact in the 2008 election Dion spent more time attacking Layton than Harper.
The Canadian Liberals/New Democrats/Bloc Quebecois troica may be opportunistic but they have signed a deal which clearly sets out who will be in charge of what and there will be no separation attempt. They have no intention of blowing their chance on that one. Here is an editorial in the Toronto Star (largest selling newspaper in Canada) which is both critical of Harper and says that it is perfectly within their system for a change of government to occur:
http://www.thestar.com/comment/article/546179
I don’t think it is the Governor General’s job to make that kind of judgement. All she needs to determine is who has the number to control parliament, not to decide whether or not she thinks it will be a stable coalition. If the coalition is unstable it will undo itself fast enough without her help, and in that case she would be fully justified in calling an election.
Here is a link to the Canadian accord; it is between the Libs and New Dems, with Bloc Quebecois agreeing to support it in return for being consulted on policies:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/v5/content/pdf/1201policy.pdf
GG Michelle Jean has to accept a Harper request to prorogue Parliament Socrates…
Would she have to accept ongoing advice to prorogue that would keep Harper in office indefinitely?
No but she would be on thin ice if she refused a request from Harper to prorogue until January when the Tories would introduce their budget…
In 1975 I believe that the Senate was split 30/30 on supply.
What Whitlam should have done is get the Labor senators and try and get the non-Labor but Labor leaning senators to vote against supply in the senate after he was dismissed to try and force the GG to make him PM again.
William Bowe
#246
“Ron, Fraser had a commission from the GG to be prime minister, and that made him prime minister. I’m not asking you to like it, but that is the indisputable legal fact of the matter.”
I realize Freaser was ‘legaly’ PM because GG sacked th elected PM who had confidence of house …and legaly Kerr’s actions made november 1975 electons ‘legal’
So I (with gritted teeth left aside technical legalities) and questoned you on analogy to Canada where confidence of house and Supply ar not de-linked as they were in 1975
Because th 1975 legal technicalities still mean th majority ‘confidence of th house of HoR was ACTUALY rendered irrelevant ….and th unrepresentative Senate’s veto on Supply rather than confidense of house ACTUALY became th sole determinants of who GG would ‘appoint’ as PM AND th sole determinants of which Partys politcal agenda of a convenient early electon would be implemented That I believe is not Canada
I do agree that that would be prudent, but clearly it’s a grey area. She doesn’t “have to” accept advice to prorogue while it’s unclear that Harper has the confidence of parliament.
I don`t think that it would be out of step to refuse a request to prorogue that was only to avoid a vote of no confidence.
Glen
There are divided opinions on that question. I am no expert on their constitution but here is a summary:
Crisis on Parliament Hill: Governor-General Jean weighs her options
Posted: December 01, 2008, 7:56 PM by Chris Boutet
Canadian Politics
As the political crisis unfolds on Parliament Hill, Governor-General Michaëlle Jean has been thrust into an unprecedented role as the arbiter called to bring clarity to the chaos. Janice Tibbetts of Canwest News Service examines the various options that Ms. Jean may face this week as she weighs how to react to the range of political scenarios that may unfold. Despite being on a European tour until Saturday, Ms. Jean’s office says the Governor-General is busy studying the possible scenarios. They include:
1 Stephen Harper could try to buy himself time by asking Ms. Jean to prorogue Parliament until late January, when the Conservatives are slated to release their budget. Several constitutional experts agree that Ms. Jean would be unlikely to refuse the request, because Parliament is constitutionally bound to sit only once a year. But they say the Prime Minister would appear to be bolting from a problem, and would pay a political price for shutting down in the midst of economic turmoil.
“I can’t remember when this power to prorogue was invoked to lock out Parliament for a few weeks waiting for cooler heads,” said Louis Massicotte, a professor at Laval University. “It sounds really desperate to me. It’s like closing shop when the kitchen becomes hot.”
2 The government could face defeat next Monday, when the opposition parties say they will join forces in a vote of non-confidence. The Prime Minister, who must then meet with the Governor-General, could ask her to dissolve Parliament, permitting him to call another $300-million election, eight weeks after Canadians last cast ballots.
“To send Canadians back to the polls in the midst of an economic crisis, when they have just gone there, would not be in the best interests of Canadians,” said Adam Dodek, a public law professor at the University of Ottawa. Other experts counter that the Queen’s representative in Canada, despite her formal powers, should defer to the Prime Minister.
3 Instead of rubber-stamping an election, Ms. Jean could use her “reserve power” to offer the government to the opposition. The three parties have already signed a coalition agreement, and yesterday were putting the final touches on a written pitch to Ms. Jean. If she agrees, it would be the first federal government to be thrown out of office in favour of an opposition coalition.
“She couldn’t be in a much better position to say no than she is right now, because it’s so close to the last election and the last election resolved so little,” said Ed Ratushny, a University of Ottawa constitutional expert. “If the opposition parties could put together a package showing there is a reasonable possibility they are capable of governing, I think that that would be satisfactory. I don’t they have to commit to amount of time.”
Mr. Massicotte said he thinks the bar should be much higher: The opposition should produce a “solid plan” for governing for a prolonged period, he said.
Canwest News Service
But that would be the least she could do William…if the coup was going to happen anyway what is a couple of months?? That would then mean she could say she gave Harper the benefit of the doubt and that he then lost confidence.
She could easily end this crisis by dissolving Parliament because the Liberal/NDP and Bloc are all going through this route because they believe she wont call another poll, but if she warned them she may dissolve Parliament i doubt the Coalition would occur…after all then Harper would win a majority for who in their right minds in Canada would want Dion as PM even if it is for a couple of months!
Glen would you be happy to have those “traitorous Quebecers” support a conservative government?
Glen
Its amazing what you can turn up with Google these days. There are past examples in Canadian history where governor generals have used their reserve powers to ignore the advice of the PM, notably the King – Byng affiar, 1926. See:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Governor_General_of_Canada
Should be an interesting week in Canada!
I would rather the Liberals or NDP, the Bloc has backed Harper because Harper has tried to do some good in Quebec…the Tories hate the Bloc.
Glen, when you’ve lived in North America in or around Canada, then you can tell me about Canadian politics. Meanwhile, you can continue to tell everyone else. Cheers, mate
Er, they clearly aren’t anymore.
But you would accept the Bloc’s support of a conservative government if it came to the crunch? I mean, you’re indignation wouldn’t prevent you from “going to bed” with those “traitorous Quebecers” Glen?
Glen
It won’t be a coup – more a dismissal
In this case it will be a dismissal self-inflicted by the conservatives. It seems the real crunch point from my recent reading of various papers is that Harper doesn’t want to introduce an economic stimulus package, but everyone else does. That is why the other three are joining forces against him.
Juliem i have just been to Canada this very year and to their Parliament so please do not lecture me.
Oz you are quite correct.
The Canadian election result at the 2008 election was Conservatives 38%, Liberals 26%, NDP 18%, Bloc 10% and Greens 7%. 26+18+10+7=61 and 61 is greater than 38 therefore it is a bit rich of Harper to say that he should stay as PM because that is what Canadians voted for when they did not.
If there had been PR then the Parliament might look something like this:
Conservatives 117
Liberals 81
NDP 57
Bloc 28
Greens 23
Then there would be a majority for Libs+NDP+Greens would have a majority and would likely be in a coalition and/or supported minority government without the Bloc or Tories.
Information from http://www.fairvote.ca/files/news%20release%20-%20october%2015%202008%20-%20election%20results.pdf
Those 2 parties dont even have a plurality!!!!!!!!!! They only get it with the Bloc…the Tories only needed 15 MPs from any party to back them!
Socrates he’s already increased funding for pensioners like Rudd and already doubled infrastructure spending like Rudd what more can you ask?
A Labor government in Britain coming back from the brink and a Conservative government in Canada on the brink. There has to be a message in that.
Glen
I didn’t know he’d done those measures – that does sound reasonable. Still, its pretty clear that the knives are out for him. Reading Jean’s background and the Canadian precedents, I’d say he’s in trouble.
Oh bother then we’ll only have New Zealand…
The point of my article is that the Parliament is not representative of the Canadian People and if a more equitable system had been used at the last election then this situation would not have arisen.
I meant my post and the article I linked to (I did not write the article).
Don`t worry Glen you would also have Italy, France, half Germany and others.
Neither does Harper? And it doesn’t matter? The only thing that does matter is confidence and supply, which the Conservatives don’t have.
There’s no rule that says the party with the largest number of individual seats, if there’s no majority, must form government and no one else can.
But Anglo countries we’d be left with just NZ…weak we used to have at least Australia, USA and Canada…
Who knows Harper may make a Berlusconi comeback!
If the party with the largest numbers of seats always formed government, I think the Australian coalition would have a much harder time of it.
Back to Oz politics, on the former thread I mentioned that having Freehills criticize the ALP IR legislation was like having the mother or your first wife commenting on the beauty and intelligence of your second.
GP poo poohed my statement that Freehills were rumored to have written a lot of the the Work Choices legislation. Saying rumour doesn’t make it fact (or words to that effect). To which I respond with this from today’s The Oz:
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24737365-601,00.html
Yes Harper does he has 143 seats…
283 – If that was the rule there’d be a Labor government in WA today.
I’d just point out that the convention in the Australian constitutional law textbooks is that a Governor would not disolve a Parliament in its first year except under extra-ordinary circumstances. In Canada, so soon after an election, it would also be very very unusual to prorogue a parliament. All the conventions would point to the G-G requesting the Prime Minister test his numbers in the Parliament if it is currently scheduled to sit.
Australian examples. 2002 South Australia, Rob Kerin chose not to resign after Peter Lewis signed an agreement with Labor, choosing to test the numbers in parliament first. 1989 Tasmania, Robin Gray refused to resign and forced the new Labor-Green accord to test its numbers in Parliament. There were also other matters going on, such as attempts to bribe Labor MPs, but the point was that the numbers should be tested.
Six weeks after an election, with the numbers in Parliament having changed by this agreement, the Harper government would have to test its numbers on the floor of the Parliament, not prorogue parliament and see if the Coalition fell apart in the mean time. That is how a government proves to the G-G that it has the confidence of the House of Commons.
Mind you, despite having a multi-party system, formal Coalitions in Canadian Parliaments are extremely rare, even at provincial level. Governments usually try an govern in minority rather than sign formal agreements with other parties. That’s another reason this is highly unusual. As for Dion having already announced he would resign as Liberal leader ahead of a leadership convention, so did Pierre Trudeau in 1979, and he went on to win an election and be Prime Minister for another five years.
Very true Gary Bruce. Did we see any Liberal supporters crying foul when the Nationals went back on their word and supported Barnett after the election? Surely they should have supported the largest party in parliament.
Zedar there should only be one centre-right party in Australia…
Ron, my invocation of 1975 went no further than disputing Glen’s point that the GG could arbitrarily call an election. This would, I believe, conventionally involve a proclamation, which requires the advice of ministers.
I’ll agree with you there Glen. I don’t think anyone outside National Party staffers think the National party still serves a purpose.
Most likely Dion will be PM within a week and Iggy will eventually take over next year.
Harper may be rolled as leader but id be naive to think they wouldnt have a leadership ballot if they lost Government and Stephen wanted to stay on.
The left has ROBD* the Tories of power right around the world.
*Rudd, Obama, Brown, Dion.
http://www.smh.com.au/news/world/court-bans-thai-pm-from-politics/2008/12/02/1227980006444.html
Thailand’s ruling party dissolved.
GOD, how boring are we.
“GOD, how boring are we.”
Too true:-)
Before Harper is voted down he should at least name Conservatives to fill the 18 Senate vacancies…lest he let Dion and Layton fill it with Liberals and NDPers…
#291
The Nationals in WA seemed to at the state election!
Glenn, the G-G doesn’t have to accept the PMs advice if they believe the PM does not have the confidence of the House. Queensland Governor declined to accept the advice of Joh Bjelke-Petersen to sack five Minister in 1987. It caused a minor constitutional kerfuffle, but resulted in a new National Party Leader, which proved the Governor’s point abour Bjelke-Petersen not having the confidence of the House. Many a G-G has declined to accept the advice of a PM or Premier to call an election, especially so soon after an election. The Tasmanian Governor declined to accept that advice from Robin Gray in 1989 until he had proved whether he had the confidence of the House.
The G-G would be entitled to see whether, so soon after an election, an alternative government could be formed in the newly elected Parliament. If there is an alternative PM with the confidence of the House who would advise the G-G not to call an early election, than all the precedents suggest the G-G would appoint that alternative PM to have that advice offerred. It’s like 1975 in reverse, where the G-G appointed a PM who could guarantee supply (note my use of words there) who would then advise for an early election. The G-G’s action was to appoint, but they then acted on advice.
Same situation here. One PM Harper who may not have the confidence of the House offering advice, when the House could itself determine who has the confidence of the House, and the G-G would choose to take advice from that person. This is a highly unusual situation but the steps to be taken are relatively straight forward, let the House of Commons decide.
The last time I can think of a government proroguing parliament to avoid a vote of no-confidence was in 1981 in Tasmania. Doug Lowe had just been rolled as Labor Premier over the Franklin Dam, and he took one of his supporters to the cross bench. New Premier Harry Holgate advised parliament be prorogued, mainly to allow campaigning for the Franklin Dam referendum. But he then didn’t bring back parliament until after some long delay, like 4-5 months, and lost a vote of confidence on the first day of sitting.
Mr Green would you think Harper has enough time to appoint those 18 Senate vacancies if he thinks he’ll lose the confidence vote in the House?
The number of Senators in Canada is fixed, so the PM can’t just stack it like Australian Premiers could in the good old days. It appears that increasing the size of the Senate would require the connivance of the provinces.
It’s good to see Obama is governing from the centre. It’s also good to see Obama and Hillary walked off stage together with each other arms around the waist.
Hillary haters on the G Island must be spewing.
Yes i know but the PM appoints Senate vacancies and Harper has campaigned on them being elected like our Senate and has not appointed any vacancies…he’ll need to appoint those 18 Tory Senators before Dion and Layton get in!
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/12/01/AR2008120103054.html?hpid=topnews
#302: Ah yes, it’s all coming back to me now.
Come on Finns! I’ve just had dinner.
Glen
You’ve forgotten Ireland. Fianna Fáil are still in and they’re right-of-centre.
Simon’s dad has died. Can’t be many of Gough’s cabinet left can there?
http://news.smh.com.au/national/former-whitlam-minister-frank-crean-dies-20081202-6pnc.html
Sad to hear Frank Crean died today. Sorry if this was mentioned earlier.
http://www.theage.com.au/national/whitlam-minister-frank-crean-dead-at-92-20081202-6pn9.html
Vera – SNAP.
Many Whitlam ministers lived or are still living long lives.
Gough will live forever
Damn right he will.
Gerry Harvey wants us to “start a collective”. That guy really is a bit messed up.
I find Glen’s bleating about the unnacceptability of BQ rather hollow.
Were you similiarly outraged when the Tories teamed up with the Bloc to bring down the Martin govt?
Well Martin’s government was corrupt…ie Gomery.
They also had an election though David.
Diog, sorry to make you spew. joining your mates at the G Island?
I can’t recall Palin ever being quite as silly as this.
http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,24741159-5005961,00.html
Interest rates will always be lower under a Rudd government
Bishop is a nutter
And she’s the second best they can come up with.
Enough said.
Oz
who is first choice?
Ywan – the ever-predictable hypocrisy of senior libs. They bang a drum all day long about accountability/ transparency in schools – but NOOOOO, not for their private school mates, oh no!! Thats APPALLING!!
I mean, seriously, how can humans in the public eye get away with that level of almost demented inconsistency – unless the media is essentially as walking apology for their incoherence?
Time to rewrite this whole script – you want public dollars, you get the same accountability as public schools. Its not rocket science. Its not “controversial”.
And lets dump the idea that this debate is public v private. It isn’t – the Catholic schools are onboard with the government’s approach.
Nope, its just a few wealthy independent schools, who – one can only conclude – probably have something to hide.
I’m sorry, but your kid ISN’T more important or valuable than mine when it comes to the distribution of public funds. You DON’T deserve special treatment, here.
Clear? See the Catholic school in Richmond that doesn’t qualify for extra govt funds, even though half the kids are in commission? Thats the problem with the current model. The SES model is a class war model of funding. It has to go.
Well I presume Turnbull, since he’s leader?
I probably should have clarified – She’s the second best the Liberal Party can offer to the people of Australia.
Gerry Harvey “If we all got together as a collective and said from now on we will have more confidence, then we could do something no other country has done”
The Hardly Normal Socialist Republic of Australia?
They had a story on public funding for private schools on the 7.30 Report. Why should private schools receive more public funding?
Or maybe the liberals are right that rich kids are entitled to a better education?
She lives on bananas and peanut butter.
Dario 317
Noticed yesterday that her mad grandmother is still interjecting in QT too.
Diogenes, that is indeed very silly and I wonder if Annabel Crabb will add it to her compendium of Julie Bishop’s “looks”? Ad Astra has an interesting piece on why Malcolm is making so many mistakes at Political Sword, and it got me thinking why folk like Bishop and Turnbull struggle so much in Opposition is due to character flaws that are becoming ever more evident with time. In Bishop’s case, she can dish it out but can’t take it when it comes to taunts. Guillard, however, maintains her cool, bides her time and takes the mickey with aplomb. Also, Bishop’s taunts seem childish, her understanding of her portfolio so shallow she is unable to make any serious criticism of the gov’t’s policies. Besides, she’s overshadowed by Turnbull, who, as far as I can judge, appears to be painting himself into a corner on the economy. As A.A.’s excellent piece points out, he’s looking like a dill. Hence, Turnbull’s character flaw, even when all evidence points to the contrary position, he’ll insist his is the right one. I wonder when more of the commentariat might start to notice this.
I don’t care what people say about “choice” or “quality education”. I don’t think a cent of public money should go to private schools.
Public education spending should be increased to created a school system on par with, if not better than, the top countries in the OECD. Parents should be able to be assured that their children are getting a top quality education.
Then if some parents want to send their kids to private schools for whatever reason – they have a better rowing program or whatever, they can do so.
The “choice” argument is a complete furphy. Even with the tens of billions of dollars in taxpayer money private schools get, it’s still a minority that can afford to send their children to them.
Anyone who thinks there’s some issue with that should go down to their nearest public school immediately and see the state it’s in. Our education system, while robust and we’re lucky to have the quality of teachers we have, is not in a top notch state. And it should be the absolute best it can be. Until that happens, we should not be throwing $50 billion to private schools.
lefty e, the gov’t. ain’t going to back down on this. I suspect a very pointy skewer levelled straight at the hearts of the diehards in the Coalition, which Turnbull, it seems, is increasingly unable to hold together. The gov’t. is nothing if not disciplined, and they’ll stare them down.
Oz and Lefty E, how much does the government save by allocating funding to private schools?
If there were no private schools, the cost per unit (for each child) would increase, however would it be fair to say that because of private schools, the cost per unit decreases according to fees charged by private schools?
Still, those rich independent schools should get bugger all!
ongoing wedges agin the fibs
1.worstchoices-yeah or nay
2.private scool funding imbalance -yeah or nay
3.welfare reform-yeah or nay
4.taxation reform-yeah or nay
no wonder their heads are exploding.
oh the inhumanity of it all
Wilson Tuckey points the finger at who’s attacking Bishop, sort of. WA is supporting her. My guess is that it’s the Googler from that list.
Oz, there’s more ways of skinning a cat etc.. Look at the legislation they finally came up with to replace Serfchoices. There’s a few little surprises in there to have the usual suspects bleating about how it’ll screw the economy, blah, blah.
Remember that interview of Rudd by Kerry O’Brien way back in, I think, about February last year, when Rudd said it took quite some time to shift a country in a different direction? I think, while they may be being cautious to an extent and despite the complaints of there being “no narrative” or vision, there is an intent to move the country to more equitable and fairer ways of doing things for the betterment of the joint. I think they do have a commitment to making the place better for all, as opposed to the Coalition, who seem to be in it only for themselves and other interested parties.
I don’t think anyone’s suggesting making private schools illegal… I know I’m certainly not. I should probably add that I find the idea of private schools in general to be abhorrent and completely against Australia’s supposed cultural attitude of egalitarianism. But I’m not one of those people who’s going to stop people sending their kids there. I just really dislike the divide they create and the culture they foster.
HSO, all very good points. I can also see the Rudd government from that perspective.
I’m just young and impatient.
I hope post 333 was not in reply to post 329. If it was you have misinterpreted 329.
I will openly admit I was a bit confused about 329.
Does the government save money by providing funding to private schools as opposed to the hypothetical scenario of providing funding to an all public schools system?
Centre @337
If the funds were injected on a needs basis-obviously yes, but if only as a pork barrelling/special interests group -then no.
the focus should not be on funding per se but on the needs basis
Thanks Gus,
I would agree with that!
“In 1975 I believe that the Senate was split 30/30 on supply”
Yes , but AGAIN like Kerr’s actions , only on legal technicalities
Only because a Labor senator died and Joh ‘appointed’ a pro vetoing Supply Seantor replacement (a Liberal in all but in name) , rather than another Labor Senator ….as per “Convention” ….. otherwise th dismissal could not hav occurred
So “legal technicalities” and broken presedent “conventions” and “votes of confidence” of th House were all thrown into th garbage bin of democracy , and to top off this nest of disgraces ….an unrepresentatice Senate decides who is PM and decides if an inconvenient electon will be held ….and there is more … Kerr’s “legal advice” came from Chief Justice Barwick , coincidently an ex liberal cabinot Minister
So many posters hav missed th 1975 diference ( of no nexus of votes of confidense vs Supply ) against current Canada & Harper ( where there is a nexus) , they hav also th missed obvious constitutional solution IF 1975 events had of been followed democraticaly ….a 1975 vote of confidense in HoR entitles supply to be passed……and therefore a 2008 vote of no confidence in Harper requires his immediate resignation (because by extension of a lost no confidense motion supply should not be granted)
This principal is consistent (for Labor people) …but Glen’s/Libs problam is having trashed th principal in 1975 , when Harper/Canada issue arises they hav absolkutely no principal to rely on as a defense except to cry wolf , rather than understand based on democratic principal Whitlam should hav remained and Harper should go Its th ‘democratic nexus’ of HoR confidense vote to Supply passing (irrespective of an unrepresentative Senate swill) thats been disappointingley missed….still…so lets forget those legal technicalities and look at ‘democracy’ for no more 1975’s … and yet Canada should be th 1975 reminder (in reverse) by its unique dissimilarity , as maintain th rage is still widespread
Ron if Whitlam was smart he’d A) never have appointed that drunk fool and B) sacked him before he got sacked!
Ron all true, but there has been two labor governments since then,time to get over it.
Glen
whipped bullbutter!
I agree with Ron on 1975 100%. Saying that it was legal is missing the point. Various conventions that had been part of the Westminster system for two centuries were deliberately ignored in a partisan way which favoured one side of politics. The fact that it could be done was merely because various constitutional conventions that had been written down in Britain after the 19020s but not here were forgotten by those supposed to protect them. Derelectionof duty by the GG at best. Whitlam made many mistakes and might have lost an election anyway, but thats not the point.
But there is no need to sink to that level to sack Harper. In Canada’s case there is no need to ignore any convention or law. The situation there is more clear cut than in Australia. As I posted earleir, there was a clear interpretation of the Canadian reserve powers articulated by a GG in the 1890s, and acted on in the example I cited in the 1926 case. The GG can sack the PM if she feels she should. Again the situation for Harper is different to Whitlam. Whitlam still enjoyed majority support in the lower house, the traditional measure of being PM. Harper does not. Hence he can be dismissed at any time the house so votes. Proroguing parliament is not a power that can be used for any private purpose.
Of course, I agree Ron the hypocracy is glaring, even if the pretext is misquoted by Harper fans.
Yep, agree with Fred, totally different game now. One, I happily think, the Opposition are buggering up on all fronts. Still think the Opposition are deeply flawed as individuals and as parties, Labor’s got talent to burn, and actually are governing in so far as gov’t’s do in a globalised world.
What is this obsession almost everyone has with the Dismissal? It was 33 years ago. And it is spoken of in the same tones as the Holocaust.
Glen, does the Prime Minister appoint the Senators, or does he advise the G-G to appoint the Senators? If the latter, it may fall down on the same issue that the G-G may not do it on his advice until it is clear he has the confidence of the House.
Ron, Whitlam brought it on himself…he could have picked a better GG lol!
Dio
you forgot to add
21 days
10 hours
and 43 minutes
but hey who’s counting
btw what were you saying about obsession
The GG does on the advice of the PM…but the trouble is he has been putting this off to make a point on wanting an elected Senate and that would then give Dion and Layton the power to stack the Senate with Liberal and NDP Senators 18 of whom should have been Tories…i guess he should have done it earlier.
To my recollection the following Whitlam ministers are still with us: Whitlam, Hayden, Enderby, Doug McClelland, Bowen, Uren, Johnson, Everingham, Paterson, Cass, Morrison, Berinson, Riordan, Keating.
Since we’re all seemingly agreed that Kerr shouldn’t have done what he did, would it be unduly provocative of me to ask what he should have done instead?
Nothing. He should have let the political crisis run its course.
Agree with Adam. Worst case he could have called an election. I am not suggesting Whitam might not have lost anyway. But Kerr shouldn’t have sacked Whitlam without a vote of no-confidence. That was against convention and made it look like it was Whitlam’s fault when the whole situation was engineered by Fraser.
It should have caused another election of both Houses…not just the Senate.
So long as Whitlam had the confidence of the lower house, Kerr should have acted only on his advice, in accordance with modern Westminster convention. Only when supply actually ran out might there have been a case for intervention. We now know that if Kerr had not have intervened, at least one Liberal Senator (Missen I think) would have broken ranks and the crisis would have passed. Fraser knew that, which is why he ramped up the public pressure on Kerr.
Since we’re all seemingly agreed that Kerr shouldn’t have done what he did, would it be unduly provocative of me to ask what he should have done instead?”
No , I’d ask questons provocatively in diferent spectrums ….why did Kerr (IF he thought he should act) do it on that particular day 11th …….why did Kerr IF he thought he should act) not do it on 12th Nov…..or indeed a week later
And i’ll add mores ….What Kerr should hav done (IF he thought he should act) is to consult HIS Minister , th PM Whitlam …..if as a result HIS minister sacked him then so beit
What Kerr should not hav done (IF he thought he should act) is consuilt a clearly partisan Chief Justice ex Cabinet Minister as his source of legal advice
So that is do’s and don’t’s of Kerr (IF he thought he should act) …..so he failed alot of tests
What Kerr actaualy should hav done is understand it was STILL a LIVE ‘poltical contest’ Whitlam vs Fraser , and therefore he should not hav got involved at all then Fact is money was decreasing but not at th rate of resolve of “small L liberal Senators like Misen etc….good reports say Misen alone was 36 hours from yielding and passing Supply…resulting in Whitlam PM and Fraser probabley forced to resign his Leadership
But Misen was not only ‘waverer’…and Whitlam only needed one
So why Kerr should not hav acted is HE decided th footy game instead of th players and it is NOT his constitutionel right to do so ….and Whitlam was favourite , and more so by day
Kerr achieved th impossible in 1975 crisis , numerous choises were available and he picked all th wrong ones…and his place in histary rightly is of disgraced infamy
What Adam said.
But that said, Gough got to power 3 years too late. If he had won in 69 his govt would have been younger (a lot of old men who had waited too long to win office) and the economics would not have been so loaded against him.
That’s it, she’s gone now. You can’t be described as “giggling” and survive. (Unless of course you’re from WA and you control 20% of the room’s numbers I guess)
Whitlam said “Maintain the rage”, some have while Whitlam, Fraser and Hawk became the best of mates, can’t add Keating to the list, he is giving the definite impression that he is still politically active. On the other hand Howard, the only conservative prime minister alive, will end up a very lonely man, worshiped by people he cares very little about and shunned by the rest.
The real question is, within the list of friends, which was the best liberal prime minister, my view is Keating.
This is sad that this is the best the media can come up with I mean…on the one hand they praise Gillard as a future PM and decray Julie Bishop as a plagarist and making gestures in Parliament…while at the same time ignoring the fact that Gillard mislead the Australian people on the Laptop roll out that is 66% over budget alot like Medicare Gold!
This is double standards!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The reason Kerr acted on Nov 11 as opposed to some other day is that he had been advised that Nov 11 was the last day on which Parliament could be dissolved for an election before Xmas. Since the election was on Dec 13, it could probably have been held a week later (Dec 20), but that was apparently considered too close to Xmas. So that’s why he felt he had to either act or decide not to act on that date.
Keating was a disgrace…he ruined the economy after doing good things as Treasurer in the early 80s…he should never have won in 1993!
I rate Hawke and Curtin well above Keating in Labor PMs.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20081201.weCoalition02/CommentStory/Front/
Didn’t expect to see you pop up on The Globe and Mail, Diogenes.
As far as I can see Kerr had only two real options.
1) Ask Whitlam to call an election
2) Allow the status qou remain.
I was born in 1976 so I missed all the fun but I would imagine that the media were all over the Government and I would imaine that the Government would have to have moved or as happens the backbench would have moved therefroe an election may well have occurred within a short period of time.
For those around what was the media coverage like in the months leading up to the crisis?
How were the two major parties traveling?
And what were the polls saying?
I believe Newspoll did not exist at that time.
As Rudd put it in Parliament, which electorates would you not like to see laptops in, Glen?
Providing computers for schools is a good policy and there’s no double standard in pointing that out whilst also pointing out plagiarism and other sad behaviour.
Under Westminster convention, Kerr certainly had the right to give Whitlam advice, such as that he should call an election. But if Whitlam refused, as he did on Nov 11, Kerr’s duty was then to do nothing.
Whitlam was well behind in the polls after the loans affair etc, but as soon as Fraser blocked supply Labor began to recover, since polls showed a majority opposed to blocking supply. That’s why some Senators were getting cold feet by Nov 11. That in turn was why Fraser goaded Kerr into acting as he did. Whitlam’s calculation may have been to let events run, then call a snap election after Xmas, but that’s speculation.
No, Kerr should have done jack all.
Setting the precedent that once the Senate blocks supply the next step is an election is extremely stupid.
It was rank political opportunism at it’s best (or worst) and should be seen as nothing else. The party that has confidence in the Lower House is the Government and should be treated as such.
I recall there were joint sittings of Parliament earlier to pass certain pieces of legislation like Medicare (I think). Why was one of these not called for supply?
Oz that is stupid politics…who said we were against it?
We are merely pointing out that your ‘darling’ madam julia made a dogs breakfast out of it like she did with Medicare Gold…
http://www.news.com.au/story/0,27574,24741187-421,00.html
Might help if they were sensible questions …
That photo is not a good look for a politician:
http://www.news.com.au/common/imagedata/0,,6380002,00.jpg
sorry … forgot the JB quote:
“I have asked almost as many questions of Wayne Swan in two months as he asked of (former) treasurer Peter Costello in two years,” she said.
“I have asked the treasurer 30 questions, I have yet to receive a sensible response to any of them.”
Might help if they were sensible questions …
That photo is not a good look for a politician:
http://www.news.com.au/common/imagedata/0,,6380002,00.jpg
Gallup poll, September 1975 (i.e. just before supply was blocked in mid-October):
ALP 35.2%; LIB 50.3%; NCP 6.8%.
Gallup poll, “first two weekends of November 1975″:
ALP 42.2%, LIB 41.1%, NCP 5.0%.
“Do you believe that the Federal Opposition was right or wrong in attempting to block the money bills in the Senate at the present time?” 30.0% RIGHT; 63.4% WRONG.
“Do you approve or disapprove of the way Mr Fraser is handling his job as Leader of the Opposition?” 34.9% APPROVE; 59.0% DISAPPROVE.
Election, 13 December 1975:
ALP 42.8%; LIB 41.8%; NCP 11.3%
“The reason Kerr acted on Nov 11 as opposed to some other day is that HE had been advised that Nov 11 was the last day on which Parliament could be dissolved for an election before Xmas”
by whom , not by his minister who appointed him Whitlam
“it could probably have been held a week later (Dec 20), but that was apparently considered too close to Xmas.”
Ditto , by who , to allow buying xmas presents
There is not one excuse that holds against a duly elected PM , holding majority in HoR being forced by a Senate (including joh appointees) to a convenient for opposition Senate) election and with that Senate effectively deciding who is th PM caretaker or otherwise supply is entitled to be passed and sooner that loop hole is closed th better , why risk another Kerr
And finaly why do people overlook Kerr deliberateley deceived th PM , his Minister who appointed him kerr should hav told whitlam what was on his mind 9even though Kerr had no right to be thinking that wat fact he was required him not to hide that from PM…and if by telling Whitlam he Whitlam sacked Kerr as he was entitled to do , then thats life0 But letting contest play out was always correct non decsion to be made
You’re not against it but you don’t want to spend money on it…
Oz, a joint sitting can only be held after a double dissolution election, and only to vote on the bills that were the trigger for the election.
365 the media were made up of the Faifax fellow Whitlam travellers and the Murdoch camp of course ,with the defunct Nation Review providing valuable comfort and fearless commentary to the armchair left and the remnants of the the hippy culture of the 60’s , \The Murdoch journalists with a concscience went on strike for practically the duaration of the election in protest at Murdochs blatant no hold barred hatred of Whitlam and put out their own paper which they sold at the numerous rallies and on the street.
ANOP AND morgan supplied the polls and until the Ker coup were starting to swing in favour of Whitlam this changed o/night following the coup , Richard Carlton was the chief ABC commentator and was fairly pr labor ( kerry obrien had worked for an ALP minister
Glen
I won’t pretend that Bishop has many friends o this blog after her Workchoices efforts, but you can hardly be surprised over the media coverage of her claws gesture. The media love that stuff, whether they’re for you or against you. Look at the coverage of THAT handshake by Latham – the same journos played it for all it was worth. Sorry Glen, but thats the nature of the business, as you know.
If you’re going to spend money on it at least keep it on Budget but i guess that’s too hard with Swanny…lol!
Recordings of November 11 radio coverage here. You need Real Audio, I believe.
Ron
I can still remember watching on TV Kerr speak, obviously drunk, at the Melbourne Cup presentation ceremny a year or two later. It was quite a bizarre speech. The event seemed to have destroyed him by then. I think he knew he did the wrong thing but couldn’t deal with it. I don’t think he was evil, but to me that marks him as a weak man, who simply caved in to the demands of others, and presumably some resentment of Whitlam. I’d love to hear some honest discussion by those who knew him of his state of mind in 1975. Just my perception.
Anyone who read the Electoral Act could have figured out the last day on which it was practically possible to dissolve Parliament for a pre-Xmas election.
Ron is right to say that Kerr had no right to deceive Whitlam about his intentions. If he had determined to dismiss Whitlam unless Whitlam complied with his wishes, he should have told Whitlam so. That’s what Sir Phillip Game did when he determined to dismiss Jack Lang in 1932, and that was the precedent Kerr should have followed. It’s true that Whitlam might then have asked the Queen to terminate Kerr’s commission, but that was not a matter Kerr had any right to take into account. If Whitlam did do that, the political odium would have been on him.
The Age had turned on Whitlam by 1975. It was The Age that did most of the damage over the loans affair, revealing Cairns’s letter to George Harris and also his appointment of his stepson to his staff. I don’t recall what line the SMH took.
And of course The Age was not a Fairfax paper in 1975, as I now recall.
Owned by Syme & Co I believe, or was it the Hearld & Weekly Times ?
Thanks William.
The blatant use of political opportunism by Fraser’s liberal government in 1975 is no different to the opportunism now attempting to be used by the non-conservatives to oust Harper in Canada. Opportunism decried by our conservative loving blogger Glen. All it goes to show is that given the chance any party or coalition of parties will use it to further their own political end.
Hah the Liberals got their lowest share of the vote since Confederation and now they after being rejected by Canadians are trying to take power with Socialists and Sepratists…they the Left are acting like Fraser!
Oz,
The constitutional provision for a joint sitting relates to the specific instance of a double dissolution election.
A dd trigger exists when the Senate refuses legislation passed by the HoR twice with a 3 month interval between the two “refusals”.
In 1974 Whitlam initated a dd election with multiple dd triggers. When he was returned, these pieces of legislation were passed in the Reps but still refused by the Senate. Each item was then put to a joint sitting (only occurrence in Oz history, iirc) and passed because the labor majority in the Reps was greater than their minority in the Senate.
I’m posting from memory, so quite possibly wrong on detail, but the general thrust of the comment is correct.
That is why a joint sitting could not have been held to resolve the supply stand-off. I agree with Ron’s and Adam’s recollection of the sequence of events, including the widely-rumoured likelihood that Senator Alan Missen was expected to cross the floor.
Incidentally one of Fraser’s tactics was not to oppose supply, but rather to defer (Senate) consideration of it until Whitlam agreed to hold a Reps election. It was widely assumed that the reason for this was the reticence of some Liberal/National Senators to breach convention and block supply, offering them a fig-leaf of constitutional respectability.
It’s also worth noting that Joh’s appointment of the risible Albert Field to a casual vacancy in the Senate was not the first breach in that tumultuous year of the convention that casual vacancies were to be filled by a nominee of the Party of the retiring Senator. NSW Premier Lewis had appointed an independent Cleaver Bunton to replace Lionel Murphy, when the latter was appointed to the High Court. However, at the relevant time Senator Bunton voted in conformity with the convention supporting the Supply bills, so his appointment had no impact on the crisis.
mexicanbeemer,
The msm were quite feral towards Labor pretty well right from the time Whitlam got up in 1972. They got progressively worse.
Oz’
These were a result of joint sittings after the double dissolution and election Whitlam called in 1974.
Only Bills that the Opposition had failed to pass prior to that were applicable. The mandate didn’t apply to subsequent events such as the suply crisis.
Oz
That Canadian is besmirching my good name. To see my name used in association with a pro-conservative blogger is more than I can take. Cynical philosophy is totally incompatible with conservativism. I’m going to have to respond.
Excuse me? Harper does not have a majority in the Commons – the voters have twice declined to give him one. The only reason he is PM is because the BQ supported him. If the BQ decides to ally with the Libs and NDP, then there is a parliamentary majority against Harper and he must resign. In 1975 Whitlam had a majority in the Reps, and Kerr broke Westminster convention by dismissing him and appointing Fraser PM, probably after corruptly colluding with him to deceive Whitlam. There is no comparison between the two situations.
“I’d love to hear some honest discussion by those who knew him of his state of mind in 1975. Just my perception”
Socrates I tink your 1977 analysis is right and feel it goes to Kerr’s character makeup
His state of mind in 1975 i only can sugest as a layman from books I’vee read on him and interviews , but I always felt he was a man over promoted for such ‘authority’ in many character attritubes , he to me took th role far too seriously about his status and influence ….rather than taking th role seriuosly to perform it as a responsible job as intended like later GG’s
So basicaly a weak man where perhaps self importance and self delusion recognition/importance and pomp and ego seemed to take over in 1975 (maybe always underneath anyway) ……these poor characteristics i tink were preyed upon by Fraser But after these very same poor charateristics resulted in his shattered pride after th dismissal (that you described years later) when most (rightly) condemned him
I tink one of Myer guys was first choise , a pity With all those legal qualifications , there may not hav been pre existing wisdom at that level or humility , rather th reverse
SNIP: Unconstructive comment deleted – The Management.
Yes Adam is right. There’s no comparison. Whitlam had a majority and the confidence of the Parliament. Harper has neither.
Thanks everyone for the information regarding joint sittings of parliament.
the events of 75 proved the frailty of our existing system
the casting of good and bad (although quite renjoyable) ignores the reality that we are at the whim of one person. The GG.
A republic,properly constructed, would return that power to the people.
On kerr- he had a quite good legal mind-the pompousity of GG attracted him and ultimately lead to his decision ,I believe he felt he was “rex in australis”
Yes. Another level of checks and balances is good. That level being accountable to the people is even better.
Adam@391. Agreed there is no comparison between the two circumstances. All I am saying is that given an opportunity politicians will make use of that opportunity be it wrong or right. I believe Kerr acted incorrectly and at the time saw it as just a blatant misuse of the opportunity provided by the appointment of Senator Field to give him a majority in the senate (with Field’s help) and I was appalled by what happened.
Herald and Weekly Times owned the then major opponent of the Age the Herald.
It still owns the major opponent now the Herald Sun but is owned by News Corp (scince 1987).
Once the takeover was a certainty but not actually done Herald and Weekly Times should have sold the Adelaide Advertiser and Courier Mail to Fairfax so that Adelaide and Brisbane kept newspaper competition (News Corp owned the other news papers in those two cities and sold them off and they subsequently collapsed).
Another facet of 75,little realised, is that gough was able to reconcile with kerr’s curr (fraser) but never with kerr himself.
perhaps the most telling point.
I am sure that the anti-supply forces only had half the Senate when used when they caused supply to pass in the negative.
Btw, throughout the 1975 crisis, Field’s appointment was the subject of legal challenge, and he wasn’t actually sitting in the Senate or voting. However, the loss of 1 Labor vote critically allowed the persistent delay of Supply.
For those who can’t remember him, it’s probably worth recalling Fred Daly’s remark about Albert Field;
Thanks Peter re highlighting deferral rather than voting against I now recall Misen and another Senator (whose name escapes me) subsequently confirmming they’d actualy told th Party room they would not vote against supply , but reluctantly would vote for defferral ‘for a time’ They were only ones to fess up but th suggestion there were others ….irrespective there were 2 strong waverers with Misen 36 hours from capitulating from deferring
Glen I can understand your frustration of your Canadian Tory Govt getting only 6 weeks of sunlite , but as i gently said earlier th rod you guys made in 1975 has returned , and with th same fundamental principal of majority HoR confidense vote warranting approval of supply ….but this time th principal will triumph as it should hav in 1975 , its th diferent Suply nexus you’ve missed
Perhaps GLEN you should wander back to early 2001 , Howard travelling shakey , before boat people issue surfaced ….Howard has majority HoR confidense vote …there is no no LCP Senate control then ….th ‘enemy’ Senate rejects Supply , and Polls show LCP looking ordinary , you would hav objected , and I would hav been (reluctantly) agreeing with you quite frankley
Principals ar not disposable when it suits Glen Listen to this song Amigo FINNS re-found (again) for me , tink 1975 principal and this song , and perhaps reconsider
http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=dipFMJckZOM
The Liberal and National Country parties had 30 votes from 60 in the Senate. Albert Field did not take his place in the Senate because Labor challenged his appointment in the High Court, so the combined vote against the deferral of supply was 27 Labor Senators plus two independents, Steele Hall and Cleaver Bunton (who had become the first of two non-Labor Senators to fill Labor casual vacancies, replacing Lionel Murphy). The Coalition was thus able to pass a motion to defer supply 30 votes to 29. If not for Albert Field, the numbers would have been 30-all. The Coalition could still have rejected the supply bills, because tied votes are resolved in the negative, but the bills would then have returned to the House rather than remained locked in the Senate.
“the Coalition could still have rejected the supply bills”
but not deferred them
Missen and one other were only prepared to defer but not vote against , Fraser would hav been finished politcaly without joh’s appointee Fields , denting Labor th key 30th vote
denying Labor th key 30th vote
And as many of us remember, Albert Field was subsequently tossed out and replaced by Labor’s original nominee, Mal Colston.
Who, unfortunately, turned out to be not such a good representative for the ALP and was embraced by Howard who used his vote to get a number of controversial Bills through.
Mal Colston used to put out a monthly newsletter, the Colston Report which I received for a number of years. It was actually quite good in many respects.
His problem was probably similar to Kerr, in that he enjoyed the trappings of power and wanted the Speakers position in the Senate and when it was denied him he became an independent and thence Howard’s man. Sad really.
His nickname within the Labor Party in later years was “Rigamortice”.
but there has been never any doubt Mal Colston would hav voted for Supply then in 1975 , making vote POTENTIALY tied 30/30 , meaning rejection…but Missen and one other were not going to allow rejection and since said so …so vote Supply would actualy pass 32/28…with Fraser just a note in history
Alternatively , without Fields/Colston in th Senate , vote 29/30 for defferral , until Misen & other caved in …meaning Supply passed 31/28
We know EXTREME pressure was applied on misen etc on morning of 11th november to hold for a day or two (th LCP Senators could read Polls showing 63% opposed holding up Supply , voters knew Whitlam was PM , holding a HoR majority and entitled to Supply…and its last bit of principal thats unarguable)
The flying peanut at his most eloquent on 11/11/75.
http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=Q-RYqMuqkZ4&feature=related
Well am hardly likely to let Joh hav th last word on 1975….my retort is we lost th battle but hav won th culture war on senate Supply powers ….as Kerr is regarded as a pompous fool , Fraser is remembered as Kerrs Kerr , Whitlam is regarded an icon , and th ‘democracy’ principal that Gough so defiantly fought for , stands even stronger today such that most Liberals cringe mentioning th dismissal , and beneath that principal is a genorational growing Republican sentiment as well……and as for sir Joh , probably remembered as an embarasing relic and he who gave peanuts a bad name
The Senate still has the power to block supply.
Realize that , but stigma from 1975 will inhibit an opposition , and in any event we ar hardly likely to get another GG who ignores so many Conventions as pompous Kerr did , nor foolish enough to remotely contemplate a post Kerr life for doing so And further you underestimate how more savvy voters hav become Having said that would find comfort in a Republic and Senate’s Supply role codified
US election loose ends, Minnesota Senate election ….
So we will know by the end of the year it sounds like ……
Bill has knocked back ideas that he will go the Senate. (Btw, Paterson (NY gov) has removed himself from the running as well)
Glen said
“Keating was a disgrace…he ruined the economy after doing good things as Treasurer in the early 80s…he should never have won in 1993!”
Glen; Keating had more balls than all the Liberal prime minsters since Menzies put together. He was the one that finally brought protectionism to an end, ( a process started by Whitlam), floated the dollar, opened up the banking sector and brought sanity into the unions ranks. There are very good reasons this country has prospered since the Keating government and Howard had very little to do with it ( one exception, the GST gave the government the revenue needed to put it in a strong position for this downturn, pity the Liberals wasted so much of the revenue on petty vote grabbing, but that is life)
If you have liberal views, take your blinkers off and look at who actually did what, if your a conservative (which I suspect you are) , then you got what you wanted out of Howard, dull political moves aim at reinforcing the worst of our past; it will all be forgotten. And yes as a conservative i can understand why you don’t like Keating, he actually changed stuff.
fredn oh and dont forget the going away present he left us a 10b dollar budget deficit and 96b of net Commonwealth debt…thanks Mr Keating!
Thank you those who replied to my question about the astmosphere in 1975!! William that was some bounce, while it could have been a rouge but the ALP could quite rightly have gone the voters are behind us on this. looking at those poll numbers shows Kerr’s actions to have been even more incorrect, hindsight is a great thing but Frazier should have held back for he was a good 15 points in front. he would have saved his Party the trouble of having a divided middle class between thse who stayed Liberal and those who embraced the ALP in part because of 1975
Glen, the budget deficit had been growing since the 60’s. It was fixed by opening up the economy (Keating), capital gains tax (Keating), selling commonwealth assets (Howard), and the GST (Howard) . I’m surprised a conservative would support either of Howards contributions.
Glen!! I for one was and will never be a fan of the Keating Government but I seem to recall helping to remove him from office a good twelve years ago, yes Howard did well in paying off that debt but some of the methods were flawed. The problem for the Liberal Party is not that the ALP have become experts on running the economy but the Liberal Party themselves have become a narrow based party, they need to boarden their base, until then the Liberal Party is in opposition.
In many ways the Liberal Party have become a little like the ALP did after they lost Government, they went though a phase of being a narrow moaning, carping good for nothing group with a slack leadership, it took until Kevin Rudd and Julia Gillard came along and the Liberal Party produced one of the worst Acts of Parliament I have ever seen.
fredin!! The Hawke/Keating Government started the process of selling assets off example the Commonwealth Bank
Wonder what the Opposition thinks of the editorial (advertorial?) in today’s online OO? The usual denials, I suppose.
Apparently, all would have been well in the Opposition if it had been taking notice of the OO.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24742395-16741,00.html
Some Opposition members, however, might be comforted by the concluding paragraph, . Generously, the OO says that Ms Bishop, (”cat-clawing schoolgirl”) “is free to use our best lines – with acknowledgment. Shadow treasurers need a strong work ethic, not a ludicrous persecution complex.”
HAHAHA experts on running the economy HAHAHAH the ALP HAHAHAHAH what a laugh thanks Mexican you made my day!
Mexicanbeemer
In 1975 I was a strong Liberal supporter and I believed Kerr did the right thing. We had just had the loans affair, and generally things looked like a mess. From my point of view all Kerr did was send the whole lot of them back to the electorate for a decision (that is what democracy is about). What you have here is an analysis on the chances of Frazer keeping up the pressure. That really wasn’t the point.
Whitlam did a lot of good things (remove the risk that I would be conscripted for one), but by 1975 things really had got out of control. I agree however Frazer did make a mistake, and to his credit I think he realized it, he did not take on the unions, that in my view is why the union movement was so damaging in the 80’s and why it was left to a Labor Government to bring it all back to sanity.
Sometimes carrot are better than sticks.
Glen
Take a graph of GDP, Inflation or interest rates. Draw lines and mark who was in power, the result is not pretty for the Liberal party. Then look back and consider what changes were made that improved our economic system and who made them. The result is not pretty for the Liberal party.
Time to move on to the next debate:
http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/bill-of-rights-to-rein-in-parliament/2008/12/02/1227980018609.html
It seems NSW politicians on both sides have a lot to learn about anger management.
What a dingbat.
http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/story/0,22049,24744521-5001021,00.html
425 – Fred, Glen doesn’t want to discuss facts he just wants us to relive the perceptions the Libs fostered all those years.
#426
I recall an examination of a bill of rights on ABC radio a while ago. Until then I thought it was something that of course we should have, but I was surprised to hear various quite persuasive arguments against it. After that I was just about convinced that I don’t want one. Bob Carr is an opponent: http://www.thenewcity.info/carr_bill_rights.htm
Oz426
That is very welcome – we need a bill of rights, as appalling cases such as Haneef and Cornelia Rau demonstrate. Given our current appalling anti-terror laws, they would also do well to include right to speedy trial, no imprisonment without trial, etc.
However care needs to be taken in how it is done. The US is by no means the best model to follow, although most of our policy geniuses blindly follow them.
In my field the ham-fisted way the anti-discrimination laws were introduced are a case in point. When you say that there should be no discrimination against the disabled it seems a motherhood statement that none can argue with. But what is discrimination? The trouble is that some people assume that by increasing access or right to use a service by one group, noone else is made worse off, but this is rarely the case. There are some ridiculous rulings on disabled access to public transport that are almost impossible to comply with. In catering for some groups you disadvantage others. Want a nice tactile surface that helps the blind find where they are going? But the bumps prevent wheelchair users from easily moving along platforms. Meanwhile nobody considers other much larger groups who are not disabled but still have real needs – like older women who are oftne osteo-porotic.
Forgive the rant but I guess I’m saying that I’m all in favour, but the bill must be crafted carefully by expert lawyers and philosophers to make sure that the “rights” do not infringe the rights of others. That will leave the list surprisingly narrow.
Socrates our rights are already protected under Common Law…we dont need to be giving more power to Judges!
Triton
Many Australian scholars in ethics and justice are in favor of a bill of rights, and there are counter-arguments to Carr’s very biased view. Here are a few examples:
http://www.humanities.mq.edu.au/Ockham/bill.html
http://abri.org.au/bin/view/ABRI/
http://stanford.library.usyd.edu.au/entries/rights-human/
http://stanford.library.usyd.edu.au/entries/rights/
http://stanford.library.usyd.edu.au/entries/civil-rights/
I think we do need such a bill; recent events have demonstrated that our constitutionis NOT sufficient protection. We just need to do it carefully.
I am not convinced we need a bill of rights!! It may look like a nice idea but if the various laws in place don’t already allow such protections then instead of another law, why not simplly admend the existing laws.
The Anti-decrimination Act & I.R laws already provide basic rights, before anyone said but they can be changed, well so can a bill of rights.
Already several issues have occurre due in part to the Victorian and I recently read an article on either the Australian Policy Online or the On-line Opinion website (I can’t recall which one) outlining these issues.
I’m firmly of the view that what this country needs isn’t a chart of rights for rights are covered in a whole range of Acts of Parliament.
I.R laws
Anti-Decrimination Act
Sexural Decrimination Act
Racial Hate laws
O&HS Act
Glen
If all aspects of english common law applied in Australia that would be (partly) true. But sadly that is not the case, certainly not after the anti-terror laws. See the links I posted for counter-arguments to the “its all right’ view, which I think are quite convincing.
MB
The whole point of a bill of rights is to give it constitutional stature so that it cannot be changed at teh whim of a government. That is one of the problems at present – a government (eg Howards) can introduce new laws (eg anti-terror) that eliminate fundamental common law rights, and our constitution can’t easily stop it. Here is a piece from the Law Institute of Victoria explaining why
http://www.liv.asn.au/media/president/20070914.html
A bill of rights is not so much about freedom but a transfer of power from parliament to the courts. It’s interesting that the courts already had enough power to undo the damage done by an appalling government in the case of Haneef and Cornelia Rau.
Undo some of the legislation introduced in the name of terrorism and supported by both Labor and Liberal would be more to the point.
fredn
The point of a bill of rights is to give some protection to individuals, not courts or parliaments. In my experience most people who think their rights are well protected in Australia have never read our constitution, which is a very weak document. It also did not benefit from the strengthening of the english constitution that occurred with various formally defined rights after our legal separation. We do not compare well.
Both of those people werent citizens!
They have been hyped by the media and if they are the only 2 injustices you can come up with that hardly justifies a Bill of Rights…
Put simply we dont need one!
Yes, I agree the US example is not a particularly good one. But then again, what of theirs is?
Glen
How about Mamdoo Habib, an Australian citizen, detained and tortured abroad with the knowledge of federal public servants (one allegedly present in Pakistan), and nothing done until it became an embarrassment in the media? He may have been misguided, but there was never evidence he was a terrorist. He is not the only one either.
Besides, the Australian citizen argument doesn’t wash – that implies non-citizens should have no rights (Pacific solution logic?). As Hemmingway put it “Ask not for whom the bell tolls, it tolls for thee”.
Cornelia Rau is still doing it tough. She was given a drug holiday in Germany (she really seems to hate her medications) and has ended up detained for 7 weeks under the German mental health act. I’m not sure a Bill of Rights would have helped her. And Glen she is an Australian citizen. She’s got an Aussie passport.
http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/carers-have-failed-rau-again-say-family-and-lawyer/2008/11/27/1227491735594.html
Actually Glen, if you read the Palmer and Comrie reports you’ll find that there were many other examples that we didn’t hear about cos they weren’t ‘hyped by the media’
Socrates anybody who goes to Afghanistan and isnt in uniform/or aid agencies has whatever is coming to them as far as i am concerned.
Cornelia Rau is still doing it tough HAHAHAH Dio she’s got Millions for what she did…if only i could get locked up and get Millions for nothing lol! And if she got caught again for not taking her medication then it is hardly fair to lay all the blame on Immigration.
We like to think we are good on human rights but the truth is less flattering. Here is Amnesty International’s report on Australia in 2007 at the end of the Howard era:
http://www.amnesty.org/en/region/australia/report-2007
Socrates
It’s John Donne, not Hemingway. And it’s;
“Never send to know for whom the bell tolls; it tolls for thee.”
I seem to recall reading in the paper a year or two ago that the immigration dept. somehow managed to deport about 50 Australian citizens in total over the last few years – was this the case or is my memory playing tricks on me?
Socrates ill assume it does not praise Howard…
Glen
The Guardianship Board agreed for her to stop the meds. Immigration is in the clear on this one. And money doesn’t buy much happiness if you’re psychotic and detained.
Ah good logic. If you go to Afghanistan you deserved to be tortured while Australian government officials look on.
Senator Conroy seems to be asking for demotion….
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24744658-12377,00.html
Senator snoozes through own Bill debate
“COMMUNICATIONS Minister Stephen Conroy has been caught napping as the Senate debated his legislation.”
Dio you do have a point. But at least she should be now able to afford good health care?
Economic news Australia grew at 0.1%
Yes I’m aware of the debate in favor of the charter of rights, and yes the consititution is a very weak document that was somethig that struck me when I read it during the republic debate.
There are several examples of charters other than the American one, the British for example have had a charter of sorts since the magna carter but has changed a great deal since that time with several changes including various acts of parliament.
Interestingly none of the first magna carter still applied as a part of the british legal system.
I’m of the view that the currant system works, we have a well developed court process and a parliament that counter balance one another, yes we can do things better and while I understand where Glen is coming from, the fact remains when you are on Australian soil you should have access to equal treatment regardless of birthplace.
Dio
I know the original is in by Donne, but the quote is in the front of For Whom the Bell Tolls. I should have said Donne, but I didn’t recall his exact words.
Glen
No argument on Conroy. The only virtue of his being asleep in parliament is that he can’t say anything stupid.
Glen
Very true. In retrospect, she obviously shouldn’t have been allowed to stop the antopsychotics. At the time, it probably seemed like a reasonable risk to take.
The Amnesty Report on Oz isn’t that bad for Howard.
1. Violence vs women. Not Howard’s fault at all. A cultural thing for Oz males. Almost impossible to fix.
2. Indigenous abuse. Similar to above
3. Anti-terror laws. Howie takes the blame for them, but I don’t think Rudd has repealed any of them and Keelty still has his job.
4. Hicks. Pretty weak by Howard not to get him out earlier but hardly a hanging offence.
5. Refugees and asylum seekers is really the only serious abuse by Howard that Rudd has reversed.
Rudd “Is Australia in Recession? Yes. Can Swan do anything about it? No. But when it comes to the economy we at least have Tanner”…
How is growing by 0.1% a Recession Glen?
Dario…it was a joke but maybe it will become a reality…hopefully it wont.
But 0.1% is nothing to crow about.
Its always a recession when Labor is in government, according to the Liberal party. At least they’re hoping for one.
On the contrary, growth of any kind in the toughest quarter we’ve seen for a long time that has seen much (most?) of the developed world drop into recession is quite remarkable.
On the recession thing, the National Bureau of Economic Research which is the “official arbiter of recessions” says the US has been in recession since Dec 2007. Why has it taken them twelve months to point it out. I can see six months, ie consecutive quarters, but 12 months makes it sound like they deliberately held back until after the election.
Who is Australia’s “official arbiter of recessions”? Malcolm Turnbull?
Mesma
I vote Glen.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/12/03/2436322.htm
So who exactly are they standing up for?
Politically, it’s hugely important what is accepted as a Recession. If the Ruddster can avoid having our economy labelled as being in recession, he gets huge kudos for his economic management. But if the public is persuaded that we are in recession, Rudd’s going to get bashed up as he has predicted that we will avoid one. I vote Possum as the independent umpire.
Socrates
As things stand your rights are protected by being able to vote out parliament, with a bill of rights your rights are protected by the court. In other words you are transferring power to the courts.
Now I will agree when it comes to rights, the courts have performed better than our elected representatives in recent years, but one should remember, we don’t elect judges.
No, as things stands we actually have little “rights”. The fact that new rights being created will be subject not to the whims of poll driven politicians but be enforced by independent legal experts is a positive.
A story about the goings on in Canada ….
http://tinyurl.com/6×59jx
Juliem if you think Layton, Dion and Duceppe all like each other and will last in a Coalition take a look at what they really think of each other….
http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/posted/archive/2008/12/02/what-the-coalition-leaders-really-think-of-their-new-partners.aspx
How’s this:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20081202.wPOLcoalition1202/BNStory/politics/home
The article has a good update of recent happenings.
The Canadian Senate really is unrepresentative swill…
To be honest, so is their Lower House.
A technical recession is 2 consecutive quarters of negative economic growth.
Australia had 1 quarter of negative economic growth in 2001, but managed to avoid a second. As such, the last recession we’ve had was in 1991.
Oz
“whims of poll driven politicians”
That being the case, then loss of rights must be something the majority want, what moral basis has the court (who after all enforce the laws generated by the poll driven politicians) got to stop it?
One has to say that Harper has to be one of the worst political operators in a while if he manages to lose government from the position his party was in after the election.
He managed to form a government from 124 seats (out of 308) in 2006 – yet he managed to lose government when he now has 143 seats. To do this, he must have really pissed off the other parties if he can’t get another 11 seats from the remaining 165…
http://www.nationalpost.com/news/global-video/index.html?video=3240893
Wow the Canadian Question Period makes ours look soooo boring!
Rubbish. Claiming that every single law that is passed by Parliament is what the “majority want” is ridiculous.
Not only that, but he managed to unite the left. Something that has never been done to this extent in Canadian politics.
However, if the coalition lasts to the next election it could present some problems. If the parties compete with each other then that has its own downsides even before getting to the issue of splitting the left vote once again. But if they decide to split up what seats they’ll contest, that could drive some Liberal voters to the Conservatives and maybe some NDP voters to The Greens.
Very true. The spectre of 4-cornered contests in Quebec (Tory, Libs, NDP and BQ), as well as a multitude of 3-cornered contests elsewhere shows the irrationality of having a FPP electoral system.
What’s more – it could have been worse! The ADQ, the official opposition in Quebec, declined to run. If it had, you would have had 5-cornered contests in Quebec, plus 4-cornered contests in other provinces where the Greens were running stronger (e.g. British Columbia).
Oz @ 642
The Libs are all urine (hope that is permissable Mr Bowe) and hot wind, They like to bluster and beat their chests but as soon as Julia (or in the case below Penny), stares them down they fold pretty quick, That education bill will be passed by the end of this sitting, just wait and see.
http://news.smh.com.au/national/murraydarling-takeover-to-go-ahead-20081202-6pvf.html
Glen 474,
Yep good isn’t it, got to love that bilingual midslinging. Thanks for the link.
They even have the bilingual ear phones in the public gallery.
Wow nothing like a constitutional crisis to liven up parliament. Maybe we should bring back Gough and Fraser to make our question time this exciting. It’s a bit bizarre the way the keep switching languages mid-harangue though, you’d have to think it’d get a bit confusing if you weren’t paying full attention.
On the actual politics of the situation, both sides make reasonable arguments for their side being in the right. In the end though, I don’t think Harper has much of a chance. Even if he does get another election called, there’s still a good chance he’ll just end up in the minority again, and this time the other parties will have an unquestionable “mandate” from the people.
fredn 465
Did you read any of the links I posted? What “rights” are protected by parliament? Our parliament (Hawke as guilty as Howard here) has ignored most Westminster conventions by now, so that is no protection at all. Specify what rights are protected?
That courts have done better in recent years isn’t an accident. The point about courts is that they go on precedent – it isn’t just up to Judges whim. If the judge errs you have a right of appeal. There are recognised (written) rules by which courts work.
Not so with Ministers. In recent times we have had a former (Liberal) immigration minister grant citizenship to an Italian Mafia figure who had no legal visa and is wanted for questioning in Italy (admittedly hsi family had donate money to teh Liberal Party, so I guess that “legitimates” him), but not to Afghans and Iranians who were acknowledged as legitimate refugees (i.e. genuine fear of persecution). Being answerable to parliament doesn’t mean anything when the conventions of the Westminster system are not enforced. Name the last Minister sacked for misleading the Australian parliament or having a conflict of interest?
The one bit of your post I agree with is when you said “as things stand”. That is the problem – our rights can be eliminated by a Ministers whim. And no, I’m not a lawyer.
Hi Vera
“hope that is permissable Mr Bowe”
William moderates abuse , but in linguistics he defers to me and i feel your lingos just shaded into parlamentery acceptance there
Yes agree Vera that LCP will back down on education bill If private Schools want tax payers money then they better meet National guidelines on a curriculum so all aussie kids ar taught similar basics Details up for negotiation by Partys
Some more rediculous 1975 comments today , will later address when work out core of rediculousness
Agree the LNP will back down on private schools. If they hold up that amount of money for long most of the schools will start objecting themselves. I wonder if the Brethern schools are some of those leading the secrecy charge? Those who have seen the Four Corners reports on them would know they have a lot to hide on finance.
Heaven help us…
They already are! That’s why I’m confused as to what the Liberals think they have to gain.
dario
I quite like the idea of billbo deferring to ron on linguistics
kinda adds the element of risk to each post
Everytime Rudd calls Turnbull the “Member for Goldman Sachs” I crack up. It’s so apt.
Hit for 6, Julie.
Oz
did you catch rudds riposte re the OO-”that venerable organ of repute”
Dio went:
Reputable economists and commentators all agree that the official definition of a recession in Australia is two consecutive quarters of negative growth. Some individuals are trying to introduce new, arbitrary definitions like a 1.5% increase in unemployment and all sorts of other horsefluff in pursuit of their own fairly obvious agendas, but it wont fly.
What often happens with the economy when we nearly have a recession is that we experience recessionary effects (increases in unemployment, downturn in retail spending, lower wages growth, higher demand for welfare payments etc) but without actually getting into the GDP contraction zone.
Some people like to call that a recession – then again, some people like The Veronicas.
Something else worth considering is that sometimes we get GDP growth playing tootsies with an official recession, but without any “real economy” effects – such as happened with the introduction of the GST. The national accounts didnt look too crash hot but the overwhelming majority of the population just breezed through it wondering what all the fuss was about (small business being the exception as it was getting slugged with an appalling piece of red tape thuggery viah the original BAS)
Hahaha yes.
“You don’t like The Oz, do you Malcolm?”
Hey, no need to hit below the belt.
I took it as a swipe against mesma. Think the backbenchers did too.
dave
i think its a swipe at all the fibs and all their different policy turns
also the fact that the OO is finally starting to analyse the fibs not adore them.
Australia is not in recession!! to say otherwise is bullbutter
If we have 0.1% growth in a quarter that covered a credit freeze then that actually is a good result.
If we have a recession this financial year (ending June 30 2009) I will join Glen in eating a hat!
I am fully aware that spending has dried up, I also fully understand the mortgage trusts being frozen would have had an impact on these fiqures, I also know from several friends in the recruitment industry that employers are not employing new staff in the numbers they were 12 months ago.
me too.
Btw its not just mesmerelda that is acting weird
“Joe Hockey sans jockeys if Sydney airport built”
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/12/03/2436517.htm?section=justin
I have to say that Joe Hockey is pretty safe making that bet IMO. A new airport for Sydney will never be viable in an out of town location except for international travel, where the extra transit time into the city makes little difference. For domestic travel, Kingsford Smith is it, because it is accessible to major destinations for same day trips. If someone really wanted to build a second airport for Sydney they should have preserved a site (including noise buffer) near a high speed rail line or road 20 years ago. Nobody did. Hence it won’t happen. Just an excercise in shoring up votes in the airport affected electorates. No private consortia would pay for it either because it won’t be profitable.
You could always convert RAAF Richmond into an international airport. Its runways would need to be lengthened a little to handle 747s and A380s, but it can handle most jets below that size.
There’s a train station right next to it and it is easily possible to extend the M2 up there (primarily because the land in that direction is still mostly empty). It would also be closer to people in the Western Suburbs than Kingsford-Smith.
Of course, the really good solution would be to convert Bankstown Airport into a commercial one for short-medium haul jets (under 767s). A small runway extension would be needed (and land is available for that, I think), but it is centrally located in the SW suburbs and it has trains and buses that go past it regularly. Of course, it will never happen because it would affect too many people in Labor seats…
Just a further thought on the whole recession thingy, the economic indicators over the next 2 quarters (like the last 2 quarters) are going to contain large variance between the States.Everything from retail sales, investment, employment growth, construction starts, exports, import demand – the full spectrum of economic activity is operating with large variations across the geography of the country.
Beware people that start cherry picking their geography for the sake of undermining the aggregates – the national accounts are national accounts.
If we are going to get all tunnel visioned on whether we’re in a recession or not it’s the aggregates and only the national aggregates that matter. I noticed John Black in the The Oz was buffing the Russian helmut of the gloom merchants this morning with this silly line.
New airport at Canberra or Newcastle with high-speed rail connecting it to Sydney. Two birds with one stone.
Turnbull thinks Julia is “nasty”
Diddums…
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24745160-601,00.html
Julia gave the coalition a good bashing over schools. This could become a stand-off with each side blaming the other for withholding funding. The trouble is that the coalition doesn’t have the support of schools, or anyone.
“faith” Diog
“3. Anti-terror laws. Howie takes the blame for them..
4. Hicks. Pretty weak by Howard not to get him out earlier but hardly a hanging offence.
5. Refugees and asylum seekers is really the only serious abuse by Howard ”
Yesterday you confessed & professed “faith” over science , making you sort of a ‘faith athiest’ Today th libertarian rules your roosts , and yet i do not understand this libertarian brand
Now Socrates I agree with in principal on a rights laws , court defended on precedent We ‘oz’ hav survived (reasonably) without a bill of rights reely because we ar a fair go society & egalatarien whereas other Nations with different cultures hav had massive abuses But still we hav had regretable instanses of standards ‘conventions’ flouted , and badly , So socrates is right to say they need codifying
However as a strong opponent here of what i call laissez fair (extreme) libertariarism (like I’d block 100% of this internet porn stuff) , my suport for Socrates is with a little tredidation of how far is far enough for th vocal minority of laissez faire Libertarians who’d twist socrates principal Furthermores I do NOT want to line pockets of those Lawyers either , thems self creating ‘cases’ on ‘rights’ to line there silky pockets
So i return diog , to your 3 examples:
With refugees you call Howard policy abuse of ‘rights’ Well i actualy suport Howards overall policy on National security grounds for th “RIGHTS” of th 20 million living here (for reasons previousley listed) IF you were referring to there subsequent humanitarian treatment , yes agree , there ‘rights’ of living conditions should hav been better looked after & with appeal process when not ass opposed to th right to just jump Darfur queues just cause there boat got here whilst Darfur groups hav no water to put boats onto (if they were strong enough lacking food)
With Hicks you say “hardly a hanging offence.” Well I do call it a hanging offense It was a gross misabuse of his human rights (for 5 years) ditto Habbib (a hanging offense) , ditto (Haneef) , ditto Muslim Jack , hell i’m more libertarian than you on these A proper Bill would hav outlawed such ‘rights’ abuse
With Anti-terror laws , you blame Howard I don’t Liberty & National Security comes at a price of some freedoms in reality , otherwise soon or later those terrorists etc will take more than your freedoms Principals of those Terorist Laws ar for all our protection and ar fine to where they go…problam i see with them is not going far enough on ‘rights’ & govenrance issues……lack of both oversite and full independant accountability to prevent abuse and/or reverse abuse quick when found (need Judges lots , not politcans in control of admin to keep Keltys not crossing lines…but not to stop him protecting us)
Now we hav so many areas of rights , disabled , ethnic , religous (suppose I’ll include athiests in there as well)…so i’d like to see these ‘rights’ in stone , but first writen by lay persons before pollies and lawyers get involved , and without th laissez faire libertarians minority or over state control brigade pushing there agendas My preferense is for detail to prevent ‘interpretation’ to minimise legol eagles earning money from it And in perfect world th agreed ‘rights” passed by referendumS (so if one rights item gets defeated it doesn’t cause all rights items to go down th sinks) Just need to find people without Agendas or politcal conflicts who hav comonsense…and that ‘faith’
Isn’t that THE runway. From memory there are geographical restrictions on what re-development is possible. Doesn’t it also have serious fog issues – more so than at KSIA ?
No doubt most things can be overcome if you throw enough resources and money at them, but I really wonder why the govt is going with this ? (apart from the impact on albanese’s seat.)
gladly – fools – suffer – not …
thats “where the govt are going with this…
The Dishonourable Member for Stirling just asked the Deputy PM:
“How many Australians will lose their jobs this Christmas?”
Total lack of decency.
Referring to post 502- Gillard, before anyone gets offended,,,
Ron
Philosphically there is no conflict between positions supporting a bill of rights and opposing Libertarianism. Both views place rights of the individual ahead of property rights. I agree they have to be limited and carefully worded and not include wooly stuff like everyone has a right to particular services etc.
- Man douses himself in petrol outside Parliament
- Restrained by police
- Seeks visa for Russian parents
http://www.theage.com.au/national/man-threatens-to-set-self-alight-outside-parliament-20081203-6qby.html
Oz 501
The trouble with those options are:
- jet airports require huge amounts of space. Adequate space hasn’t been preserved at Newcastle either, till you are half way to the Hunter. then it could be viable, but you woudl still be talking many billions. Hard to justify given all the other badly needed urban rail lines we haven’t funded.
- Canberra is just too far. The high speed rail would still take an hour at 250 km/hr, and would cost more than the airport. There is no adequate rail corridor either, thanks to NSW Rail’s abysmal lack fo investment. In the mean time you could have flown to Brisbane.
488 Oz
Turnbull (and maybe his mum) probably still think that the reference to Goldman Sachs is a compliment…
Regarding cost, I see the rail as being more than simply getting airport travellers to Sydney. A lot of people commute to Canberra from Sydney either by plane and car putting them on a train would be a good move.
The corridor is a bit of a problem.
I don’t think it should be anywhere around Sydney. I live in Sydney, I like it, but we have to get over it. It’s pretty much at peak with the way we plan, and we should be planning to develop other regional centres, like Newcastle.
Socrates
There ar aspects of libertarianism I do support However like politcal partys there is a Libertarian church with varying views from ‘moderate’ to ‘less moderate’ , and i tend for th former especfialy when rights of a few severely infring th rights of overwhelming majority , and where trade off points ar
IMO the most likely candidate for a second airport is south
Ron 515
All the things you mentioned could be fitted into a liberal theory as well as a libertarian view, especially if you don’t hold with property rights overruling individual rights. Not all liberals hold views on rights that are absolute. Liberal philosophers who are also interested in legal philosophy and jurisprudence like Ronald Dworkin would be quite close to your view.
Far right (economically) libertarians worry me because of their religious faith in the so called “power” of markets. The only thing fundamentalist free-markets have shown is that they breed inequality and a dog-eat-dog system of society. Two things I believe we should be aiming to bury, not trying to claim them as an ideal way of doing things.
It’s interesting that Michael Johnson, the member for Ryan, has been placed behind the Opposition dispatch box in Parliament. The seat behind the pulpit is the most sought after backbench seat on each side of the chamber as it gives the most free media exposure.
Normally political parties stick highly vulnerable members in those spots. I can’t remember him being there before – can anyone confirm?
If they’ve got Johnson sitting there, their QLD tracking polls must be showing a whole world of hurt.
The current airport in Newcastle is more than capable of handling jets – after all, it is where our current fleet of FA/18s are housed.
The only problem with it is that it’s next to impossible to get to and even if you built a high-speed rail link (not such a bad idea considering how many ppl commute from the Central Coast to Sydney), it would still take about an hour to get there. That’s ok for an international flight, but not for flights to Melbourne (the main destination from Sydney) or Brisbane/Canberra.
An interesting proposal would be to expand Wollongong Airport (at Albion Park) to handle jets. Quite a few people commute from there to Sydney. However, it would require a high-speed rail link to make it viable for business travel plus a major upgrade of the Princes Highway/F6
Possum, the seating plan (updated 14/10/08, presumably to account for the Mayo and Lyne by-elections) has him in the back row. I assume he’s closer to the front now?
Why not build the second airport in Newcastle, make it soley for International and leave the domestic at Kingford-smith.
I would call that a win-win
Building a fast rail link to Newcastle can in turn take pressure of Sydney’s growth corridor instead allowing Newcastle to further develop.
Billbo, today he was sitting where Nola Marino usually sits – unless someone beat Nola up with a seriously large ugly stick overnight, it was Johnson.
It’s unusual to change these things like this – hence I was wondering if anyone else noticed and maybe I was just imagining things. I’ve got a confirmation on twitter by another tragic who was watching – hard to tell if it was Johnson though because he had his face squished into his hand during most of QT.
But if I had to guess – that’s who it was.
Then keep Kingsford Smith domestic?
On Monday QT, Johnson was sitting where Judi Moylan usually sits.
http://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollytics/files/2008/12/khemlanij.png
Yes the domestic carriers would fight tooth and nail for domestic flights to remain at KSIA.
Just a word of warning on Newcastle fast rail plans –
- Newcastle airport is further from the Newcastle CBD than Kingsford Smith is from the Sydney CBD
- there is no suitable existing rail corridor from Sydney to Newcastle, or Newcastle CBD to Newcastle airport, meaning either land acquisition or tunnelling.
- double track electric rail costs > $10 million per km if in a suitable corridor
- double track rail tunnel costs > $100 million per km
So you are talking billions just for the rail link (120km+ from Sydney CBD to Newcastle airport). It would be cheaper to give every voter in Albanese’s seat $10,000.
this rules Richmond out.
And there might be someone interested in building it
http://news.smh.com.au/national/no-second-airport-for-sydney-basin-govt-20081202-6pnn.html
It was Johnson. Also, Bob McMullin had someone else sitting in his seat.
Hello Ron
And so he should, your’e the number one man when it comes to lingo
Yeah, Newcastle just isn’t a realistic option
Senator Faulkner just concluded an interesting speech on reform to the AEC. The Government has rejected an opposition plan to set up a separate voter fraud section within the AEC.
Ronster
I professed faith IN science, not faith over science.
Hicks wasn’t a hanging offence because it was primarily the US Government who held him for five years, not ours. Also it was just one person. If Howard did the same in Oz, it would be worse than his refugee policy.
The anti-terror laws are too open to abuse by the political process. Also we’ve got some serious dimwits running anti-terrorism and the Federal DPP in Oz. All this terrorism stuff is a huge beat-up. Hundreds of people die every week due to underfunding of hospitals and bad medicine. Is everyone carrying on like a pork chop about that. But when a few dippy zealots play on the internet and fantasise about making a bomb we’re expected to believe taht life as we know it is about to end. There is no sense of proportion in the terrorism debate. It’s all hysteria.
So Sydney is ruled out and there are prohibitive costs and a lack of an adequate corridor when it comes to fast rail in Canberra and Newcastle.
You’re all just Macquarie Bank stooges!
The silence of our Government regarding that sort of treatment towards a citizen, and their approval for Guantanamo should be a “hanging offence”.
You say it’s ok if it’s only one person who’s held for 5 years without charge in an illegal prison while our government does nothing, Is it ok for 2? 3? When does it stop becoming ok? And why?
Thanks Flaneur
Poss, What is happening to Sexy Maxy? Where is she sitting and I haven’t heard or seen her asking a single question. Is she playing possum? or planning to return to Your ABC as the Chairwoman of the Board?
“You’re all just Macquarie Bank stooges!”
Thanks to the nature of the financial deals done with them by various State and the former Federal government, we are all hostages of Macquarie Bank
Someone shoudl use that statement by Mac Bank to demand they disclose the details of their contract and where it says that. They will say its “Commercial In Confidence” but that is BS. After the competitive bidding period has closed there is no public interest reason why such deals should remain secret.
Finns, she’s sitting directly behind Swan on the front row of the backbench. You don’t really see much of her in QT except for that weird angle that originates from somewhere behind the speakers chair and pans to Rudd.
Oz
No, I didn’t say it was OK to keep Hicks for even one year, or at all for that matter. What Bush and Howard did was 100% wrong but wouldn’t hang Howie for it. Probably just a quick beating. But I would hang Bush who has done it to hundreds of people in contravention to international and US law.
If Conroy keeps making a goose of himself over the internet filter I hope they give McKew a run in comuniactions. She deserves a chance at something and actually knows the industry in question.
Dio
Interestingly it may be possible to hang Bush and a few others who ordered torture, or failed to stop it (!) under US law. At the end of WWII a Japanese general named Yamashita was executed on that basis (failure to prevent warcrimes). See
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Command_responsibility
Poss, how did the member for Petrie got the top gig? It must be her exotic name: Yvette D’Ath. They simply can’t resist her baby face.
http://www.abc.net.au/tv/qanda/mp-profiles/petr.htm
Good idea!
The problem with Conroy is the factional power he possesses. Wow a lot of S’ in that word.
Petrie is quite marginal? 2%.
Finns – she sits on a margin of 2% and won a seat that surprised quite a few non-Qld’ers. Margins in seats like Petrie are always exaggerated if you take them at face value because of the demographics of the place. If you alienate only 1 semi-major demographic the seat can be lost, so they’ve whacked her in the prime position to get a bit of recognition.
Also shores up the female vote for the ALP more broadly – or so the theory goes. I dont give it much credence myself – the people that watch QT have already made up their mind on their vote, and the local media and groundwork operation provides more local recognition than the 5 second clips on the nightly commercial news of QT stuff could ever do.
I saw that Conroy’s puritanical wowserism might have spawned a new party, the Australian Sex Party. Four million Aussies access porn each year. I wonder how many would change their vote. There might be a lot of modems for sale if the filter gets up.
Oh, and Finns – she might have a baby face, but I wouldnt fight her for the last jelly bean in the packet!
Not me though – I put as much money on Labor in Petrie as the bookies would allow.
Blatant self-plug – might be time to start rethinking Australia’s political demographics Part 1
http://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollytics/2008/12/03/its-time-to-rethink-political-demographics-part-1/
Diog, i hope the Australian Sex Party will a seat in the lower house. Then it will be interesting to know where and how she will sit, ala that porn star who won a seat in the Italian Parliament?
http://www.quesomagro.com/blog/uploaded_images/ciccolina-713948.jpg
That’s what i call exciting QT
Come on, The Australian Sex Party is naught but a front for the porn industry.
Which, ironically, is a large contributor of Hetty Johnson’s “Bravehearts”, one of the minority of “child welfare” organisations supporting the government on their filter stance.
Wonder if they’ll sign up the perpetual pornstar candidate in Qld, Jodie Moore.
http://www.5nxmodels.com/models/jodie_moore/jodie_moore_0101main.jpg
http://www.5nxmodels.com/models/jodie_moore/jodie_moore_0101main.jpg
Tell you what, finding a safe for work picture to go with the wiki link took a bit of doing!
Thanks Vera
And I do it all for love
I had a look at that MacBank link you listed , fancy Libs giving MacBank first right within 100km of Sydney because it reduces future negatiating position of any future Govt
But then they hav such gall , I mean Airport is topical so MacBank put out into public areena that info of there first option , but then at end say quote “But we’re not providing any comment with regards to that.”
But they damn well did
Ooops, wiki link
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jodie_Moore
Ron
Exactly they did, hence they should be pressed for details of the contract. I’m sure the opposition would like it to be revealed, as evidence of their economic management skills.
Poss
If I didn’t know better, I’d almost suspect a non-psephylogical interest in some of these candidates.
Harry et. al.,
OT to chat about the cricket momentarily …. Boy aren’t the English getting an early start?
……
Amigo ronnie, you are an old softie.
Socrates – you impugn my honor! (well, what’s left of it anyway)
It’s all about the data like the swingers… er, swing vote and the arm.., er.. poles.. the polls!
God, everyones a cynic!
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24745539-601,00.html
Another leak?
The Australian Sex Party has more policies that Malcolm Turnbull. Looks like they are only running for the Senate. Actually, I agree with all their policies except the silly referendum mandating equal male/female representation in Parliament.
http://www.sexparty.org.au/ASP-Policies.html
No sex, no booze, no betting, no flirting, no fun, no partying. Damn rotten wowsers, I’m voting for the Sex Party!
Diogenes @ 532
The anti-terror laws are too open to abuse by the political process. Also we’ve got some serious dimwits running anti-terrorism and the Federal DPP in Oz.
Careful. The “dimwits’ also have the power to put you away seemingly on a whim, and the rest of us would never know.
@ 539
No, I didn’t say it was OK to keep Hicks for even one year, or at all for that matter.
By his own admission, Hicks fought in the military – and the Taliban would appear to meet all the criteria of Part 1, Article 4 of the 1949 Geneva Convention relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War – of the de facto government of Afghanistan, so the U.S. was entitled to detain him as a P.O.W. for as long as hostilities continued, which means they could still be holding him. HOWEVER, they were required to house him under similar conditions to their own troops and treat him as specified in in the Convention.
I haven’t been there, but I doubt that American troops at Gitmo are housed in wire cages, or small soundproof boxes. Nor does torture, beatings, solitary confinement, sensory and sleep deprivation, etc, etc meet the requirement that no physical or mental torture, nor any other form of coercion, may be inflicted on prisoners of war to secure from them information of any kind whatever. Prisoners of war who refuse to answer may not be threatened, insulted, or exposed to any unpleasant or disadvantageous treatment of any kind.
What Bush and Howard did was 100% wrong but wouldn’t hang Howie for it.
I am staggered that an Australian Prime Minister, especially one who grew up with the horrors of Changi, Burma, the Bataan Death March, and other such atrocities still open sores in the national psyche would ignore, much less condone or facilitate mistreatment of any P.O.W., particularly when the country was engaged in two wars on the enemies’ soil with the inherent high capture risks.
I’m appalled that he seems to have gotten away with it without censure. What message does that send to purveyors of evil? IME, they don’t need any encouragement to do their worst, but the actions of the U.S., with our almost complete acquiescence has effectively given them carte blanc to do whatever they will.
They may share a common policy though, “We decide who comes in Australia and the manner in which they come”.
And ironically the libs have more positions, “we’re for WorkChoices, we’re agin WorkChoices, we’re for the apology we’re agin the policy, Rudd should do more Rudd is doing to much, ……..
560 it was an interesting question. Not quite sure if Turnbull was against the idea, or just that the ALP wouldn’t run it properly.
MF
Doesn’t the Geneva Convention only apply in a legal sense if War is declared formally? How do you do that anyway, is there a pile of “We’re at War with …. (fill in the appropriate country)” forms lying around or do you have to enact an Act of Parliament? Did Howard actually declare War on Afghanistan or Iraq? I know the Yanks used that argument in Vietnam. What constitutes a War?
MT keeps going on the “attack”
Oh you are so nasty Malcolm, please stop it!
Love this from The Oz:
So “grilled” now constitutes one question.
wasn’t that a “police action”?
Kevin Rudd, Gordon Brown and Barack Obama – Grow a pair, create another coalition force and get your arses to Zimbabwe.
Grog
The US used the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution for Vietnam which authorised the use of military force, which is not the same as declaring War.
Someone better at telling stories then I am remind us about the BS surrounding the Gulf of Tonkin.
Oz, let wiki do it!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gulf_of_tonkin_resolution
the ABC also has a bit on the Labor Bank:
Love the way it frames hte headline:
err so is it good or bad? And whose idea is it???
The difference of course is that during the Whitlam days they ignored treasury advice the whole way, not something I think is happening here. But hey why let facts get in the way…
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/12/03/2437137.htm?section=justin
[Oz, let wiki do it!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gulf_of_tonkin_resolution
Oh I know the story, I just thought someone could spin it into a wonderful tale of treachery, murder and romance.
I’m so confused.
I thought Turnbull was criticising Rudd for having this idea, if he had it. But now he’s being placed as the architect of the idea? There’s the rainmaker again.
The Gulf of Tonkin bore an uncanny resemblance to the Children Overboard. They were basically manufactured incidents exploited and perverted into a “casus belli”. They say that the first casualty of war is truth, but the war on truth is usually the first cause of war. The phrase “WMD” comes to mind. Karl Rove came out today and said they wouldn’t have invaded Iraq is they knew they had no WMDs. I swear that man has horns.
Good news for the Left in Canada:
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20081202/poll_future_081202/20081202?hub=TopStories
What dos “Run by accord” mean?
juliem, I wouldn’t get too steamed about the Poms getting in an early sledge, the team physio declared Ponting could take on the Sith Afrikanns despite his injury, so that’s all right, cause they’re probably more of a worry than the Poms. Besides the Poms are still smarting about the Ashes, a bit like the Libs. and the election. Sniggle.
Diogenes @ 566
The Geneva Conventions apply whether you declare war or not. In fact, they generally refer to armed conflict not war, presumably for that very reason.
Linguistic trickery such as calling war a ‘police action’ might fool your citizens but they have no more legal standing than calling POWs ‘enemy combatants.’ It won’t prevent you getting hung if the ICC ever gets the balls to treat all pond slime equally without fear or favour. However, I’m not holding my breath.
Nor, BTW, despite Roosevelt’s “day of infamy” speech, is there an obligation to declare war, or otherwise advise your intended adversary of your intentions before attacking.
The Chinese’s whisper. Sssshhh, the slow boat to China may yet save OZ from recession as nobody else will. As Kevin Rudd would have acclaimed in his impeccable Mandarin: “Zhong Guo, Xie Xie”. So be kind to your yum cha next time.
http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/china/2008-12/03/content_7263448.htm
Oz, I’m not sure I could recount the Gulf of Tonkin incident without frothing at the mouth and shorting out the keyboard. As Diogenes said, the U.S. lied about being fired upon and used the lie to commence a “police action”, initially having sent “advisors” to aid and abet a corrupt government against those rotten commies to the North.
“Lyndon Johnson told the nation,
Have no fear of escalation.
We are trying everyone to please.
Although there really is no war,
We’re sending fifty thousand more,
To help save Vietnam from Vietnamese.”
One verse from protest song from the era.
Dio (and any other interested parties),
William
Are you going to move a few rungs up the ladder at the West Australian
I’m guessing Burkey isn’t too pleased by the changes.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/business/story/0,28124,24745456-7582,00.html
juliem
No action is legal or illegal until it is tested in court. Obama isn’t going to use that clause to disqualify her. And no-one would risk death by taking Hillary to court in a bid to stop her becoming SOS. It’s in the bag.
Ok Oz, …
It was a dark and stormy night….
Can someone explain to me in small words what the political upside is to the Libs blocking the education funding? I mean if they had a major national body behind them, but geex the best Pyne can comue up with is a few schools and most of them a Steiner ones. The Libs are thisclose from doing a reverse Latham, and getting Pell to come out and say vote Labor.
@564, Castle:
That has a definite “ring” to it:
“The Liberals have more positions than the Australian Sex Party.”
Luverley!
I’m wondering that as well.
Fielding is all about “intelligent design”, I have no idea what the Libs are playing.
But hey, it makes them look stupid, so more power to them.
I’m not “feeling” this Sex Party puns at all.
Isn’t it that Fielding doesn’t want to get ambushed by mandated Evolution as a science subject?
The complement to my earlier point about Intelligent Design.
I just thought that it is usual to oppose something that:
a) you disagree with – but the Libs policy for ages has been to get a national curriculum
b) the public opposes – funding for schools? yeah they really oppose that
c) the main bodies concerned oppose it – nope – no AMA type support here
or
d) err.. any help???
Since I’m relying on a now somewhat faulty memory, this could be wrong, but:
Surely the case against Howard over Hicks is that he did nothing, when Tony Blair made sure that British detainees at Guantanamo were released to be tried in the UK. Similarly. John Walker Lindh a celebrated (and imho a seriously misguided US citizen) who spent some time in Guanatanamo was released and tried in the US. Hicks was hung out to dry while the others in the coalition of the willing ensured that their citizens were not exposed to lengthy spells at Guanatanamo, and were tried in the normal court system.
However, it’s no surprise to me that public opinion didn’t rally to Hicks (until very late in the day), given the way he was vilified by Downer, Ruddock, Howard et.al.
590 Grog
d) box of rocks
as dumb as…
Has it been confirmed that tomorrow is a national day of mourning?
Roy & H.G. have quit Triple J, and will be on Triple M in the eastern states only next year!
http://www.news.com.au/entertainment/story/0,26278,24742880-5013560,00.html
I have been listening to those guys for nearly 17 years, well before I knew what the hell they were going on about. What the hell will I now do on Sunday afternoons?
cheers onimod I knew there was something I was missing!
from the dopey news.com blog on whether julie v julia is ignoring the important issues (leaving aside the fact that this isn’t an issue at all but still…) are some great comments:
normal???
anyoner know what these nasty insults actually are? Given me one example of Julia being too personal.
Still this comment is a nice response:
593 ShowsON – I blame Labor for this one! An absolute national tragedy.
It wouldn’t bother me so much if I had a practical way of listening to their new show. 22 years on one radio station is a good effort, you can’t blame them for cashing in later on.
If Triple M have any sense they will let them do whatever they want. That’s what makes their show and characterisations so interesting in the first place.
Agreed
Triple M do stream, so that is one way of listening.
If they’re Ch 7 Olympic Shows are any guide, yes they would’ve stipulated they’d only do it if they had full creative control.
from tonight’s 7:30 report:
http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2008/s2437152.htm
I thought this part was hilarious.
The journalist was Paul Borgiorno from Ten. He has a degree in theology as well!
But the question made me think, I certainly hope the Government can take money aware from schools that teach nonsense.
Yeah, but not terribly convenient.
Hopefully they do a full podcast – excluding songs and other copyrighted material of course.
Even if they leave a few ads in that wouldn’t bother me. I don’t mind watching Chevy adverts so I can see The Daily Show for free.
Rupugs have won the recount in Georgia after Democratic voters fail to turnout to vote.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/03/us/politics/03georgia.html?hp
The government should ask Fielding in the Senate which schools he has been talking too. If one were a suspicious type about who funded Fielding in the first place, you might suspect that it is a small group of Christian fringe schools run by a rightwing nutbar sect. Journalists should pursue Fielding on this. Why block $28 Billion of funding over curriculum when it has been signed off by all the other mainstream church schools? Its time Fielding’s looney right links were exposed.
Oh goody, Julie Bishop, the Minister channeling my stupid chinchilla is on Lateline. I can’t wait.
hahaha only 20% of registered voters voted…Go Saxby!
Looks like unrepresentative swill in the Senate is world wide problem, eh Glen!
BTW somenoe posted earleir today about the $320K the exclusive Brethren donated to the Liberal party and asked what they receivd in return. While I can prove no causal link, they do receive quite a bit from Commonwealth and State education funding for their schools – $3.1 million to be exact according to this article:
http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/news/queensland/brethrens-qld-schools-gain-3m/2008/10/19/1224351016688.html
These are the sorts of small schools receiving large funds that the current education amendments are aimed at. Fielding must be pursued if he is going to try to defend tis sort of thing. His “clean image” will soon start to smell.
Further to the above, the school mentioned, the Agnew School i Queensland, had 256 students. Thats about $12000 per annum per student!! More than many courses uni HECS per year. Where does it go?
lateline
mesma v sayles
cat v kitten
much teeth clenching and forced smiles from cat
but kitten takes the points
(my word she’s an uncomfortable teev view that mesma).
Real estate investments most likely.
Jesus wept… They’re both idiots
MP slammed for selling photos of petrol doused protester
I’ve cut/pasted a couple of differant bits there… but the gist remains intact
All of em (yes, I’m including the guy with the petrol and lighter) are complete idiots
You’d think the non desperate would know better – wait…..
http://livenews.com.au/Articles/2008/12/03/Man_douses_himself_with_petrol_outside_Parliament_House
Journalist: Are you worried that intelligent design may not pass muster?
Fielding: Look, that’s got nothing to do with it. This is about – and this is a genuine issue…
And there you have the cat out of the bag, ladies and gentlemen.
This useless hypocrite does not believe in intelligent design.Whether or not it “passes muster” has nothing to do with what he is about. That is not a genuine issue to him.
But currying favour with the Looney Religious Right is.
The genuine issue to Fielding is Fielding.
The saddest thing is the guy did it for no real reason. He and his family are permanent residents who are not going to be kicked from the country.
In fact his parents are eligible to apply for citizenship.
I wonder if Family First disendorse him before the next election?
Do they really want him at #1 on their Victorian ticket?
ShowsOn @ 613
Apart from a standard empathy of the (I prefer people don’t hurt themselves kind) I have zero sympathy for that guy.
Well, I have sympathy for him on the grounds that he is obviously mentally ill has made two public attempts at self harm in the last week.
I wonder whether Fielding conducted and prepared his own “Family Impact Statement” before deciding how his “conscience” would allow him to vote on the private school funding issue.
I’m sure the probably 95% plus of non Government school parents and children represented by the two private school industry captains who stood shoulder to shoulder with Gillard on the issue today constitute “families” of some sort or other?.
Or, like Howard, is the well being of his own family on the public teat the only “family” the otherwise unemployable Fielding cares about?
A cry for help – maybe (A stunt) more likely
Well, Senator Evans – the minister for immigration – reported to the Senate that his family has been offered mental health assistance previous to today’s events.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Education_in_Finland
I am in awe.
The Australian reports that Terry Hicks unexpectedly met John Howard for the first time yesterday at an art function to which they were both invited.
Mr Hicks politely shook the former Prime minister’s hand and exchanged pleasantries with him before moving on.
After what that man has been put through at the hands of Mr. Howard and his Government, his magnanimity is truly humbling.
William,
3903 out of 2.9 million is the final count …..
Fulvio Sammut aren’t you forgetting Howard got his son out of Gitmo? No wonder Mr Hicks should be humble before Howard…
I shoudl declare a bias on this one because I know some of teh people involved. Still, if this report in The Age is correct I think this is excellent news for Melbourne:
http://www.theage.com.au/national/city-transport-plan-revealed-20081203-6qnt.html
They are going ahead with a badly needed rail tunnel in the Melbourne CBD and some outer ring roads, but not the cross city road tunnel. From both a transport and environmental viewpoint I think this is a good decision. If this is where some of Rudd’s infrastructure money goes it won’t be wasted. We can only hope Sydney does something equally sensible.
Well Glen, if you tell a lie long enough, often enough and loud enough, you must hope people will believe you? I remain skeptical that Mr Howard was Hick’s benefactor.
The one thing the Liberal Party have in common with the Australian Sex Party is the number “69″
Lucky Melbourne!
The proposals from the City of Sydney council to the Building Australia infrastructure fund include a couple of light rail loops in new urban growth areas and in the city. It’d be very nice if they got off the ground, though maybe I only say that because it’ll mean light rail from my doorstep to the city.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20081203.wquebec1203/BNStory/National/home
I don’t see how they can have any credibility after this.
Oz @ 628,
Power is a highly desirable aphrodisiac and some people will do virtually anything, compromise any principle to achieve and retain it. Classic example, JWH. Harper is Canada’s version of Howard.
Good riddance to him then and I hope the G-G hurries back to sort this out.
Oz it undermines nothing…the Canadian Alliance then merged with the PC Party and turned into the Conservatives…
Harpers line that the Conservative Party of Canada would never sign any documents to give the Bloc such power is clearly true…because the CPC has never done such a thing since it has been in existance.
Oz every PM in Canadian history has had to face the people…Dion wouldnt have to until 2010 or 2011…if you wanted to form a Coalition with the NDP and Bloc he should have taken that to the Canadian people in the last election in 2008 he didnt…hence he’s a liar and a fraud and after being thumped in the election Dion is trying to do anything to become PM.
Dion has got NO mandate to form a Coalition Government with the Bloc and NDP, he told the people he would never do such a thing and now he is…therefore if he is so certain this is backed by the people of Canada he must therefore support another poll…
Oh come on Glen. It’s a clear case of “If the Bloc works with us, they’re good. If they don’t, they’re bad”.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/
Harper is about to address the nation live.
“We will use every means possible to defend our government”.
Prorogue here we come.
Of course he will Prorogue…but will Jean accept?
Now Canadians will turn their TVs off and not watch the Dion and Layton Show.
I don’t know about that. More of them want change and want the coalition to immediately take power than want the Conservatives to remain in power, according to the latest poll.
Oz i saw the poll you referred to and you cherry picked the best figures….you forgot about these…
http://www.angus-reid.com/polls/view/32359/canadians_not_sold_on_dion_as_prime_minister
I would be comfortable with Stéphane Dion becoming Canada’s prime minister
Agree – 25%
Disagree – 65%
Not sure – 10%
I am worried about the Bloc Québécois becoming involved in the federal government:
Agree – 57%
Disagree – 30%
Not sure – 13%
Those figures do nothing to contradict the others..?
Dion’s approval rating is better than Turnbull’s.
But at least Turnbull can speak English properly.
An education insider tells me that one of the reasons the Libs are against the Govts Education bill is that there is a ranking system of sorts involved. Many of the more expensive and exclusive schools dont want to advertise that their results are no better than, and often worse than the much cheaper public options. In straitened financial times, that wouldnt be a good thing when trying to seperate parents from $15k plus in fees.
Melbourne does not need another tunnel through the city. It needs suburban extensions and a comparatively minor works in the inner city to allow the current inner city system to reach its true capacity of 192 trains per hour which it it currently no where near.
Building the tunnel would tie up the money for much needed suburban extensions like Doncaster and Rowville for a generation like the city loop did.
Aint the ‘free market’ a bitch
Just a reminder that the Libs and their lies and scaremongering about “boatpeople” hasn’t changed with Howards sacking. They are still the nasty, hatefull racist pack of (rude word omitted) who would have no compunction of manufacturing another “children overboard” if it got them a few votes.
It isn’t hard to “maintain the rage” against this loathsome lot.
Article from: The Australian
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24747366-7583,00.html
They’ve caved in and will support it in the Senate without amendments.
It would be suicide not to
Tom
The trouble is (for both Sydney and Melbourne) that the track capacity problems are in the city. They can’t run any more trains on existing lines, let alone extensions, without more capacity in the point where the trains are going to (the CBD).
They have or they will?? I can’t find anything saying they (or Fielding) have caved in.
Grog
http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/coalition-caves-in-on-schools-funding-bill/2008/12/04/1228257195339.html
twas just reported on the 12pm JJJ news that they will support the bill (or already have? I didnt quite catch that bit)
It’s not their fault btw – the Gov should have told them that’s what they meant before all this silliness
I kid you – not
Sky news said that Pine just had a press conference saying that they would. He tried to pretend that it wasn’t a backflip but Kerin Gilbert said it was and Julia will be on him in QT.
Have. It passed the Senate.
I think that Jenkins will have his hands quite full today with everyone wanting to get in one last dig at the other side before they break for the summer
….. essential viewing today 
…….
Fliders Street Station has 4 direct tracks in and the same out with the city loop having four tracks also which have a capacity of 24 tph if properly run adds up to a capacity of 192 trains per hour. The main issues are operational and a lack of trains (The 1970`s Hitachi trains that were scrapped should not have been) not infrastructure.
Cheers Spam Box – still nothing about it on the ABC or news websites…
Whether the opposition has caved on the education funding or not, if we have any journalists left in the nation someone should still pursue Fielding on his reasons for opposing them. It will expose the fact that this nutter is backed by people well to the right of even the Nationals.
In Sydney the problems are more to do with CBD and other bottlenecks than a lack of trains
I actually think JG should go easy on him in QT today. She won, everyone knows it; no need to stomp on him today.
Tom
I don’t know the details but people I know who have analysed it say there is a major problem with the way the city loop works and the capacity to get trains through stations. Ideally they need to stop it working as a loop and turn it into two crossing lines.
I still agree with you that more trains and the outer suburban extensions are needed – outer suburban service is very poor compared to inner Melbourne.
The situation in Sydney is worse than Melbourne. Sydney not only needs more trains and the CBD bottleneck fixed, but the track and whole signalling system is old and in poor shape. It needs a major overhaul. Tacking on a few metro lines just avoids the problem.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24750073-601,00.html
The city loop can still work at 24 trains per hour as loop if inefficiencies like long stops at Flinders Street.
Changing the loop tunnels so they are no longer a loop route via Flinders St but a Flinders St by-pass would massively (so much so that the capacity constraints would be North Melbourne and Richmond making it rather over the top and a bit pointless) increase capacity through the city but would cost a bit in tunnel end relocation but still be a lot cheaper than the Footscray-Caulfield tunnel.
Since when do comments made in parliament bind judges? LEGISLATION binds judges, because it describes the intention of the Parliament.
What the hell is Pyne going on about saying that something Carr said in the Senate is what the legislation really means?
Is it time I sent him another abusive email?
The problem in Sydney is the lack of anyqhere to send the trains. Trains coming into the CBD have only limited options. The south coast line has its own tunnel out to Bondi Junction and avoids most bottle necks. All the other trains have to go around the city circle or across the harbour bridge. In peak hour, both the city circle and harbour bridge are at minimum allowed gap between trains. In addition, the busiest station, Town hall, is completely inadequate for the volume of passengers joining or switching trains.
Geography doesn’t help. The harbour is so deep that any under harbour train tunnel has to start its descent at Central and would be luck to emerge again before St Leonards. Think of some of the deepest underground lines in London and you’ll understand why a harbour train tunnel gets trains under the CBD, but produces such deep stations that they are difficult for commuters.
Then there is the problem that the Sydney commuter network and the freight lines are not seperate like other cities, and the load on the commuter services makes it difficult to use rail freaight in and out of Port Botany. Freight is also made worse by thge geography of the Sydney basin, which means all the train lines out of the basin in all directions are winding and would require a fortune to straighten out.
The best plan, proposed in the late 1980s, was a new western CBD line, perhaps providing a back-up link to the harbour bridge, which could be used to get more trains into the CBD, and take the load of Town Hall and Wynyard. When they built the cross-city tunnell, the tunnel dipped to preserve the space for a western CBD rail line. But it would be heaps expensive to build and take years before it solved the city’s load problem.
Sydney is in a real mess transport wise because it has made a lot of transport mistakes since the Great Depression/World Way Two.
Building freeways/motorways and generally massively expanding the road network (done to a larger extent in Melbourne).
Railway construction cutbacks the whole time since (which has been done in Melbourne but to less painful results).
Replacing the inner-city trains with double-decker trains instead of re-signalling for shorter gaps between trains (not done in Melbourne).
Getting rid of the trams (also not done in Melbourne).
Tom 663
I must admit I am backing away a bit from my earlier endorsement of the Victorian plan becuase the tunnel I thought they were announcing was what you just referred to and not the Footscray Caulfield one.
Antony
Agree with all that. The private proposal to build a fast train in from Parramatta involved a new line into the CBD for that reason and made some sense. The signalling is also important – Sydney doesn’t get full capacity out of the lines it does have because of poor old signalling. Arguably several CBD stations need to be rebuilt too. I can’t believe they would pass fire regulations after the (London) Kings Cross fire. the depressing thing about Sydney rail is that not only is it a mess, but I see no serious evidence of an intent to fix it.
Antony has reminded me of another post World War Two problem with Sydney. Not extending the freight separation beyond the 1920`s suburban limits where it had been built to.
Did anyone listen to the CEO of Australian Rail Transport Corp. slag of the trucking industry at the National Press Club yesterday?
ShowsOn at 664, my understanding is that the courts can and do refer to Hansard as an aid in interpreting the intent and meaning of legislation if there are doubts in that regard. The relevant minister’s comments and explanation at the time the Bill is presented in Parliament may well be relevant and of assistance to the Court.
ShowsOn
It’s definitely time to send Pine another email. His level of attainment as your employee leaves a lot to be desired. It’s time to set some performance guidelines for him in writing. A few Key Performance Indicators wouldn’t hurt. And I’m concerned that he isn’t taking advantage of the significant “improvement opportunities” you have offered him.
You might ask him exactly what legal action he proposes taking against Carr. I’d love to hear.
665
Is there anything this man doesn’t know about? (seriously)… always with the detail and insight
When I grow up – I wanna be Antony Green
#657 Socrates
Fielding opposed the bill on the grounds that funding was tied to the adoption of a national curriculum that does not yet exist. He doesn’t see why measures relating to the national curriculum can’t wait until it is written.
You WANT to spend each polling day kicking and cussing at a dysfunctional computer?
674
ROFL
Julia in charge in QT yet again.
676,
In case you missed the reason why; Rudd, Turnbull, the Defence Minister and one of his assistants are all in Sydney at the funeral for the soldier who recently died in Afghanistan.
Julia the Magnificent thumping whine & co on their backflip.
Memsa got a few backhanders from Swanie earlier.
Julia doing a thorough job of demolishing the Opposition’s nonsensical excuses re the backflip on the education bill
Crikey whine is going to need intensive care after the thumping Julia the Magnificent is giving him. She is wiping the floor with him.
Not a lady to pick a fight with.
whine is going close to being chucked out of the parliament.
Sounds like Bishop’s leaks on this bank proposal don’t have much cred
A year ago, the IPA published a list of the greatest mistaken decisions in Australian history. I’d add one they didn’t think of. That was to follow Blaxland, Wentworth and Lawson’s route over the Blue Mountains with first the road, and then the rail line. It’s a tortuous route that makes for ineffeciaent rail freight.
What was long advocated by the Country Party, but never backed by Sydney business interests, was the building of a a decent rail link up the Hunter and through the Great Dividing Range following the Goulburn River. This provides a lower level and far straighter link across the mountains. The proposal also involved a new port in Port Stevens north of Newcastle, a good deepwater port that now couldn’t be used because it has become a holiday and retirement haven. It would have avoided all the geographic problems that make Sydney a difficult freight port. (The Country Party didn’t help their cause because they tied the whole project into creating a seperate state in Northern NSW.)
Sydney has dithered for years over a port/road/rail freight interchange site. Melbourne and Brisbane have done it, but nimbyism and lack of clear government decision making keeps styming it in Sydney. Geography didn’t help either. Melbourne had the spare land around the Port and the northern suburban boundary for interchanges was not as far distant as in Sydney. In Brisbane, there was lots of room to expand and build a new port at the mouth of the Brisbane River. Perth had the same advantage, building all the seperate rail links in standard gauge at the same time as they developed the Kwinana Industrial area.
There is a big freight interchange at Parkes in central west NSW these days. It’s where the east-west and north-south rail freight links meet. All the freight to Sydney has to be put on smaller trains to get over the mountains, so more of the freight is going to Brisbane and Melbourne these days.
Hahaha at least Hockey still has a sense of humour
Spam box, if you’re not careful, I’ll get on to Sydney’s mad public transport ticket system. You can buy a Travel Ten (ten trip) ticket for busses at newsagents. You can buy a bus weekly at Newsagents, and even a bus-rail weekly at newsagents. But if you want a rail weekly, or any rail ticket, you have to buy it at the train stations. And there is no rail equivalent of a Travel Ten. Nor is there a daily public transport ticket by zone. You can buy a daily ticket, but it covers the entire metropolitan area, which is not of much use to most public transport frequent users who live closer to the city.
All Sydney fares are still point to point. You catch a bus on the weekend, and it will sit at a stop for several minutes while there are on-going disucssions with passangers about how much it costs to go where they are going, and then the necessary fiddling with purses and wallets.
And then, all the frequent use tickets only apply to the state owned systems. The private bus companies have their own ticketing systems, many of which don’t offer multi-trip options, and if you are catching a train on to the city from the end of the bus route, require you to have another ticket for the train.
Victoria introduced a common ticket system more than 20 years ago, but Sydney is still saying it can’t be done until they have a smart card. For a whole series of reasons to do with different union coverage of private and public transport services, and sweetheart subsidies for school students designed to keep private bus companies solvent, nothing has hapened to sort out Sydney’s public transport for decades. It all goes back to Jack Lang’s Transport Co-ordination Act which was designed to stop private bus companies competing with government owned trams. Ever since, state governments haven’t been building a better public transport system, they’ve been negotiating compromises between competing interests.
Julie has Swanny on the run as usual.
Antony, I bet you had a big trainset when you were a rugrat
mesma is the one on the ropes. The entire opposition front bench are having to run interference for her. She is in deep trouble.
I hope making Canberra our capital city was on that list.
If you live in a dreamland perhaps
Dario if you were watching Swanny bumbled through a question by Julie on whether the Government would rule out creating a State owned Bank…Swanny did an awful job and didnt answer it and the Speaker called him 4 times to answer it and he didnt!
Julie is doing well!
684, Antony, you are wired today, gotta lay off so much caffeine
………
No I didn’t. But I’m actually a keen cyclist and I like riding to work some days. But the entire ticketing system in Sydney is designed around people who do the same trip every work day. If you drive or ride some days, then public transport in Sydney becomes a mess because you have to keep fiddling round to buy tickets. And because all the tickets in Sydney are point to point rather than zonal, you have to buy an individual ticket all the time. The train ticket vending machines are also different from station to station because each station has a different set of point to point fares.
Where I live, there are two stations close together on different lines, Erskineville and Newtown. They are just 1km apart, and weekly tickets from both stationsa to the city are the same price. Yet a friend of mine who had a City-Erskineville weekly caught the train to Newtown one day because the trains on the Erskineville line were stuffed, and was fined by an Inspector because his ticket, despite being the same price and same distance, did not entitle him to travel to newtown instead of Erskineville.
It is also why they couldn’t get their smart card system to work. The fare were to complex. If you caught a bus, the card had to recognise you when you got on AND got off the bus. Instead of simplifying the system, they tried to duplicate the hideously complex and illogical current ticketing system.
My logical nature just doesn’t cope with a system infested with no other logic than keeping a lot of ticket sellers and collectors in employment.
Pine going close to being booted again!
Antony…the London Public Transport system uses Oyster Cards and they work well, i used them when i travelled there this year…it is a system that works and can be put in to the major cities what do you think about that?
Anyway, away from public transport. Federal redistributions are coming up for NSW and Quueensland. It will be determined in the new year that NSW will lose a seat to 48, and Queensland will gain a seat to 30.
http://blogs.abc.net.au/antonygreen/
Antony what about Victoria?
Glen – London has a zonal system, that’s how you make it work. Sydney has point to point tickets. In London you can by a daily zonal ticket, in Sydney you can’t. In London, all bus fares are the same wherever you are going, but most people have daily, weeklies or quarterlies. You can implement that sort of system, but you first have to simplify the ticketing.
Melbourne’s a cinch. You buy a half day or full day ticket and hop on and off to your hearts content. Not in Sydney. It’s a weekly, or travel tens which you have to use on every trip, or you buy a fare each time.
Glen, all other state unchanged.
The advantage of the Oyster Card is that there are flat rates for any bus trips (1 pound each) regardless of distance, as well as a system of 10 zones (with 6 main ones and 4 that go into Hertfordshire) for the tube. In Sydney, there is still distance-based pricing for rail and distance-based pricing for buses. Also, there are no private buses in London – while there are heaps in Sydney.
All in all – Sydney needs to sort out its ticketing system first before it can think about a T-card system…
Antony 692 – well said!
They could get integrated ticketing if they agreed to simplify the system but that means either making some people worse off or giving up some marginal revenue. Its silly really, because if they did it the extra passengers would probably make up for any revenue loss. But thats NSW financial management for you.
London also has one central body (London Transport) that distributes the revenue and runs the zoning and ticketing system. That makes it work. They have moved to that approach in SEQ now and presto! – integrated ticket zones have been introduced.
If you really want to see good integrated transpor systems the best ones are not in the english speaking world – go to Munich, Vienna, Helsinki, Strassbourg, Singapore, or Hong Kong to name a few. There are more modern (and cheaper) options than Oyster card out now too).
FF & Mr X at it again…
http://news.smh.com.au/national/showdown-looming-on-broadband-funding-20081204-6rap.html
Roxon announcing in the house that Customs have tested the ‘Malternatives’ that the liquor industry have tried to get around the alcopops tax don’t match the chemical composition of beer so they will still be taxed as spirits
ive been away for a few days and boy have i got a lot of catching up to do!
correct me if i’m wrong but didnt a labor pollie have to resign from the shadow ministry for writing a reference for a shady charactor– and that was before he becane shady, it was when he was still respectable, so what should Heffernan do in this case?
http://abc.com.au/news/stories/2008/12/04/2437985.htm
Slit his wrists preferably
New thread.