Janet Albrechtsen says the Liberals need to talk about the glory days. The supporting evidence for her argument? Extensive quotes from John Howard and Alexander Downer. Could it be that they have a vested interest in seeing their legacy defended?
But my favourite part of Janet’s column is this:
Howard chooses his words carefully, understanding that his era ended when the government lost office. Not for him the rambling, rumbling ruminations of a disgruntled former PM such as Paul Keating.
No, not a rambling, rumbling rumination in sight.
45 Comments
I enjoyed Downer’s “If people start criticising the Howard government’s economic legacy that’s what Labor wants.”
If people start criticising it? Alex, we were criticising it when it was happening.
I gather she isn’t referring to the other howard legacy of lies, using the lives of the desperate and disadvantaged for cheap political gain, giving new meaning to the phrase “nobody told me”, and an economic legacy that has entrenched the hand-out mentality. Let’s see the coalition defend that.
Well, AUS Libs aren’t the only ones going through this.
Its the USA Libs as well
http://edition.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/07/06/begala.palin.republican.party/index.html
If people start criticising it? Alex, we were criticising it when it was happening
Give us some examples of your criticisms, Lefty. Was one criticism the possibility that they repaid the $96 billion (legacied by the Keating government) too fast thereby putting Federal finances in excellent shape? Was that a criticism?
Janet A: “Others said the same thing privately last week when opposition treasury spokesman Joe Hockey made an off-the-cuff remark that it was “reasonable criticism” to say that the Howard government spent too much on tax cuts and family benefits. As one senior Liberal MP said, in exasperation, to The Australian: “Which party is Hockey a member of?” To criticise the Howard government for cutting taxes too much is like the Greens now deciding it is bad policy to save too many trees.
The kindest, and perhaps likeliest, reading of Hockey’s comments about tax cuts is that it was a stuff-up. But it is the sort of lazy blunder that the Liberal Party can ill afford to make.”
Another reading of Hockey’s comments is that he genuinely believes that to be a valid criticism of the Howard government and he is simply sharing that opinion with us because he is honest. So let’s shoot him down for being honest, rather than towing the party line and pretending Howard/Costello never put a foot wrong. This is what it means to be part of the Coalition, apparently. Don’t give us your opinion. Lie to us about how you really feel rather than concede any point of criticism of our side. So the message that the electorate sent the Coalition by throwing the PM out of parliament in favour of someone with no experience in parliament whatsoever was clearly “keep doing exactly what you’re doing”. I sure hope the policy wonks within the Libs think just like Janet does.
Shorter Tob….
When trying to win in politics it’s always best to present the worst side side of you, no the good things. Lol.
Shorter Tob….
When trying to win in politics it’s always best to present the worst side side of yourself, not the good side. Lol.
Howard’s rambling ruminations aren’t as interesting as Keating’s, so we don’t hear about them. Blessedly.
The world has clearly changed. The Tories are having a damn hard time coming to grips with it. Janet will slowly devolve into a rambling monomaniac like Piers Akerman.
The conservatives have already lodged Howard in their pantheon with the senile duo Reagan and Thatcher. We’ll have to put up with years of this, because their faith is blind and implacable.
What do you mean “Janet will slowly devolve into a rambling monomaniac”? Wasn’t she there years ago?
Perhaps Janet Albrectsen thinks it might be cheaper to raise the Titanic than to be aboard the maiden voyage of Son of Titanic.
Well, I hope the Liberals follow Janet’s advice. It’s important to focus on refighting the battles of the past that you’ve already lost.
I say this because I truly have the conservatives’ best interests at heart and genuinely wish them success in the future.
Who the heck cares what Janet Albrechtsen’s opinion in The Australian Vendetta, is?
What fight is that Jeremy? What old battles are you referring to as Janet A isn’t referring to fighting old battles. She’s suggesting that libs bring up the fact that they ran a pretty decent ship overall during the 11 years they were in office. They did and must of the electorate believed that even though they voted them out of office (Polls). Stop denying the obvious please and attempt to move the goal posts.
I personally don’t think they ran a good enough government because they didn’t dismantle the welfare state and they botched up labor market reform.
Victoria asks:
Who the heck cares what Janet thinks? Obviously you do Victoria otherwise you wouldn’t have commented. Tob does otherwise he wouldn’t have posted this obsessive thread. Leftie does… Lot’s of people care.
In fact the only person who wouldn’t care that much is me as I did look at the piece and didn’t read it when it was first published. I’m just commenting because I see all these lefties not caring enough to obsess over what she has to say.
Don’t feed the trolls.
Freddie:
I’m well fed, so don’t worry about me. I swallowed (almost whole) a great Aussie burger with-the-lot for lunch, mouth watering Aussie chips all washed down with ice cold Coke Zero to watch the weight.
What you ought to be avoiding, Fred is making stupid comments like that because I recently suggested “you were out of your league”, which still holds true. You are.
Joe Hockey realised that to win back the John Howard’s battlers – who in the end desserted him because of Work Choices he needed to admit that they did some things wrong, and some things right (don’t ask me what the right things are, maybe the Gun Amnesty).
The Howard years were based on Magic Pudding economics where company profits would always keep increasing. None of it was squirrelled away for the bad times because profits would keep reappearing just like the Magic Pudding.
Part of the problem the Thatcherite / Reaganomics commentators are going to have to adjust to is that most of the world thinks that’s was helped create the current mess.
Also can people for heaven’s sake sick to the topic in their comments, the personal attacks are getting nearly as bad as the ABC News website comments section.
deccles – Selling the Silverware to pay off the credit card only works for so long.
I think there were some good things within the govt over the Howard years but in the end once they had both houses the power and the need to change became too strong. The changes alienated the battlers and making promises that they knew they couldn’t keep (interest rates etc) finally wore thin on the electorate.
Let’s move on people. Howard who?
tee, still trolling?
BAS statements. has small business forgiven the libs yet for that brilliant piece of red tape?
Tee says:
‘Victoria asks:
Who the heck cares what Janet thinks? Obviously you do Victoria otherwise you wouldn’t have commented.’
Umm, no, that doesn’t follow at all. Actually I was interested in commenting on the Pure Poison piece. In actuality the truth of the my statement can be found in my actions. That is, I haven’t read an Albrechtsen article since the election of the Rudd government. They are irrelevant now.
Honestly, I haven’t taken her seriously since her bald statement, ‘We’re all Conservatives now.’
Yeah right, Planet.
Tee off on that, tee.
Any halfwit can sell assets to reduce debt.
I presume that by not responding, Leftie suggests I’m right.
There are few things an opposition can do to try and improve it’s standing with the electorate. It can offer ongoing criticism of the government, suggest alternative policies and highlight/remind the voters of the good times we had when they were last in power.
Normally the last option isn’t possible for most oppositions simply because it wouldn’t be true. In 1996 Labor left the country in a state of permanent decline with huge deficits, unemployment permanently in double digits and inflation at high levels. The Libs also had the same problem with Fraser’s terrible government in the early 80’s.
However the libs don’t have that problem now and it seems according to the polls the voters actually do think they left the economy is fine shape and their economic management was first class.
So Janet A is right to bring this up and it would be a good strategy for the opposition to remind the public that their previous time in office wasn’t flagged with a negative economic image, they didn’t have a foul mouthed, uncouth, hate-filled leader as PM like Keating. They were actually managing the economy well.
So your criticism of her is frankly silly and really shallow.
Freddie:
No you are, as shown by the fact that you have nothing at all to add to threads other than silly 3 word snarks… What’s the matter, is 3 words per sentence as far as you can go, Freddie?
Jeremy: I say this because I truly have the conservatives’ best interests at heart and genuinely wish them success in the future.
Spoken like a true lawyer.
Janet has got to be kidding – there was absolutely nothing conservative about the Howard government. The Liberals need to embrace true conservatism in order to get elected again, which doesn’t seem to be happening under the current leadership group. About all they can come up with is “Look at the debt!”
“She’s suggesting that libs bring up the fact that they ran a pretty decent ship overall during the 11 years they were in office.”
The “fact”?
Do you conservatives actually grasp that many people do not agree with you? That it is far from “undeniable” or whatever other words I’ve heard used by rightwingers when repeating the party line?
I know that you believe the above, but could you at least do us the courtesy of conceding that your point of view on the subject is far from objective or universal?
tee says at 3:14pm that s/he comments (at least six times) because s/he is not interested but Victoria and others (including me, one must presume) comment because we do care. Happily for tee, tee will never notice what a wally that makes tee look. I did read one Albrechtsen article, and got the impression that she is an Anne Coulter wannabe, so I don’t need to read any more of her stuff. And tee, check our history, Cossie only said he paid off the $96b, treasury figures show he never did.
I’m not a conservative, Leftie. I’m libertarian and actually despise conservatives as much as I despise the left. Statist arseholes are statist arseholes. bigger statist arseholes are that, just bigger statist arseholes. So it’s the size of the statism that determines the level of “arseholery” in my opinion.
However the “fact” remains that the broad voting public actually does think the conservatives (who I don’t support) ran a pretty good economy. That’s a ” fact” in the sense that they actually did have a good economy under them and the public generally believes that.
Seeing perceptions are important in politics and the conservatives (who I don’t support) would do themselves a bit of good sounding a little more positive Janet’s advice is quite good. It’s simply another tool to use to try and gain voter approval and therefore a trawling exercise to get more votes.
Whatever you think doesn’t really enter into it, as there’s as much chance of you voting conservative as there is of Guy Rundle at some stage saying something that sounds half way intelligent.
So, to sum up… Janet’s advice was good while your criticisms of her advice was uncharacteristic pretty shallow and bereft of thinking in political terms.
measures to use to determine how they went are actually pretty conventional things that economists would use.
Inflation rate.
general level of long term interest rates.
employment levels
GDP growth rate
DGP growth diffusion
Federal debt level.
Deficit or surplus
business investment
consumer sentiment
business and consumer borrowing.
It’s those sorts of things Lefty. You could add some more, i’m sure, however on those sorts of things they did pretty well.
I just had an image of Tee at a party. While everyone is talking and having a good time, I’m sure he has a quick swill of cheap champagne and then proceeds to endlessly talk about how crap the left is, leaving everyone trying to find a way to not engage him in conversation.
I really don’t buy his whole not liking the conservatives thing either.
How about this for a crap statement from him “In 1996 Labor left the country in a state of permanent decline with huge deficits”. Permanent!!! holy crap, that Labor is just terrible!
and this…
and they botched up labor market reform
wow, people at the party, please step away slowly…
“No you are, as shown by the fact that you have nothing at all to add to threads other than silly 3 word snarks… What’s the matter, is 3 words per sentence as far as you can go, Freddie?”
Don’t be stupid, tee. That was my only 3-word post at this site. I only needed 3 words to make my point on that occasion.
hegemony:
You’re chronic constipation sufferer, am I right? If only you had good bowel movement earlier you would have had nicer things to say.
I really don’t buy his whole not liking the conservatives thing either.
Heggles, if that’s all the evidence you can offer you really need to sit down and try to figure out what the word “evidence” means.
My comments are perfectly within the belief system of most libertarians. Lastly, somehow I don’t think you are I would be attending the same parties. That’s a 100:1 shot that’s a sure thing.
Freddie:
Good work with the sentence word count and excellent effort expanding the vocab. Keep it up Tiger and in 300 years you could be writing another War and Peace. Take it slowly though.
hegemony:
You’re a chronic constipation sufferer, am I right? If only you had good bowel movement earlier you would have had nicer things to say.
I really don’t buy his whole not liking the conservatives thing either.
Heggles, if that’s all the evidence you can offer you really need to sit down and try to figure out what the word “evidence” means.
My comments are perfectly within the belief system of most libertarians. Lastly, somehow I don’t think you and I would be attending the same parties. That’s a 100:1 shot but a sure thing
Freddie:
Good work with the sentence word count and excellent effort expanding the vocab. Keep it up tiger and in 300 years you could be writing another War and Peace. Take it slowly though.
You know, you only have to post each comment once, tee. They don’t improve with repetition or anything.
Yes, tee, you are entirely consistent with the common or garden variety Libertarian: abusive, ignorant, arrogant, and short-sighted to a fault.
http://www.angryflower.com/atlass.gif
Don’t hold anything back, Catshid. Let it all out.
Out of interest tee, who do you vote for, who best in Australia represents your liberterian views? I’m admitedly and unashamedley of the ‘Left’ so I wont vote for Labor, my preferred party is the Australian Greens but even they aren’t ideal for me, there is a party that contest seats in the Western Suburbs of Melbourne calling themselves the Socialist Alliance, their name seems right so they get placed highly on my ballot paper but for all I know, being an alliance they may accept national socialists?
RobJ @ 38 – I suggest you have a look at the Socialist Alliances website (if you haven’t already) to find out what they are all about. Then have a look at the various groups that make it up. After following the links I found out about a spat that one of the groups had with…wait for it…The “Leninist Party Faction”!
And their policies are utopian at best – the major thing missing? The little problem of ‘how’ is missing from most of the policies. That and about a 99% tax rate to pay for it all!
But hey, its a free society.
Like I say baldrick, I’m not sure which factions make them up so I think I’ll keep voting Green (best fit) but you may now realise (though not admit) that your accusation of me being partisan was incorrect.
Tell us who you voted for and why?
““Leninist Party Faction”!”
Beats those idiots One Nation and the utterly ridiculous Family First.
RobJ
I leave the house of reps ballot blank and vote for the LDP candidates in the senate. Prior to the LDP fielding candidates I never enrolled, as I find it a shocking breach of liberty to be forced to vote. Not voting is as important as actually voting in my mind.
Well, RobJ – you are partisan to the left side of politics
I have alternated between Labor and Liberal.
My criteria for voting is simple: 1) Does any party have a particularly stupid policy that I totally disagree with? (think internet filter). They lose my vote there and then.
2) Of the remaining parties, on the issues I deem as important, who has the policy which best reflects what I believe? What is their timeline for implements it? Have they costed it? And how will it affect me?
3) Always vote below the line – my vote is not going to be horsetraded outside of my control.
To be perfectly honest – no political party suits all my beliefs. I came to very much dislike Howards government towards the end – Howard in particular. He was acting out of self interest and not in the interest of his party. I thought that he got a fitting departure – one that was outside of his control because he was just selfish.
For implementing it…..I should say!
“as I find it a shocking breach of liberty to be forced to vote. Not voting is as important as actually voting in my mind.”
I agree but to be fair you can go to the ballot box and tear up your paper, it is compulsory to get your name ticked off, you don’t actually have to vote.
” Does any party have a particularly stupid policy that I totally disagree with? (think internet filter). ”
Did you vote against Labor then, even though at this stage you must have disliked the Howard Govt?
Did you ever vote for the Government that gave us the Pacific Solution and took us to war in Iraq, after all they are stupid policies (As is the Internet filter, designed to appease wowsers and other pricks)?
“3) Always vote below the line – my vote is not going to be horsetraded outside of my control.”
I agree, preferences are non-democratic and put power in the hands of the likes of Steve Fielding.
“To be perfectly honest – no political party suits all my beliefs.”
Same here.
“Well, RobJ – you are partisan to the left side of politics ”
Except ‘the left’ isn’t a political party, see, I was right about your likleyhood of admitting your error.