Australian Federal Election 2010

Posted by: Andy Double U

Australian Federal Election 2010 - 25/06/2010 08:13

In light of Mr Pearce's post in the Lounge Guidelines thread this morning grin I thought I might get this one cracking!

Keep in mind his comments:
Originally Posted By: Matthew Pearce

However, please bear in mind that these threads will be subject to the same guidelines as all other threads in relation to trolling and personal attacks, so keep them out of it. In fact, we will adopt a no-tolerance approach in these threads, so any offensive behaviour of this kind will result in immediate bans.

So, feel free to start debating away again, but play nice!


So onto the upcoming election, yesterday's events will certainly spice things up a bit and have changed the dynamics of the electoral landscape.

To be honest, at this point I don't care what happens, just hold the blasted election so that people and businesses can start going about their lives with a bit of stability and direction. It seems nearly all people I talk to at the moment are terribly disillusioned with those at the top (and that being even more so than usual) and are really unsure what the current government stands for. I think this might have been part of the reason for the new PM making admitting that they'd lost their way in the last few months. It will be interesting to see what decisions they make in the next few weeks, I don't envy them at all.

As for Kevin Rudd, well I think it goes without saying that I wasn't his biggest fan but I could help but feel for him yesterday whilst listening to his speech. Obviously he was incredibly passionate about his role as PM and I've always thought that he really was doing what he thought was right by the party and his country. It was a shame to see him ousted in such an undignified way and to be honest, struck me as being a bit cruel. But hey, that's party politics for you and they are obviously doing what they can to maximise their chances of re-election.

Anyway, interesting few months ahead and no doubt plenty of interesting discussion and debate will be had between fellow WZoners. Just a quick thanks to the mods and the admin for reopening these kinds of discussions, hopefully you guys won't regret it... much! grin

Andy
Posted by: Dale Small

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 25/06/2010 08:36

Technically, she has until April 2011 to call it, so if I were her, would be hanging on as long as possible to do some damage control, if that can be achieved at all.
Posted by: bigwilly

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 25/06/2010 10:04

Yep, if I were her I'd be wanting a chance to prove myself before calling an election. Really all we've heard about her from the media over the last year or so has been about her failings.
Posted by: SBT

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 25/06/2010 10:41

Yes they probably would have lost the next election with Kevin at the helm or if they had of won it would have been a very close run thing and resulted in a minority Parliment. Not to sure that still won't happen.
Turn back ETS, Climate Change, Super Mining Tax, 12 months paid maternity leave and 10 minutes after they get re elected it will all be back on the books again.

About the only thing they haven't tried is increasing the GST (The UK has just done this as a means of increasing government funding) and don't think Rudd et al haven't been talking about that as a means to make up the biggest hole in Australias budget ever. Could you live witha 5% increase in GST. I am a pension on a fixed income. There is no way in the world I could afford to live with an increase in GST and I wouldn't be alone.

An increase in GST has to be approved by all Australian States. Now why doesn't that fill me with a warm comfortable glow of confidence that it will never happen.
Posted by: Dale Small

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 25/06/2010 10:50

It will probably be next on the cards, it has just passed parliament over the ditch here.

Oh & I grew up, worked business and earnt my wages under the Hawke/Keating/Howard threesome so know a fair bit about Aussie politics, I bailed when Rudd came in cause I sure wasnt going to go through another Labor debacle & was correct, now theyve imploded im just sitting back waiting for the repercussions smile
Posted by: ant

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 25/06/2010 11:33

I had hopes when this government was approaching the election, and hoped that at long last I could return to voting Labor. And fully intended to, when all of a sudden they started chanting Working Families. I know spin when I hear it, and the politics of victimhood, entitlement and greed.

So I voted Green, and independant. And I ALWAYS vote below the line for the Senate, so I can control where my preferences go.

I have hopes of Gillard, she's a straight talker, and she's not afraid to own her own beliefs and thoughts. And in watching the news last night on various channels, I never once heard Working Families used. So I'm hopeful.

although I'll still be voting Green, and Stable Population Party (of which I'm a member), and maybe the animals rights party too. But I might let my preferences flow to Labor after all that, if the others fail to get up.
Posted by: Dave-Wx

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 25/06/2010 12:00

Its odd you say that...as throughout what she has said yesterday when she trotted out her major lines...some sort of 'workplace' or 'workers' phrase was at the start of it (followed climate change, saving from the GFC etc etc). It almost sounded to me like "I'm making sure the unions know we're thinking of them and showing that we're back on the straight and narrow again"

Anyway interesting times indeed...no doubt part of the switch is to call an election during her honeymoon period (ie: Oct-Nov), to maximise their chances of getting in again.

And something I'm very surprised at is all the polls that the news websites have going at the moment - all say 'will you vote for Gillard' and they are all displaying an emphatic NO across the board! (with a slim yes vote by comparison on the ABC website)
Posted by: AaronD

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 25/06/2010 12:54

i think people were getting worried because Rudd made such big moves and people were becoming uneasy about them. people don't like being outside their comfort zone.
The thing is Rudd did get voted in by the people and Gillard and her "crew" have decided THEY want to take a different approach so we will kick him out.

Now everyone has their opinions but Rudd was voted in and he had his ideas on immigrants etc... I read in an article where Gillard said something about understanding that people who don't want so many immigrants in Australia and will address that.
now i dont think the immigration issue issue should be discussed here or the topic will get banned but my point is how i think alot of people would have voted for Rudd for his ideas on such topics.
if that makes sense?? :-)
Posted by: Scud

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 25/06/2010 13:14

Originally Posted By: Dale Small
Technically, she has until April 2011 to call it, so if I were her, would be hanging on as long as possible to do some damage control, if that can be achieved at all.


I would have thought she may do this too however last night on The 730 report she guaranteed the election will be this year. She also won't be moving into the lodge unless she gets voted in as PM by the people. Wonder how long Kev will stay in there for...
Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 25/06/2010 13:56

It's kind of ironic that religion and politics are allowed back in. If Abbott gets into power this nation will need to get used to the two becoming one.

As for yesterday's event, the right thing was done by the party and I believe that as disappointed as Rudd is, he was a part of the process of change. He also showed his political will by staying in the party. Plenty before him have simply fallen on their sword so he should be admired for that courage. I watched the entire process live and when it came Abbott's turn to speak I made my mind up right there and then that all the while he is the leader of the LNP I will never vote there again. What an ungracious grub of a man he is. He has redefined the term "bigot". They'd do much better to dump the clown and get Joe out in front.

I expect that we will see a quick resolution on the mining tax now too. Other than the greedy pig that is Clive Palmer, the rest appear ready to sit down and get a result.

After the dust settles on yesterday's events I would also expect a rise in support for Gillard from the female population. Afterall , Abbott thinks women were put here to iron his shirts. It will be an interesting few months ahead that is for sure.

Most of the nation saw an historical day in Australian politics and not all in a good sense. However I doubt most will understand the actual mechanics of yesterday's events. The moment there were murmurs about a leadership challenge the axe had started to fall. Whilst Gillard is being labelled by many as a back stabber, the truth is she had nothing to do with the leadup. She is merely a consequence of its end.

Abbott will need to be very careful how he treads with her in coming months because no-one likes a bully. I personally believe he would much prefer she was still the deputy. I predict she will be in the public eye for the next three months more than Rudd was for the past 3 years. This is where he failed.


I have never been aligned to one party. Howard got me twice. Despite the shortcomings of this current government I still can't help but feel the alternative is worse.

Yep, interesting times ahead.
Posted by: Arnost

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 25/06/2010 14:12

I bet the mods just had collective apoplexy after that post CF! You certainly didn’t hold back much..! LOL.
Posted by: Keith

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 25/06/2010 14:21

Originally Posted By: ColdFront
....... Abbott thinks women were put here to iron his shirts.

Actually, on the Today show some time back as part of the weekly 'Abbott and Gillard' segment, Abbott did do some ironing..literally. There had been a discussion on their family roles and how they spend time with family when away from the 'bear pit'. The two political opponents then hugged one another (at the behest of the show host of course).

As I say, all a bit staged for the show. But no matter who you support, it was funny to watch.

(Really, I don't think shirts need ironing.)
Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 25/06/2010 14:25

Hmmm I didn't go for any individuals in here. I don't feel good about either party. I can't vote for a green party with a leader that is as ridgid as iron. So I don't see the problem with it. SBT has expressed his view on who he won't be voting for. As has Dale. Fair is fair yeah?

I don't like Anna Bligh too much but the way Clive Palmer has bullied her is rather grubby for a man reportedly worth several billion dollars and crying about paying more tax. So he deserves a mention. I live in a state where the opposition is a bunch of misfits who have spent their time in the wilderness jostling for position rather than working on alternative policy.

I haven't seen much of it from the federal opposition either. They are attacking Gillard as a backstabber despite 2 leadership spills of their own in recent times. They say you have to be of a certain ilk to run as a politician. Any idea why? The enire political system in this country needs to go back to the drawing board. Perhaps if we had several close run parties to chose from they'd work harder to avoid a much lengthier time in opposition.


I saw the ironing segment too Keith. AKA damage control.
Posted by: Greg Sorenson

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 25/06/2010 14:41

haha, yer interesting post CF. Good to see that you aren't aligned with just one party based on your previous voting. I too am a swinging voter and i take my vote very seriously. Both major and minor parties have in the past provided valid policies that i believe were for the betterment of the country. I have not liked them all, but at least i have gone for the best package put on the table at the time. I'm not one of those voters who asked themselves, will this improve "my" life, rather, will this improve "everyones" lives. People can be selfish, and often look at things in tunnel vision.

I think Australian voters should be informed, well prepared, armed with all the facts about promised policies, and then execute their decisions. Perhaps there will be one single issue that will make you decide, or a more holistic approach may be needed. The point is, don't waste your vote. Other countries don't have the some right, or privilege for that matter, as we do. We should be thankful for it.

In terms of leadership candidates, i can't say that i favour Abbott at this stage. He hasn't proven that he can be balanced in his views so far, especially in finding a the middle ground within his far right winged ideals. He has time however to prove otherwise and soften his approach. Gillard too, has time to prove that she can mop up the mistakes made so far and build upon some of the good outcomes in this term. Be it one month or 5, there's time to grab my vote.

What ever the outcome, it sure will be one of the most anticipated elections for some time. So many twists and turns, you can almost cut the air here in Canberra atm, it's really electric.
Posted by: ant

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 25/06/2010 15:38

Good words, ColdFront. I see nothing wrong there, the forum rules are about attacking other contributors, ad-hominem argument, which is attacking the man, not the ball. CF certainly wasn't doing that, he/she is stating their views. Stating them well, I might add.

I don't support Abbott because his history shows him to be a socially neanderthal idealogue, who is quite prone to acting on his personal beliefs (morning-after pill, family planning removed from foreign aid programs etc). He's had a make-over, which should always set the alarm bells ringing, because make-overs are a facade. He's probably quite a reasonable bloke, but, his track record makes me believe he's unfit to run a progressive country like ours.

I joined the population control movement because like many others I'm scared of what's happening, and the strongly pro-natalist and pro-immigration policies of the Howard and Rudd governments made me despair. The Greens weren't tackling the population elephant in the loungeroom, which has prompted many who would have gone Green to move beyond them and create a specific party to get the topic out in the sun.

I also became very concerned at how successfully both major parties were painting refugees as some terrible threat, while continuing to import hundreds of thousands of legal immigrants. That's not just spin, that's downright evil.
Posted by: dcon

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 25/06/2010 23:34

I think this thread is a good idea...it hopefully will show that we can put across our opinions and perspectives in a logical, reasoned sequence without feeling the need to resort to abuse, which everyone has done so far. If we act like adults and respect each others views even at the same time as disagreeing with them, this thread will be beneficial and mentally stimulating.

just a comment on the post above...which im sure that most of you will totally disagree with....I just think its important to stand back and view the direction this country is going.
Originally Posted By: ant
...his track record makes me believe he's unfit to run a progressive country like ours....


the use of the word progressive - its freely bandied around in this age - is as I see it, purely subjective to ones own views - not political, but ones moral views. what may be progressive to one person may be retrogressive.

Having said that, i think that many of the changes that have happened in this country in the last 10 years are indisputablely progressive - women rising to positions of leadership, respect for people of all cultures including the original owners of our country, and there are many more.

However, some of abbots views on sensitive issues (which i wont mention here) are so-called indisputably retrogressive, but the bigger perspective is that they are not fundamentally indisputably backward, but it depends on the moral beliefs of the person judging. Liberation is not always progressive, history clearly shows that. So I support Abbot, not because he says or does everything right, but because having a conservative leader encourages the country to think not once, not twice, but three times before bringing changes which will radically change the direction (particularly moral) of the future of this country.

hope i havent overstepped the line...but ive given my one cents worth.
Posted by: David Simpson.

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 26/06/2010 08:08

It all seems morally corrupt to me, but I guess there are no surprises there. I wasn't a fan of Krudd but the same rats who ganged up on him now run the country, in time perhaps Karma will determine their fate. If it doesn't, I'm sure the unions (who must be stoked with the weeks events) will.

When parliament next sits...
Posted by: Arnoldnut

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 26/06/2010 08:10

may think this off topic but I don't think anyone should automatically assume women will vote for women.
My experience with many aussie woman is that they may seem happy to see a woman in what they perceive as a mans job. But many many times I've had a situation with a woman mechanic in the workshop and some women customers refuse to have a woman work on their cars.
I saw it so many times ....the men customers had no problem .....while some women just refused to allow the woman mechanic to touch their cars.
Might think this has nothing to do with anything ....but ask any automotive dealer/large workshop and they will tell you exactly what I've said here ....not worth your business suffering to employ any. (this is common knowledge in aussie automotive ...ask anyone who holds the reins)

I just don't think anyone should assume Julia 's got half the votes automatically ...in fact I'm more inclined to believe the opposite is in play and she now needs to convince all aussie women.
Posted by: Ruckle

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 26/06/2010 08:54

Interesting points all, Arnoldnut in particular raises an interesting topic. At my work there are about 60 people, split 50 50 along male females lines (and one undecided, lol) with most likely 70% in the 21-26 age group (making me an old fart at 38 in the office). Anyway it was interesting to note yesterday women did seem to be making more of the gender issue. "Can you handle a female pm?", "Girl power"etc. Most of the male discussion was along the lines of politics and was pro or anti the govt based on policy not gender. So in short I was proud of my male colleagues (despite disagreeing with some of them naturally on policy) and a little disheartened by the females approach.

Another disheartening thing over the last couple of days has been the amount of ignorance about how our political system works. The cry of"I voted for Rudd", was he on your ballot? No, you voted for your local mp. I know our elections have taken on the appearance of a more presidential election in recent years but that is not the reality of our system. Schools , what are you doing?

Onto the election, my money is on a very very quick calling of the vote. I think the honeymoon period would be the ALP and Julia's best chance to retain the job- if I were making decision for them I'd be going down that path.
Posted by: Andy Double U

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 26/06/2010 09:07

I think you are bang on Arnoldnut. Another example that I witnessed just recently was when I headed to a mate's place and the AFL was on the telly with a female commentator (I'm a bit embarrassed to admit that I don't recall her name as I hardly ever watch footy on TV). Anyway, the most interesting thing was the generally negative comments that came from the females at our gathering, one even saying that she'd rather listen to a man any day of the week! Needless to say we blokes shrunk into the background looking at our beers, we weren't sure whether a murmuring of approval or disapproval was warranted grin .

It was interesting to read in the newspaper headlines about feminism's big leap forward thanks to Gillard's ascension. To me, calling a female, a Prime Minister, seems a bit backward if you ask me, maybe she should a prime ministeress? Anyway, with cries of joy from those in the feminism movement I think the real issue of gender equality took a back seat. I've coached women's footy teams, seen them play with more passion than most guys teams, I know many women who own and run successful businesses but it seems unless you've been perceived as breaking the mould in some way then it seems you really aren't all that special. Real equality is judging a person by their achievements and what they stand for, not making a big about attaining a position based on their gender! Obama's election was also a classic case of old style prejudice rearing its head in a reverse kind of way.

Either way it won't matter to my vote what gender, race, colour, religious persuasion etc. or hair colour the leader of a party has. As the ALP has demonstrated quite clearly, your vote is one for the party, not for the leader. It's not like any of us had the option of ticking the Kevin Rudd PM box at the last election! Having said that, it is obvious that Kevin Rudd with his tiny circle of close confidants did exercise a degree of control over the ALP policy direction for about two years. The ALP really did need to give him his head though because he was the one authoritarian enough to gather the squabbling mess together to look unified enough to run a country. I think it is obvious to all that decisions that have been made since the beginning of the year are proof enough that running a government/country with only four people is an enormous task and can easily fall apart under pressure.

The one I can't believe is Wayne Swan, how he went from being Kevin Rudd's No. 1 buddy to Gillard's is beyond me! He is a definite snake in the grass with a strong sense of what's best for him and one who I would not trust one iota. It's an absolute shame that the ALP's best performer (and the one who I have most respect for), Lindsay Tanner, will not be contesting the next election as I actually think he does have a good idea of what would be good for the country. I think his resignation is a sign of a lack of faith in the party as a whole.

The way it stands right now, I don't know what the government stands for. Gillard has a big task ahead to sort things out and she would be stupid not to consider calling an early election to capitalise on the honeymoon period that she will no doubt get. As far as I am concerned, she, through her involvement in the decision of the recent spate of poor policies, has a lot to answer for.

Hey CF, remember this photo? Anna Bligh looked pretty happy here smile (Taken from this story)
Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 26/06/2010 09:38

I remember the story on the news and I remember what I was thinking at the time. It certainly didn't reflect that image and highlighted how money dominates everything.

I can show you a photo of Gillard and Rudd together (all smiles) a week ago too.


Interesting comments about Swan being a snake Andy. I Personally think that to be a politician at the upper end of the pay grade scales atop a thick leathery skin are mandatory. None moreso than the PM and treasurer. Costello was a bloody good treasurer but one of the most venomous of all. I couldn't ignore his credentials as a money manager but it didn't stop me wanting to "hit it with a spade".
Posted by: ant

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 26/06/2010 10:41

Rudd was got rid of because he had become toxic to the electorate. and the problem with Rudd was, he was a really poor leader. His micro-managing was underminding his cabinet ministers who couldn't say a thing without it being approved by the PM's office first. This crippled the government.

The home insulation debacle, all that was engineered and run by PM&C, not Environment. PM&C pushed it through, rode rough-shod over objections (about safety etc) in their haste to get the money pumped into the community (this was part of the stimulus to ward off the GFC, which worked). But Garrett wore the blame, for a thing he had no control over.

I think many in government saw that, and realised it was something that could not continue.

everyone's worked for a micro-managing boss at some time, and you see how nothing gets done, you can't do your job, everything has to wait for the micro-manager to approve the next step, this is what Rudd was doing to the government.

They put up with it for several years, but when the Garrett thing happened, and then his plummet in the polls to a character like Abbott, that roused them into action.

However, the catalyst was actually Rudd, sending his chief of staff out to canvass the members to see who was "loyal" to Rudd and who wasn't. Gillard had made no push to count numbers or even declare she was interested, but Rudd was out counting votes anyway.

This had the Labor people saying enough is enough, and start moves for a spill.

as for being female, I guess the feminist triumph is that a competent person has been given a go, and being female hasn't prevented her. 10 years ago, it might have. 20 years ago, it would have. The impediment has been removed, and that is what feminism was about.
Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 26/06/2010 11:19



I couldn't agree more with all of that Ant. Gillard as pm is a consequence of events. Not their course. She had no choice but to stand or sink with the ship. People will slowly understand that as time progresses I believe.
Posted by: ant

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 26/06/2010 11:29

I hope so, ColdFront. People seem very ready to think "oh she stabbed him in the back". Fact is, as far as I can determine, Rudd stabbed HER in the back. She was still loyal to him, but he sent out The Boys to de-stabilise her anyway. Backfired.

And I think she'll be a more competent leader than he. She's seen first-hand how his poor management style didn't work. I hope she's worked out a better way. I hope she delegates properly to her ministers, she has such a talented group there in cabinet, and outside it too. I hope they get the chance to show us how good they can be, before an election is called.
Posted by: Shayne

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 26/06/2010 14:40

all i really want is justice, security and freedom..without of course pandering to the minorities that howl the loudest..the one that waves those flags enough for me will get my vote..

i know what id like to see our country be..

as for who and what i really am...well very few have an insight into that..

good thread otherwise..ill be reading with interest..
Posted by: Stormy1

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 27/06/2010 14:42

Originally Posted By: bigwilly
Yep, if I were her I'd be wanting a chance to prove myself before calling an election. Really all we've heard about her from the media over the last year or so has been about her failings.


I dare say we'll see that now-polls suggests labour in front now, also the media suggesting that a damning report coming out end of August regarding the Schools BER programme under labour. So makes sense to me that labour may call an election ASAP and personally I think this will be the case. I really wanted to see them calling election next year but this is the game of politics!
Posted by: Fozzy

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 27/06/2010 15:08

Hi Crew, My two bobs worth:When I was a kid the Libs were in..But they were mongrels, so they were out..Then Labor was in..But they were mongrels, so they were out..Then Libs..mongrels..out. Labor..mongrels..out. Then libs..mongrels..out. Now Labor...
I found, what you hear in the media, is what they want you to believe. It is all manipulation of the masses, using the "gaming" formula. The people need to wake up & kick them all out...till then...We get the government we deserve. THINK FREE
Posted by: Arnost

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 29/06/2010 16:18

Quote:
Federal Labor candidates in regional Victoria have been told to prepare for an election in the first two weeks of August.


http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/06/29/2940024.htm

If this does happen then we can be pretty sure that Tanner had no intentions of quitting before the Gillard coup. There is no way that he wold announce his departure at such a late stage - leaving really little or no chance to select a candidate in, what is really, a seat that Labor may very well lose to the Greens.
Posted by: SBT

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 17/07/2010 13:15

21st August is going to be a busy day for us- wedding at 3.30Pm (middle daughter), now we also have to vote as well.

I am so sick and tired of the term "Going forward " i could scream and it has only been an hour since Mrs Ronald McDonald announced the election - 5 more weeks of this Aaaaaaaagh.

Everyone I have voted for since 1974 has failed to gain office - Look out Julia my vote is comming your way grin
Posted by: Rime

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 17/07/2010 15:11

I just find that whole spin slogan of "moving forward" very ironic. What exactly are we moving forward from? We are moving forward from Gillard and her government's own failings. I think in a way this spin of moving forward really goes against the current Labor government as all what it is doing is admitting that they are at fault. Its like, "oh sorry guys, but we really really stuffed it, but don't be so negative about it and move forward". Sorry sweetheart, but for the good of the country you deserve the boot!
Posted by: Mick10

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 17/07/2010 16:24

aswell as looking at both gillard and abbott, its locally where i will be looking hard. we have a retiring liberal member in our marginal seat of herbert. i dont want to have another 3years of a liberal member in labor government or visa-versa.
Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 17/07/2010 20:27

Game on. 5 weeks of lies from all sides of politics. Does anyone own a spare cone of silence?
Posted by: SBT

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 17/07/2010 21:40

Nothing wrong with having a siting member in opposition. It's not like the last buugger actually did anything when he was in government except photo bomb every time somebody came here and there was a camera within 100 kilometers.

I for one wouldn't vote for Tony Mooney if he was the only one on the ballot paper.
Posted by: Xavo

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 17/07/2010 21:52

I'm not old enough to vote, but if I could this one would be a tough one for me.

If Abbot gets in, the NBN is gone.
If Gillard stays in, the filter comes in (probablymost definitely).
Posted by: ant

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 18/07/2010 09:52

I ensure my vote exhausts at Labor, to ensure it doesn't exhaust at Liberal, but it has a long road to get there. This year, I'm a member of the Stable Population party, so if they have candidates organised, in my electorate and state, that's where my first vote goes. then Green... Eden Monaro has an excellent Green candidate this time around, she's a local councillor and got the highest personal vote in the last council elections.

Then anyone else who's not a nazi or a lunatic, and finally Labor.

I always control where MY preferences go. In the Senate, I always vote below the line. Above the line voting is how bloody Fielding got in. Control your vote...
Posted by: SBT

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 18/07/2010 10:59

Yes couldn't agree more Ant. If you vote above the line you are a mug. Always indicate where you want your preferences to go otherwise you have effectively nullified your choice even if it means making 72 entries on one ballot paper.

Xavo
I think you may be a little off track with the NBN and Libs caning it. As it is already enacted into legislation. It will more than likely be scaled back to only encompass the Brisbane Line (World War 2 defensive line which was a border drawn up from Brisbane to Adelaide with everything above it surrended to the advancing Japanese) Which would see the NBN confined to the major population centres of Brisbane Sydney Melbourne Canberra Tasmania because it is already installed - and everyone else can go to pot. Not that the Labour NBN will come anywhere near connecting all regional centres (Townsville) either within the next 30 years. Don't believe the hype about Townsville getting it and it connecting the whole of the city. It won't. It will be a backbone and anyone within x distance (1.6 klm?) of the backbone can get connected but anyone 10 metres further away won't be.

As to the internet filter it was first bought up by the Liberals way back about 6 years ago and dropped before they decided to run with it, remember free home filters for the Internet to Save the Children from accessing stuff that some people would like to see banned from viewing by anyone because of their narrow minded bigoted fundementalist ideals. (This comes from having ultra consevative right wing fundamentalist church groups funding your campaigns in both Labour and Liberal parties). Fielding is just the front man.

About the only semi decent idea I have seen so far in the elcection is the implementation of a 15,000 strong Green Army to do environmental work around Australia. Nice idea but I remain dubious as to how they can set it up and run it effectively.

Mind you the Insiders had a good idea this morning on ABC TV. They would like to have anyone with in ear shot of the PM blow one of those bloody annoying world cup trumpets everytime she mumbles "Going Forward". In her announcement of the election date yesterday she said it 22 times in less than 7 minutes. Going forward from what?

Back stabbing your boss?
Boat people to East Timor?
Great Big New Mining Tax that keeps changing?
Posted by: Rime

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 18/07/2010 11:49

Originally Posted By: ant

Then anyone else who's not a nazi or a lunatic, and finally Labor.


Well that should rule out Bob Brown aswell. poke

Ant, you may find it interesting that it was the Liberals who first brought up the idea of sustainable population well before Labor and they were the first to make it an official policy before Labor. Labor only brought it up under Gillard. The Libs got hounded by Rudd & co for it earlier in the year for even mentioning it. Gillard has suggested this as a policy because she knows that it will win votes.

I also agree about voting below the line on the senate paper. I have done this in the last few elections to make sure the Greens do not get my vote through preferences.

I sometimes I find it hard to figure out who to vote for, but I always know who not to vote for. Sorry, but I must admit, I am a very harsh voter when it comes to Greens. When I have to vote in an election that I have no idea who to vote for (i.e some council elections) I will get the Greens how to vote card and vote in reverse order. I did this last time in the Alice Springs Town council election and those who I helped to get elected turned out to be pro development and for economic progress (otherwords, had their heads screwed on the right way). Meanwhile, the poor Greens will always believe they got my vote. grin
Posted by: bigwilly

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 18/07/2010 14:37

Have to agree about the Greens. They're nothing more than an ideology driven, city-based, pseudo-conservation/environmental party. A quick look at their policies should be enough to convince anyone who actually cares about the environment and community/society to keep their vote as far away from them as possible.

The Liberals will never see my vote either as long as that narrow-minded biggot Abbott has anything to do with party leadership.

So, on the basis of keeping the worst out, I think I might have to be voting Labour.
Posted by: Seabreeze

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 18/07/2010 17:59

I will be voting for the Nationals at the election. We don't have a Liberal candidate, otherwise I'd vote Liberal but they're pretty much the same. However, the New England electorate is a very safe Independent seat held by Tony Windsor (margin of 24.3%), and I'm certain that it will stay that way.
Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 18/07/2010 23:22

Originally Posted By: bigwilly
Have to agree about the Greens. They're nothing more than an ideology driven, city-based, pseudo-conservation/environmental party. A quick look at their policies should be enough to convince anyone who actually cares about the environment and community/society to keep their vote as far away from them as possible.

The Liberals will never see my vote either as long as that narrow-minded biggot Abbott has anything to do with party leadership.

So, on the basis of keeping the worst out, I think I might have to be voting Labour.


Amen. Tony Bigot will sink his own ship if he keeps flapping on about keeping interest rates down. Howard said the same thing and we all remember what happened there.
Posted by: Homer

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 18/07/2010 23:49

Originally Posted By: ColdFront
Originally Posted By: bigwilly
Have to agree about the Greens. They're nothing more than an ideology driven, city-based, pseudo-conservation/environmental party. A quick look at their policies should be enough to convince anyone who actually cares about the environment and community/society to keep their vote as far away from them as possible.

The Liberals will never see my vote either as long as that narrow-minded biggot Abbott has anything to do with party leadership.

So, on the basis of keeping the worst out, I think I might have to be voting Labour.


Amen. Tony Bigot will sink his own ship if he keeps flapping on about keeping interest rates down. Howard said the same thing and we all remember what happened there.



Funny thing was, after all Howards bleating, Labour actually managed to keep interest rates down, that is of course, until things started to go too well in this country, which didn't happen elsewhere.I cannot believe that Abbott is treading the same path not 24 hrs into this campaign.
Also cannot believe that Abbott is going down the path of party stability. Is he not the third leader of the Opposition since the last election? LOL!!!!!!

Homer
Posted by: adon

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 19/07/2010 04:17

Well I will be going conservative as i do always but I will be voting for the Shooters party in the senate. They are the most anti green party there is(and I am also a keen shooter). So if you like outdoor recreation and hate the greens go for them! Not a big fan of either of the main parties really they have done nothing for my area because it is a safe seat(Mallee is national ie. gutless lapdogs of the liberals). I actually found a party that most closely reflects my values in all areas but defence and they are the liberal democrats. They stand for a small government, minimal interference from government in the daily lives the population and minimal taxes. So I will be looking at their senate rep too.

And for those who did not fully understand Sir boabstrees comments on the NBN. Labour will NEVER bring this to rural and regional areas. It is pie in the sky and the coalitions attemp at affordable wireless which was canned by labour would have been the closest to an affordable BB access for rural aussie we could have hoped for.
Posted by: Rime

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 19/07/2010 07:31

Originally Posted By: Homer

Funny thing was, after all Howards bleating, Labour actually managed to keep interest rates down, that is of course, until things started to go too well in this country, which didn't happen elsewhere.I cannot believe that Abbott is treading the same path not 24 hrs into this campaign.
Also cannot believe that Abbott is going down the path of party stability. Is he not the third leader of the Opposition since the last election? LOL!!!!!!

Homer


Don't be fooled though. At this present time, the government alone is burrowing $100 million a day. At this rate it is inevitable for interest rates to increase. The economy is going to slow unless somebody has the brains to stop massive spending and start managing and governing. We only need to look at Greece to see what happens if a government fails to put a stop to spending.

The interest rates that dropped under Rudd was because the economy slowed. Under Howard, the rates rose because of slight heart burn due to a booming economy and high employment rate. The drop in the interest rates was a far bigger stimulus to our economy than the billions wasted on the $900 cheques, BER and pink batts.

This present government do not know how to manage and govern. Period. Even if they do have a good policy, they will fail to deliver it due to their poor management (ie. BER). They have already wasted billions.

I am voting for a Coalition member. In my seat, it will be a Country Liberal candidate. The current coalition have brains and a proven track record. They also have a lot more talent on their front bench. I also will not vote for a party that is going to commit us to an ETS!
Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 19/07/2010 08:35

Originally Posted By: Homer
Originally Posted By: ColdFront
Originally Posted By: bigwilly
Have to agree about the Greens. They're nothing more than an ideology driven, city-based, pseudo-conservation/environmental party. A quick look at their policies should be enough to convince anyone who actually cares about the environment and community/society to keep their vote as far away from them as possible.

The Liberals will never see my vote either as long as that narrow-minded biggot Abbott has anything to do with party leadership.

So, on the basis of keeping the worst out, I think I might have to be voting Labour.


Amen. Tony Bigot will sink his own ship if he keeps flapping on about keeping interest rates down. Howard said the same thing and we all remember what happened there.



Funny thing was, after all Howards bleating, Labour actually managed to keep interest rates down, that is of course, until things started to go too well in this country, which didn't happen elsewhere.I cannot believe that Abbott is treading the same path not 24 hrs into this campaign.
Also cannot believe that Abbott is going down the path of party stability. Is he not the third leader of the Opposition since the last election? LOL!!!!!!

Homer



I like his constant referral to Julia as an assassin. Priceless coming from someone that toppled his own leader. Tony the bigot. No thanks.
Posted by: Cheers

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 19/07/2010 09:10

Hi everyone
It's great news that admin have decided to give religious & political threads a trial run.
(with rules of cause)
I'm more interested in the views of the swinging voter.(I'm not a swinging voter as some of you know from the 2007 election)
I will be watching this thread with great interest.

LET THE GAMES BEGIN
Posted by: Flooding rains

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 19/07/2010 09:22

I think we know who Rime will be voting lol. All I hear is blah blah blah from that camp.

Everyone must remember who had the best of times and who had the worst. The current Labor government had the worst of times and in my opinion steered us through pretty well. Howard in his last couple of elections always got lucky with something coming up so he can run his scare campaigns. Lucky for him the Aus people were stupid enough to fall for it all. For years and years huge surpluses came from the liberal government however what good has it really done? For the sake of coming out every year bragging about a 16 billion dollar surplus, spending of this was not nearly good enough. Hospitals, roads etc didn't improve nearly enough considering the absolute boom we were in. So now Labor comes to power, major economic downfall and are criticised for not doing enough in certain areas. WELL HELLO!!!!! The libs had 10+ years of boom to do something! Here in Townsville there is criticism left right and center (mainly from the liberal member) toward Labor cause there is no PET Scan machine. Well who had all the time in the world to give us one with 16 billion dollar surplus.............. The libs of course. So the libs claim they are good for the economy of Australia, on paper it would seem that way but walk around the streets and you see a story of greed.

And yes I cannot believe either Abbott is running the slant that the Liberal party is more solid then Labor, what does he think we can't remember back to last year with all the turmoil? But in actual fact I wouldn't be surprised if it works for him cause 1 thing I have noticed is that aussies live under rocks and rarely think back at all.
Posted by: Dale Small

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 19/07/2010 09:50

Bob Hawke & Paul Keating. The Aussie version of the movie "Grumpy Old Men."
Ironic.. both of them nearly sent us bankrupt in the old union days.. along with the union thugs that would pinch walllets out of my guys on-site, who got the better deal? Us in the end, voted them out.

Still, if I were back there now, I'd vote for the ranga.. I like her style.
Posted by: SBT

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 19/07/2010 09:57

Exactly FR. 16 billion dolar surplus was held by the Liberals and gained by tightening the belt in a lot of areas and yes it did take 11 years to accrue but that was after the former Labour government sent us spiraling into national debt and left the nation with a huge deficet. It is always the same. Labour spends money like water on popular projects that the country doesn't need or in the long term afford and the Liberals rein it in and save money. Those of us who have seen a few government changes since 60's will tell you the same thing.

Townsville isn't unique in what it needs in health care and already we are screaming for another general hospital to be built to help with the bed shortage. A PET Scanner is a nice to have. It would mean people might be seen a bit quicker than having to fly to Brisbane for a scan but in the end it isn't going to be a huge vote winner for either party. 99% of the population wouldn't know what a PET Scanner did let alone know the requirement to have one.


The Fishing and Outdoor Party got my vote last time and nearly 12,000 others thought they where a good idea too. (I think you can guess that their preferences didn't go to teh greens either).
Posted by: SBT

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 19/07/2010 10:04

Queenslands Labour government will cruel the Federal Labour election in my opinion. Too many marginal seats for them to try and claw back or take.

People are sick and tired of having to see night after night Nurses protesting because they haven't been paid in 3 months, hospital waiting times increases, emergency departments leaving little old ladies out in the cold because they haven't got a bed for them, sell offs of state own infastructure like our railways, ports and shipping terminals, state government forcing water pricing on to councils and while we are at it the forced ammalgimation of councils with the loss of jobs, loss of services, loss of trust etc.

If I was a Labour candidate in Queensland and a sitting member I would be crapping myself that the Queensland people will use the federal election to send a clear message to Capt Bligh that we aren't happy Jan and to watch out in 2012 because she is headed for the retirement village.
Posted by: Andy Double U

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 19/07/2010 10:08

Originally Posted By: ColdFront
I like his constant referral to Julia as an assassin. Priceless coming from someone that toppled his own leader. Tony the bigot. No thanks.


Hook line and sinker CF. There was a marked difference between the overthrowing of the two leaders. That prat Turnbull lost the leadership due to a party vote on policy. ie. The party did not support his position on the ETS. Rudd was canned because of flagging popularity and the party deemed that if it was to regain power at the election, then he had to go. A cynical move that they shouldn't be rewarded for.

Labor have shown their true colours, well and truly! They have reduced our democratic process to a three year popularity vote. The Labor coup demonstrates to the Australian people was that the public doesn't choose the prime minister, the party does. So whilst we can prattle on about how Abbott is perceived as some ultra conservative, the proof in the pudding shows that it is the party that runs the country, not the leader!

Re: Interest Rates.

Interest rates are determined by what inflation is doing. Now there are many different drivers of inflation, the state of the economy, government spending, currency, the list goes on. From a business perspective, this year we have had to pass on a price rise despite the fact the economy has come off the boil in a big way. Why? Because the commercial cost of rates, water, electricity have all absolutely skyrocketed. Fair enough, some might say, as we are a business. But a business must recoup its costs through sales and ultimately we sell to the consumer. Therefore, the consumer ends up carrying the can anyway! Put simply, the consumer ends up blaming 'greedy' business when instead they should be booting out the morons that are the root of the cause.

From a political perspective though, who can blame a government from shying away from the difficult decisions though? We feel it is our right in this great country to have free/affordable health care, we want state of the art roads, we want 10Mb broadband (beats me why we actually need that, better ping rates on WoW perhaps?).

Apparently we want to save the environment but we don't want it to inconvenience us, financially or physically. We've gotta wake up to ourselves! Get real. We are a continent roughly the size of the US with less than a 1/10th of the population. We are environmentally friendly already as we aren't shovelling coal into power stations to keep the lights burning for 300 million people! And that is another thing. We are sitting on a stupid amount of the world's uranium deposits and we don't entertain the thought of nuclear power? Actually, on second thoughts, if you've got someone as incompetent as Beattie/Bligh and Rudd/Gillard running things, then maybe that isn't such a bad thing. Case in point, the Builder's Early Retirement fund, ah, I mean, the school building thing where they built structures but didn't actually think about how to utilise them. Putting laptops into schools but not installing any software to utilise them, There you go kids, we are going to learn a new program called Notepad! Heating people's homes by causing roof fires (not that insurance builders will mind). The green loans scam. The government covering up god knows how many deaths by encouraging illegal immigrants to try their hand at a boat cruise in the Indian Ocean, not to mention supplying them with better accomodation and resources than we do for our own homeless. Creative accounting that means we only meant to tax 12 billion dollars out of an industry, which means a deal to placate the mining industry only cost 1.5 billion dollars. Somehow it became lost in translation that to calculate that 1.5 billion dollar loss then the original tax was going to gain closer to 24 billion, so how many billion did that cost again? An NBN that went from a 4.5 billion dollar core promise, to a 45 billion dollar white elephant (they weren't out by that much were they?) and when Australia's largest Telco snubs them they come grovelling with a 10.5 billion dollar deal when the company orginally sold for 13?!!?!?!? I'm still trying to figure out what the health deal was about. On one hand, control of the health system was going to be removed from the states, but it cost us an extra 2 billion and at that, the federal government will only end up controlling the funding anyway?!

Seriously?! No doubt the ALP is aware of all of these gaping holes in their argument for reelection and to appear serious they ditch the leader but don't reshuffle the cabinet? Ole mate Swanny, the biggest snake in the grass somehow retains treasury despite his gross incompetence, Gillard gains the title of PM despite monumentally misappropriating huge amounts of tax payer's money. Tanner, probably one of the better performers is quitting, Faulkner has no interest in a front bench position. The ALP is a shambles and has made a run to the poles in a vain attempt to hoodwink the Australian public (again).

The whole thing would be funny barring the fact these turkeys are playing with Australia's future. Nearly makes you want to move to Unzed.

The bottom line is that if Australia wants to be in the fortunate position where we have the choice to be more green, to have better facilities, then we need to remain prosperous. Driving through Buenos Aires last year really rammed this home to me. When the Argentinian peso devalued to a 1/4 of its value in 24 hours, back around the year 2000, widespread poverty was instantaneous. Men in pinstripe suits begging on the side of the road trying to feed their families. Now I'm not saying that this will happen in Australia, but I can tell you that warm fuzzy issues like tackling climate change, installing an NBN, vegetation management are not even on their radar and the reason for that is that the financial position of the country is not strong enough to supply the necessities let alone the luxuries. We have a vested interest in remaining prosperous so we can maintain our freedom of choice.
Posted by: Mick10

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 19/07/2010 10:14

PM must be in Townsville today, just saw her plane land about 30min ago!

maybe we might get the funding for that PET scanner! the townsville hospital is already having a major upgrade with a new emergency dept being built as we speak. some serious money on local roads is needed.
Posted by: Rime

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 19/07/2010 10:34

Very well said Andy!

What you wrote in the following text is what scares me the most about this government.

Originally Posted By: Andy Double U

Hook line and sinker CF. There was a marked difference between the overthrowing of the two leaders. That prat Turnbull lost the leadership due to a party vote on policy. ie. The party did not support his position on the ETS. Rudd was canned because of flagging popularity and the party deemed that if it was to regain power at the election, then he had to go. A cynical move that they shouldn't be rewarded for.

Labor have shown their true colours, well and truly! They have reduced our democratic process to a three year popularity vote. The Labor coup demonstrates to the Australian people was that the public doesn't choose the prime minister, the party does. So whilst we can prattle on about how Abbott is perceived as some ultra conservative, the proof in the pudding shows that it is the party that runs the country, not the leader!



What we are seeing is the NSW style of Labor government now in Canberra. The Labor government style is about spin, incompetence, spin, incompetence and more spin and incompetence. (Oh and also the occasional bribery allegations and pocket warmers donated by the Calabrian Mafia). Once they become on the nose, the unelected union heavy weights will bull the strings and their leader is dumped. Everytime this happens, everyone becomes happy. It is all about being relected, not policy.

The style of leadership that Julia Gillard has been playing at is very similar to Rudd so far. She never answers a question straight, she refers to slogans and uses spin. She rushes into everything to deceive the electorate into thinking she is doing something, but then it backfires. The East Timor issue is a good example. In a way I think she is better at the spin than Rudd. If this continues, she will once again become toxic to the electorate and she will be dumped. I predict she will not last as our PM beyond 3 years.
Posted by: Flooding rains

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 19/07/2010 10:42

Well what politician doesn't? All use spin, few rarely answer full questions. She is way better than Rudd and I think she will be the best PM we have ever had. Wow Rime I know im one sided but your incredibly so. Have you thought about being a politician? Seems like you have got all the brainwashing and bagging powers down pat.
Posted by: Rime

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 19/07/2010 10:51

Originally Posted By: Flooding rains
Wow Rime I know im one sided but your incredibly so. Have you thought about being a politician? Seems like you have got all the brainwashing and bagging powers down pat.


FR, did you notice how the last three or so posts before mine were all bagging the government, some very good points, but you choose me as the target. Can you elaborate on at least one point you disagree on in the last 6 posts and why?
Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 19/07/2010 11:04

Abbott the Bigot is the worm on the hook.

I am glad Abbott opened his trap on interest rates . Most Australians have good memories. Interest rates continued south when labor got into power despite claims to the contrary from Howard. Same old spin from the same old rabble. The LNP lost their way several years ago and at that point I changed my vote. They became disjointed and a party full of people looking to overthrow eachother. That is still apparent now and until they get that sorted I will not tick their box. Coincidently they are the same at state level here in QLD.

Most Australians know that Rudd failed to communicate with his party and that was his downfall. He sent out the sharks to test Gillard's loyalty and it backfired. Suggesting Gillard initiated his removal shows a lack of knowledge of what transpired prior to his stepping aside. Of course the desperate leader of the opposition is trying to con Australians into believing she acted first.

During Howard's 11 years in power there was not a single rise in the aged pension and after being in opposition for 5 minutes they demanded it from the current government. Hypocrits much? The irony of course is that to raise the pension means more government spending and now they are attacking labor for doing it. Yep, Australians do have good memories.

Whilst Labor didn't handle the stimulus package roll out perfectly, many economists the world over acknowledge that they saved us from a very dark place. Comparing Buenos Aires to Australia should see you appointed to the LNP soon enough. They rely on fear too. Though not usually as dramatic.

Bigot's (I mean Abbott's) suggestion that work place agreements are dead is as reliable as Howard's suggestion that his government would not introduce a GST. They will bring them back as soon as the opportunity arises. Afterall, the LNP are all about supporting big business at the expense of working class Australians.

Ultimately for me personally it comes down to one very important fact. The entire time that the labor party has been in power the opposition has moved to block every single piece of legislation put forward. That Turnball wouldn't lower himself with them spelt his demise. They have been negative throughout and even now at the commencement of the election campaign it continues. Australians don't want a whining budgie smuggling bigot displaying a negative, attacking approach. The LNP in QLD still haven't learnt from doing exactly the same thing. Australians want a proactive governement and despite some bumps along the way the current government has done more to support Australian families in one term than the previous government did in three.


FR do yourself a favour and don't get into heavy debate with hardliners. You will struggle for objectivity. I personally will never align to one particular party. My view on life is much broader than that. I voted Howard twice and then he lost his way. He forgot the little people that make up the majority of voters in this country. This womanising bigot that is at the front of the LNP is still lost.

Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 19/07/2010 11:31

....and speaking of targets. It wasn't difficult to predict where the first attack on a fellow poster would come from either. Nothing new there though. The same two everytime. Attack the post, not the poster? If only the election outcome was as predictable. Personally I think this current government will struggle to regain power .The past 4 elections have seen the party I voted for elected. My luck has to run out surely.
Posted by: Helen

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 19/07/2010 11:32

All the parties lie, but here in SA the Labor party not only does so, but is sneaky and underhanded, too.

On the back of yesterday's Sunday Mail story, as just one example ( STORY HERE ), if I were and Adelaide resident, I would not be voting Labor in a fit.

As a country SA resident, I, like my fellow country voters will vote Liberal... not so much as to get Tony Abbott in, but rather to keep our Federal member, who's a pretty decent bloke.

Mod Hat on
...and folks, please keep the discussion to the topic at hand. Personal attacks will NOT be tolerated.
Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 19/07/2010 11:34

...and isn't that a big part of it Helen? To make sure your local representive is doing his/her job? Our local LNP rep hasn't been heard of for lord knows how long.
Posted by: Helen

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 19/07/2010 11:39

Indeed CF. If he wasn't doing his job, he'd be out of there quicker than Flynn. wink

Would really be interesting if everyone voted that way, instead of because "I've always voted for..." I reckon the Federal leaders would get a real wakeup call too, especially if the reasons were given for each vote... would make a lot of folk have to think about their decision. smile
Posted by: Andy Double U

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 19/07/2010 11:46

Full of contradictions aren't we CF?

Originally Posted By: ColdFront
Most Australians know that Rudd failed to communicate with his party and that was his downfall.


Now keeping firmly in mind the above quote, read this one:

Originally Posted By: ColdFront
The entire time that the labor party has been in power the opposition has moved to block every single piece of legislation put forward.


The reason why Rudd/Labor failed to get legislation through the senate was in part to do with the second quote. The fool expected the senate to just rubber stamp his legislation. The ETS is a classic case worthy of further inspection. Rudd did actually have a mandate after the 2007 election to push through an ETS. The ALP's failings were twofold though:

1. Not pushing for a double dissolution election despite having a trigger which says to me the party was actually too gutless to proceed with legislation that would help address the BIGGEST moral challenge of our generation. Why were they so gutless?

2. Secondly, why didn't they negotiate with the Greens and Independents?

You know, it is all very convenient to blame the Coalition for blocking the Senate but at the end of the day, there were ways and means around that which were either not explored (unlikely) or the party didn't have the internal fortitude to proceed (most likely). The failure of these policies to get past senate is more a reflection of the ALP's own inabilities rather than anything else, remembering that the gang of four were running the show, Rudd, Gillard, Swan and Tanner.

It's funny you should mention the ole GST chestnut, although hardly surprising. It pays to remember that the Coalition campaigned the GST in the lead up to the 1998 election. Once re-elected they didn't actually have the seats in the Senate to pass it intact so the Coalition negotiated with the Democrats and it was passed into legislation. Something the ALP this time round could have looked back on perhaps? Oh that's right, they're all about Moving Forward. The age old 'Never Ever GST argument' is a well worn one and not relevant nowadays. If it was so bad, and continued to be that way then it would have been rolled back.

So given we've raised the issue of the GST, how about we talk about Children Overboard? Oh that's right, the ALP has admitted to losing track of boats for them to never reappear, presumably they've sunk. So much for human welfare. Let's enact a policy that encourages human trafficking. You know it's kinder and more humane if they never leave the shores of Indonesia and apply for asylum in the right way.

Originally Posted By: ColdFront
Whilst Labor didn't handle the stimulus package roll out perfectly, many economists the world over acknowledge that they saved us from a very dark place.


Gloss much? You do know that there are more billionaires in the world today that are richer as a result of the stimulus packages? Not only that, but the gap between the poor and well off has actually widened. I'd say that is a little more than not quite managing it perfectly and say it is a failure of policy. The $900 Gerry Harvey bonus is an absolute classic case in point, he skimmed his margins whilst the rest of the money went overseas to the electronics manufactures. Wow, way to go stimulating the economy! You're right though, not quite perfect?
Posted by: KevD

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 19/07/2010 12:26

Originally Posted By: Helen
All the parties lie, but here in SA the Labor party not only does so, but is sneaky and underhanded, too.

On the back of yesterday's Sunday Mail story, as just one example ( STORY HERE ), if I were and Adelaide resident, I would not be voting Labor in a fit.



Jesus - I would be mad if I lived in Adelaide and that was happening to me...can't believe how sneaky politicians can be...personally have little time for any of them...Unaccountable wastes of time and space.
Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 19/07/2010 12:37

Originally Posted By: ant
I hope so, ColdFront. People seem very ready to think "oh she stabbed him in the back". Fact is, as far as I can determine, Rudd stabbed HER in the back. She was still loyal to him, but he sent out The Boys to de-stabilise her anyway. Backfired.

And I think she'll be a more competent leader than he. She's seen first-hand how his poor management style didn't work. I hope she's worked out a better way. I hope she delegates properly to her ministers, she has such a talented group there in cabinet, and outside it too. I hope they get the chance to show us how good they can be, before an election is called.


....and that is the first thing Abbott the bigot dragged up. Even his follow speech when Gillard was brought into power was typical of a bigot. Ungracious to the enth. He is just as predictable as the behavior of his staunch supporters. I'll continue to focus on the representitives rather than get into some childish slanging match with fellow posters . The only result for that is a locked thread .

Cheers.
Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 19/07/2010 12:40

Originally Posted By: Black Nor'easter
Originally Posted By: Helen
All the parties lie, but here in SA the Labor party not only does so, but is sneaky and underhanded, too.

On the back of yesterday's Sunday Mail story, as just one example ( STORY HERE ), if I were and Adelaide resident, I would not be voting Labor in a fit.



Jesus - I would be mad if I lived in Adelaide and that was happening to me...can't believe how sneaky politicians can be...personally have little time for any of them...Unaccountable wastes of time and space.



So true. You need to be of a certain ilk to choose that career path. They all rely on the fact that we have reasonably short memories where politics is concerned. We only tend to remember the most recent term or most recent government in power.
Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 19/07/2010 12:46

As I was saying about trusting Abbott on work choices.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/07/19/2957587.htm
Posted by: Dale Small

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 19/07/2010 13:24

Pollies are wallys, the only people who need a kick in the ken ring are those who voted them in.. IE, you!

Only spect for a pollie I have is for little John.. for spending his time with us, a 1 on 1 personal chat about cricket.. the guy is mad, with his retirement & taxpayer super he should just buy the ICC & direct it himself.. I wouldnt complain, the guy us a cricket tragic, I would commit him to the loony bin if it wasnt for the fact he spent time to hang out with ordinary people.
Posted by: Arnost

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 19/07/2010 15:48

"As I was saying about trusting Abbott on work choices"

LOL! Don't you love the partisanship of the ABC...

Quote:
"I can't give an absolute guarantee about every single aspect of workplace relations."

"I can't say that there will never, ever, ever, for a 100 or 1,000 years time, be any change to any aspect of industrial legislation," he said.

"But the Fair Work Act will not be amended in the next term of government if we are in power."


Headline: Abbott to reintroduce workchoices!

And compare to:

Quote:
JULIA GILLARD: Good evening, Tony.

TONY JONES: Are you now or have you ever been a member of the Communist Party?

JULIA GILLARD: (Laughs) Tony, I think that question shows how silly all of this is getting, though I suspect in this interview, probably the Howard Government would think you're the dangerous radical. After all, I'm only from the Labor Party, you're from the ABC.


Headline: Gillard categorically denies being a member of the CPA! linky

It's no wonder that the electorate is now so dumbed down that politics have deteriorated to the status of a footy match. Sad to see really.
Posted by: SBT

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 19/07/2010 17:32

Some good points bought up here but a few people have lost sight of what an opposition is supposed to do. It is supposed to be the safety valve which stops lunatics enacting legislation like the stinking ETS without proper debate in both upper and lower houses.

It was rejected for damn good reasons. Not the least of which is that it would have created another stealth tax on every Australian.

As to the Labour party being gutless about not forcing the issue you are right. They don't have the conviction of their own legislation.

If I had of been the Prime Minister and I believed in my heart of hearts that this issue was indeed good for the country then nothing on heaven or earth would have stopped me from getting it passed including putting my government on the line to enact it. The reason K Rudd didn't force the issue is because he would have had his bum handed to him on a plate at the poles and there is the rub. He didn't have the conviction to say damn the Liberals let us let the people of Australia decide. Instead he showed how weak the arguement for an ETS actually is and backed down like a wimp.
Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 19/07/2010 17:48

I agree on the 'sfaety valve" comment SBT and on occassion was glad it was applied. However from my eyes the valve was welded shut the moment the LNP went into opposition. I was a pretty big fan of Alexander Downer as foreign affairs minister but his behavior after the last election was disgraceful. Simililar to Costello's. Like two kids having a hissy fit. The problem is that it appears to have rubbed off on the rest of the party as the way to behave in opposition.
Posted by: Dale Small

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 19/07/2010 19:20

I spent my whole life there, raised kids, busted my butt & paid my taxes and the some.. but if a little ol country as the bum end of the planet can ratify the ETS.. (yes, us.. petrol prices went up, big deal they always do) then I dunno. Going to follow this one closely. I dont like either party or what they stand for, since I was legal age ive voted in local, state and federal election & never did a mickey mouse vote.. but Im considering coming back to vote for Minnie mouse smile
Posted by: problem gambler

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 19/07/2010 19:45

i find it funny that labours tv commercial has julia saying im committed to getting the country into surplus.Surplus and labour dont mix never had never will.

Australian voters need to see the bigger picture here ,

The current goverment has turned a 60 billion dollar surplus into 100 billions dollar deficet in just three years and with many econimsts tipping a double dip recession within 2 years can you really trust labours economic fiscal policy with dark times looming

IMO labour will win but we will all lose in the long term
Posted by: Flooding rains

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 19/07/2010 19:53

^^^^^ Maybe something called the Global Financial Crisis? If the libs were in power there would have just about no stimulus and we would have gone into recession for sure. Probably loosing out more money than now.
Posted by: Mrmac

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 19/07/2010 20:06

Well there are some interesting points coming out in this thread so far but what I'm wondering is does anyone actually change their vote from election to election. And does anyone base this change on the policies and debates that happen in the lead up to an election. I am a Liberal voter but I am interested if anyone can point out to me what has actually changed under the new PM. As far as I can see nothing has, the country is still being run by The ALP's behind the scenes factions who so gutlessly removed their leader for tackling the big issues and making unpopular decisions. Julia seems so fixed on 'moving forward' that I don't think she even knows what direction she has to go yet and it feels that the only way they are trying to head is to the finish line asap so australia does not work out that there is no substance to anything the labour government says. I also know we have been deceived already by the new PM as the deal on the mining tax was done prior the the leadership spill, the she steps in changes a couple of details and claims she has done the deal of a lifetime to get us out of the debt she helped get us into. Where is the genius in that! I remember the stability the Liberals / Nationals bought us for so long great economy, jobs for all ect ect.

I hope we can get back to that asap and I believe that the current government has no idea on how to do that!
Posted by: Arnost

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 19/07/2010 20:09

Flooding Rains:

"If the libs were in power there would have just about no stimulus" - Correct.

"And we would have gone into recession for sure." - Debatable. It was a banking crisis not an economic crisis... and Aussie banks were just fine. So why should things have been any different stimulus or no stimulus?

"Probably loosing out more money than now." Just keep saying that until you really believe it.
Posted by: Dawgggg

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 19/07/2010 20:12

Im just voting for the dude in the speedos haha wat a legend !
Posted by: problem gambler

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 19/07/2010 20:15

lol Global Financial Crisis is labours scape goat

Chinas already slowing down on iron ore when she stops so do we and we now dont have anything to fall back on as we are so much in debt
Sure steps back then needed to be taken but how much money was wasted
1.the solar and insulation bungle
2.900 bucks to each taxpayer
3.Every boat person costs the tax payer 100,000 a year

a lot of wasted money there
Posted by: Mrmac

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 19/07/2010 20:28

I so agree with this, GFC was breed in countries where if paying the mortgage is a bit tough then you move out and hand the keys back to your bank. Our much more accountable banking system ensures that when confidence goes out of the market that throwing in the towel is still never an option. Backed up by mortgage protection insurance it keeps our banks strong!
Posted by: Dale Small

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 19/07/2010 20:29

Even though I live over the ditch, I like you already Problem Gambler..

{ED} Perhaps learning Mandarin isnt all that..
Posted by: Mrmac

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 19/07/2010 20:38

Just for the record chinas iron production is back to about 70% of the level pre GFC that is why labour could compromise on the mining tax so much and still get us back to surplus in their proposed time because of the extra income they had not expected to come!
Posted by: Flooding rains

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 19/07/2010 20:42

Lol Trav didn't think you were into to old dudes with speedos. Well if that's the way you swing....... haha
Posted by: Flooding rains

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 19/07/2010 21:01

Oh god just heard an ad for the Liberals which has a song, I can't take 4 weeks of that haha
Posted by: Arnost

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 19/07/2010 21:04

Wellcome Mrmac:

"I'm wondering is does anyone actually change their vote from election to election." - well governments change... so the idea of a swinging voter is not a myth.

"And does anyone base this change on the policies and debates that happen in the lead up to an election." - maybe. You'd want to think that it's so...

We have however had a good example of democracy in action with the change from Turnbull -> Abbott. Here, when Turnbull ignored the grass-roots Liberal voters who called in / emailed in that they are opposed to his proposed course of action matters came to a head. His proposal to support the ETS resulted in hundreds of thousands of calls and emails to local members suggesting that if they want to see any votes flowing their way to back off. So when Turnbull didn't back off "the Coalition had struck an agreement with the Government and should stick with it... blah blah blah" he found himself unsupported by his senior ministers who on principle resigned. And this forced a leadership vote of no confidence and Turnbull found himself on the back bench. (linky)

Maybe a bit more messier that Rudds clinical departure - but at least it was driven by the "people".
Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 19/07/2010 21:55

Originally Posted By: Mrmac
Well there are some interesting points coming out in this thread so far but what I'm wondering is does anyone actually change their vote from election to election.


I do and have never been aligned to one side of politics.

...and Arnost, Rudd's removal was driven by the people too. Just because it was initiated in house that does not mean it wasn't in response to a poor poll just prior. His popularity plummeted so yes, it was ultimately the public that shot him.
Posted by: Arnost

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 19/07/2010 22:55

"Rudd's removal was driven by the people too"

LOL... Does this mean that Comrade Joolia's time has come?

Quote:
The latest opinion poll has Labor in trouble at the election, with the coalition getting an early swing.

A Galaxy poll conducted for the Nine Network in the 24 hours after Prime Minister Julia Gillard called the election showed Labor's primary vote had dropped to 38 per cent.

The coalition's vote was up to 44 per cent, putting both parties at 50 per cent, a 2.7 per cent swing to the coalition.
linky
Posted by: Arnost

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 20/07/2010 00:50

As for the Greens:(linky)

61.end the current arrangement for recurrent funding to non-government schools by no later than the end of 2010.

66.end government funding for schools that operate for private profit.

Just how dumb do they think we are?

There are well over a million kids in private / non-government schools. linky

Now, unless the Greens want to confiscate and nationalise all the private school property, they will have to pay for new classrooms. Lets see, as per the BER, we know that a demountable class holding 30 odd kids costs $892,860 + $119,840.31 site management

Lets round that down and say $1m for each 30 kids when fitted out? And we have not yet bought the land - or are we going to sacrifice parkland in the suburbs? I'd guess another $1m per each demountable. We then need toilets, playgounds and staff romms etc. And then you have to pay the teachers something too... Reckon you won't have much spare change from $100 billion.

And how much is the Govt budget for private schools? $5 billion? Sounds cheap!

Actually I SUSPECT the reason for this is that the Greens want the kids in the public school fold - so they can be indoctrinated and brainwashed into green ideology and "show commitment to ecologically sustainable development and lifestyles" and be "environmentally responsible". Look at the HSIE curriculum! The 3 Rs are now ‘reconciliation, the republic and refugees’...
Posted by: KevD

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 20/07/2010 08:28

Just how dumb do you think we are Arnost? So easy to snip out the sections that balance the biased view you have just put:

62. implement a new model for recurrent funding to non-government schools based on the following:

* proper consideration of the resource levels of non-government schools and their financial capacity, including fees and other parent contributions;
* an appropriate measure for indexation of the funding of non-government schools that de-couples it from spending on public schools; and
* non-government schools to be fully accountable to the parliament and therefore transparent to the public on their use of government funds and their financial situation, including all income and assets.

63. ensure that non-government schools in receipt of government funding:

* do not discriminate in hiring of staff or selection of students;
* have an admissions and expulsions policy similar to public schools including an obligation to enroll; and
* demonstrate social and community engagement and benefit by offering community access to facilities and/or a fee waiver for a percentage of students from disadvantaged backgrounds and/or with special needs.

64. invest the money saved from ending public subsidies to the very wealthiest private schools into a national equity funding programme for public schools.
65. support the maintenance of the total level of Commonwealth funding for private schools at 2003-04 levels (excluding that re-allocated under previous clauses), indexed for inflation

Seems like most of the answers you are looking for are in there wink
Posted by: Arnost

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 20/07/2010 09:27

All that guff above from the Greens basically says - if we give you money you do as we tell you i.e. more bainwashing and dumbing down of the kids.

And by the way, how many of the 1m kids in private education do you think go to schools that make some profit? As of next year according to the greens the cost of schooling will go up!
Posted by: Arnost

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 20/07/2010 09:29

Duplicate post
Posted by: Dale Small

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 20/07/2010 09:51

And then you have to wonder about how many people it would take to administer such hijinks.. then the schools, then the land.. then the aquisitions..... made of money!

I vote Mark Hardy for PM. Since he is the chair of the board here, dont hear much from him he would do perfect. Helen for deputy.. I know she will fit Joolia's role well. David Simpson for the opposition.. hard as, also rarely heard but well respected.. Ashton however.. (where are you ol mate?) do it for everyone.. wink

Either this post is going to be deleted or lambasted.. either way dont care, have fun. Still reckon the ranga is the go but..
Posted by: Andy Double U

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 20/07/2010 09:55

Originally Posted By: Black Nor'easter
Just how dumb do you think we are Arnost?

...

Seems like most of the answers you are looking for are in there wink


So much for no personal attacks hey? Yesterday, I had a post deleted because I was debating the logic of a member which I presume was interpreted as a personal attack.

In the long term, the Greens will end up very compromised by their own stance. Chris Uhlman did an interview with Bob Brown which was quite telling in this regard. Link

Thanks to the Greens preference deal done with the ALP yesterday, a vote for the Greens is now a vote for Labor. Bob Brown compromised already. Link
Posted by: KevD

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 20/07/2010 10:05

Originally Posted By: Arnost
All that guff above from the Greens basically says - if we give you money you do as we tell you

Like this doesn't happen @ the moment with politicians and where they put the money...like it doesn't happen every day with political donations buying influence (something the Greens would ban btw smile )

There also has to be some accountability for money spent - I reckon most people would complain if money was given out without some checks / balances / direction as to how it could be used.

Brainwashing kids...like that doesn't happen now with advertising / magazines / education programs designed to do little other than develop the next generation of compliant consumers? Not sure how what happens now is not considered brainwashing - but that anything green is...not that I see anything in there that dictates how the kids need to be taught smile
Posted by: KevD

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 20/07/2010 10:09

Originally Posted By: Andy Double U
Originally Posted By: Black Nor'easter
Just how dumb do you think we are Arnost?

...

Seems like most of the answers you are looking for are in there wink


So much for no personal attacks hey? Yesterday, I had a post deleted because I was debating the logic of a member which I presume was interpreted as a personal attack.

In the long term, the Greens will end up very compromised by their own stance. Chris Uhlman did an interview with Bob Brown which was quite telling in this regard. Link

Thanks to the Greens preference deal done with the ALP yesterday, a vote for the Greens is now a vote for Labor. Bob Brown compromised already. Link

Sorry - did not see that as a personal attack myself...Does not attack Arnost so can't see how it could be?
Great to see the preferencing happen. Don't particularly like Labor myself but if it works to get more Green senators into parliament that has to be a good thing smile Isn't compromise the art of a succesful politician?
Posted by: beachcomber

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 20/07/2010 10:33

Like Ive changed address but I carnt be bothered filling out a form and sending it away. Its pointless cause If Im going from my previous Airlie Beach Im still voting for Dawson. I live in Cannonvale now. Stuff it. How are they gonna to know.
Posted by: Arnost

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 20/07/2010 10:36

Quote:
Mr Abbott yesterday signed a pledge that WorkChoices was "dead, buried, cremated" while refusing to rule out small changes to the workplace relations laws if he was elected.
( linky )

He's being pilloried for not confirming that there won't be some small changes ... hee hee ... (Just dreaming - he should categorically exclude these as the media seems to demand and then when the ACTU comes and asks for an increase in the minimum wage he should say he can't as he has a mandated commitment not to do so... LOL) (I despair of the media...)
Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 20/07/2010 11:16

Originally Posted By: beachcomber
Like Ive changed address but I carnt be bothered filling out a form and sending it away. Its pointless cause If Im going from my previous Airlie Beach Im still voting for Dawson. I live in Cannonvale now. Stuff it. How are they gonna to know.


I'll tell them wink
Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 20/07/2010 11:20

Originally Posted By: Black Nor'easter
Sorry - did not see that as a personal attack myself...Does not attack Arnost so can't see how it could be?


I agree. As opposed to a Hook ,line and sinker which any good fisherman knows is used for trolling. Hence the origin of the term.

Who thought the greens would give their preferences to the LNP? Seriously.
Posted by: bigwilly

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 20/07/2010 12:30

If the Green's can't be taken seriously about their commitment to the environment and society, their flagship issues, how can one possibly take them seriously on anything else?

I didn't know who to vote for, but the preference deal just made it that little bit easier for me.
Posted by: ant

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 20/07/2010 21:10

Um, YOU give your preferences. Preference deals are only for people who don't allocate their own preferences. Don't like the preference deals? Allocate your own.
Posted by: Dawgggg

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 20/07/2010 21:22

Originally Posted By: Flooding rains
Lol Trav didn't think you were into to old dudes with speedos. Well if that's the way you swing....... haha


haha i think he has balls to run around in them haha maybe i should start !
Posted by: Flooding rains

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 20/07/2010 22:04

haha yes well I would say he has 'balls'. LOL
Posted by: Dave-Wx

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 20/07/2010 23:20

Am I right in saying that the advantage (all be it somewhat diluted) of a preference deal is that on the how to vote cards that deal will be printed, as there is a known percentage that will usually put their preferences down similar to or exactly as that listing suggests?

Also - its compulsory preferential voting federally isn't it?
Posted by: Andy Double U

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 21/07/2010 07:56

I think I just spilt my coffee... Apparently Abbott is driving people to suicide and the Greens believe that the twin towers were brought down by controlled explosions! laughlaughlaugh Link

Andrew Bolt's column is a good one this morning, it puts forward the Green plan so eloquently that it is a must read. And before anyone starts crying bias, I'd suggest they read some of his previous columns as he is hardly glowing in his appraisal of how Abbott is going so far. Link

It's not as if a Greens protest vote delivers anything of value anyway, it still ends up going to the ALP which has bungled everything from pink batts to knifing prime ministers...
Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 21/07/2010 09:06

Originally Posted By: Dave-Wx

Also - its compulsory preferential voting federally isn't it?


Tick one box above the line or number ALL boxes below the line.
Posted by: Flooding rains

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 21/07/2010 09:40

Number all boxes on the House of Representatives paper and as CF said above, '1' above the line or all below the line on the senate paper.
Posted by: ant

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 21/07/2010 10:43

And if you do the "1" above the line with the Senate, you are prohibited from complaining about preference deals. Voting above the line means you are handing your chosen party/group your vote on a platter, to do with as they will.

This is how Stephen Fielding got in, when Labor chose him to receive their leftover votes, rather than the Greens.

I always vote below the line which means yes writing lots of numbers but I want to control who gets my vote.

If YOU allocate your preferences, preference deals are meaningless.
Posted by: Dave-Wx

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 21/07/2010 11:29

Yeah sorry guys (and thanks too)...I was thinking about the lower house mainly when I posted...but the upper house is important too!
Posted by: bigwilly

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 21/07/2010 13:33

Quote:
If YOU allocate your preferences, preference deals are meaningless.


And pigs might fly. Sure your vote won't go to the party a deal has been struck with, but preference deals really come into their own after the election, when the Government is searching for support. As I've said, that Labour are prepared to jump into bed with Brown and his lunatic cohorts is enough to turn me away from them big time!
Posted by: Arnost

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 21/07/2010 14:11

The preference deal is such a win for the Greens...

Most voters may allocate their own preferrences in the Lower House (so no advantage to Labor). But if voters want to alloacte their own preferences in the Senate, they HAVE to fill out (and fill out correctly) every number on the of ballot paper. You are guaranteed that A LOT of people just will not be bothered to do this on the entire six feet of ballot paper - they will simply do the "1" tick and go (happy days the Geens).

Lets face it - Greens will have the balance of power... And that is really really scary!
Posted by: Keith

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 21/07/2010 14:24

I don't know why the Greens and Labor don't either amalgamate or form a coalition. One is only a different shade of the other. There are very few really independent people left (pardon the bad pun) now.
Posted by: AaronD

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 21/07/2010 14:43

id have to totally disagree Arnost, i think its good to have a 3rd (or even 4) major party involved so there is a bit more of an opinion.. whether it be the greens or a more conservative group.

i mean having a split senate with the greens making up the balance has to be better than having one party having full power in both house of reps and senate like what happened with the liberals last time.


Keith many people also think the choice between ALP and Liberals is choosing between 2 shades of gray. and the other parties are the ones who really have the different ideas.
but yeh i def think more independents are a good thing, they don't have party policies and crap to adhere to. but thats just life, if there was all independents they would all form little coalitions until major parties are formed anyway.
Posted by: Keith

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 21/07/2010 15:31

A valid point Aaron but I wonder if that really depends on who is doing the 'thinking'. As far as Labor goes there would be many who think it's departed its traditional values...something I would disagree with despite the 'capitalist bedfellows' (some of whom are staunch members of the Fabian Society). They (the politicians) are all in it for whatever they can get. That's more human nature I think, than dilution of party principles. I guess if the mutual detractors of either side of the 'bed' hated one another really bad, we'd have fights breaking out in Parliament, like what happens in the Ukraine.

I'd like to see the abolition of Question Time. It's nothing more than a point-scoring circus, totally devoid of any genuine motive. All sides of the Chamber are equally to blame. The time would be better spent discussing issues that matter, though that too is a point-scoring game. If it does have any real use, then it needs a major makeover.
Posted by: Dale Small

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 21/07/2010 16:16

Like to see it go here as well.. these people are supposed to be running our country's?
My 2.5yo behaves better..
Posted by: AaronD

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 21/07/2010 16:17

Exactly Dale! they are idiots..

True, people who i have talked to are more towards the greens side anyway. im sure looking at it from the other side of the fence it probably seems almsot the opposite.


being only young and not have had much experience with this, have elections always been about this slagging and almost dirty campaigning or is it just in the last 5-10 years i have become more aware of it? no valid points are ever brought up or answered in any media interviews or question time or anything.
Posted by: Bryan

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 21/07/2010 16:41

The campaigns have always been similar to this....but I would not call it dirty or slagging...i think they are benign and at times, BORING!! The USA elections etc are more engaging and more interesting! I want politicians who engage, i want pollies to give PASSIONATE speaches where they hound and slam their opposition...PASSION like they used to in the HAWKE era or even in the wartime era! Large rallies etc where 1000s of people turn up and are passionate...but this is Australia; a country full of politically moronic people who could not care about elections then complain when they are hard done by....sigh....SOrry....I am a political junky who follows elections closely around the world and i just want SOME ACTION! ahha
Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 21/07/2010 16:44

Originally Posted By: Keith
A valid point Aaron but I wonder if that really depends on who is doing the 'thinking'. As far as Labor goes there would be many who think it's departed its traditional values...something I would disagree with despite the 'capitalist bedfellows' (some of whom are staunch members of the Fabian Society). They (the politicians) are all in it for whatever they can get. That's more human nature I think, than dilution of party principles. I guess if the mutual detractors of either side of the 'bed' hated one another really bad, we'd have fights breaking out in Parliament, like what happens in the Ukraine.

I'd like to see the abolition of Question Time. It's nothing more than a point-scoring circus, totally devoid of any genuine motive. All sides of the Chamber are equally to blame. The time would be better spent discussing issues that matter, though that too is a point-scoring game. If it does have any real use, then it needs a major makeover.


I couldn't agree more Keith. It is also a national embarressment.


Originally Posted By: AaronD


being only young and not have had much experience with this, have elections always been about this slagging and almost dirty campaigning or is it just in the last 5-10 years i have become more aware of it?



When you reach my age you'll realise even moreso that every single election has the same sad sorry lot attempting to prove who is the biggest child. Get use to it. That these party members run this country is frightening indeed. You will hear the term "political catfight" more than once in your lifetime.
Posted by: Keith

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 21/07/2010 17:07

Well, I vote Bryan for PM!.Seriously! But Bryan, what's your definition of 'slagging'? Granted they all poke fun at each other and send up the other side in the TV ads, that's fine, but gosh there's always been slagging off in the House, especially Question Time. That's why the Speaker is forever calling for 'OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOORRRRDER!!!!!!!!!! The Honourable Member will resume his seat!' The poor fellow must be driven nuts by 'the comments uninviting of the party members fighting'.
Posted by: Arnost

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 21/07/2010 17:24

By the way Keith - there's a massive difference between the ALP and the Greens. The ALP is socialist / democrat whilst the Greens are unashamedly totalitarian. Have a look at their economic policy and weep:

Or let’s have a bit of fun:

1. human economies exist within, and are dependent upon, natural systems; resource management is, therefore, central to good economic management Are we saying that we should (control the means of production?)

2. equity of access to the essentials of life and promoting equality are central goals for a civilised society (Not too far from this to “every person should contribute to society to the best of his or her ability and consume from society in proportion to his or her needs” Eh?)

3. the free market economy, by externalising the environmental and social costs of greenhouse gas emissions is creating the greatest market failure of all time, namely climate change. (Oh - I forgot that the centrally controlled Eastern European, Soviet and Chinese economic models operate/d in pristine environmental gardens of Eden)

5. timely and cost effective solutions to social, environmental and economic challenges can be achieved by a cohesive industry policy. (If we had full central control we could have fixed the Katrina and Macondo disasters straight away!)

6. the fulfilment of human potential and the enrichment of lives is best achieved when people work together for common goals. (Ah yes - those "common goals" - to which we must subordinate our individual freedoms and desires)… What happens if I don’t share those common goals?

7. sustainable, equitable economic progress is best achieved by government ownership of natural monopolies and new government investment in strategic assets. (The almighty and benevolent government will own Everything!)

8. government finances must be sustainable over the long run; budget deficits and surpluses must balance each other over the business cycle. Who put this crap in here? See below!

9. long term government borrowing is the preferred mechanism for funding long term infrastructure investments. (And if we don’t own it – we’ll just write a cheque… hehe!)

10. governments have an important role to play in regulating markets and correcting market failures, but markets where they function well have an important role to play in the allocation of resources. (The almighty and benevolent government will have rules for everything… and wink wink we know that the markets by definition don’t function [see pt 3] so the second clause is just a “warm and fuzzy” for those that may think we are taking over)

Hee hee… Oh look – they really hate the GST too! And the tax the rich thing? By their point in 22. “introduce a new top marginal tax rate of 50 per cent on incomes of $1 million or over”… Sounds great but let’s see – there are some 5-6000 people that have incomes in excess of $1m pa and so this will raise an additional $250m. Wow! We can all get a $25 rebate after this is spread back to the other 10m taxpayers! (linky) And at what cost? What do you think will be the logical response by them? And remember - these typically are the people who provide the jobs for the rest of us!
Posted by: Dale Small

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 21/07/2010 17:40

Have to agree with Bryan.. growing up in the Hawke/Keating days.. there were real catfights, real no guts no glory politics, even if it nearly destroyed the economy of Australia.. you just dont see it these days. Too much of a nanny place..

The should do what they do in the russian federation or asia.. just let everyone go hell for leather in the chamber, bring on the biff.. person left standing holds the fort!
Posted by: Andy Double U

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 21/07/2010 17:57

Now this is ironic laugh

Originally Posted By: From Arnost's Linky
29. Return the company tax rate to 33% and broaden the company tax base by reducing tax concessions.


Isn't Swanny running a campaign against the Coalition for leaving the Company Tax rate where it is / increasing tax by 1.7% where companies generate a taxable income > $5,000,000 p.a (in order to pay for the paid parental leave scheme that would otherwise be funded from budget surplus)?

The preference deal really spells out that the ALP is only against new/increased taxes when it is the opposition proposing them, otherwise it's fine if some votes are involved.
Posted by: Keith

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 21/07/2010 19:15

I think too that in Question Time it's funny how with hollow eloquence and feigned etiquette they all 'thank the Honourable Member for Whykickamoocow for his question'. They are more polite now than before, I agree, but not in a manner that would reflect a real change of attitude to each other. The politeness is just a charade...more like damnation with faint praise. Another reason to abolish QT altogether.

Arnost, the Greens might be totalitarian, they might not be, but they also hold to Socialist ideals. If anything is overtly totalitarian, there's none more so than in the assertion of political correctness that comes from certain quarters of society.
Posted by: Dale Small

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 21/07/2010 19:24

In all honesty Keith, they should have it in primetime, or at least a replay. So the everyday mums, dads & kids get to see what a pack they really are.. not 2pm when the general population are going about their daily lives oblivious to the charade going on with the heirachy.. that would really throw a cat amongst the pidgeons then!
Posted by: Arnost

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 21/07/2010 20:22

Keith - you're too polite! LOL... By totalitarian I mean authoritarian socialist - I don't really see much difference between Hitlerian or Stalinist socialism. Both are all about control - through "social engineering" be it faux morality / pitical correctness, coersion and ultimately physical intimidation.
Posted by: Keith

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 21/07/2010 20:57

Originally Posted By: Dale Small
In all honesty Keith, they should have it in primetime, or at least a replay. So the everyday mums, dads & kids get to see what a pack they really are.. not 2pm when the general population are going about their daily lives oblivious to the charade going on with the heirachy.. that would really throw a cat amongst the pidgeons then!

I reckon ratings would take such a nose-dive that the networks would go broke. But yes, it would make people think. Then people would be wanting the TV station to put Masterchef on so it would clash, unlike the coming debate here (don't know if I'll watch it; there's a favourite program I like on FM radio at that time). But here's something that would work: each member that casts nasturtiums on a member of his/her opposition should be required to donate $1000 to that opposition party's coffers. That would make them behave!
Posted by: Dale Small

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 22/07/2010 06:49

Haha Keith, thats not such a silly idea!
Posted by: Keith

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 22/07/2010 07:17

Originally Posted By: Arnost
.... By totalitarian I mean authoritarian socialist - I don't really see much difference between Hitlerian or Stalinist socialism. Both are all about control - through "social engineering" be it faux morality / pitical correctness, coersion and ultimately physical intimidation.

Yes..when you put it that way, I'd have to agree. People who want to rule the world won't launch a military assault; they will infiltrate society, manipulate foolish politicians whose only desire is to stay in power and so secure subservience. Communists did this one way or another in the Cold War.
Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 22/07/2010 12:16

Quote:
each member that casts nasturtiums on a member of his/her opposition should be required to donate $1000 to that opposition party's coffers. That would make them behave!


We'd have payed off our debt (and the rest of the world's) from Julie Bishop's mouth alone. What a sour ,overpaid oxygen thief she is.
Posted by: problem gambler

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 22/07/2010 15:37

lol

At least she can add up
Posted by: adam17

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 22/07/2010 22:28

Well I for one am screwed, when it comes to polling day, I'm making a paper aeroplane out of my ballot, I really don't know who to vote for. Neither party have no real appealing qualities, and I don't trust the smaller parties, after back room deals with prefences and the likes, it seems no matter who you vote for, will end up in the hands of the big two. I'll get my name marked off but thats about it, the past 5 years have really left me and lot of others scratching their heads.
Posted by: ant

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 22/07/2010 22:49

Back room deals with preferences? They don't affect you IF you allocate your own preferences.

People, this is not rocket science. Either let them allocate your vote, or YOU allocate it.

If you don't understand our electoral system, then open your eyes and go read up about how it works. There are no preference deals if you know how to number the boxes with your pencil from 1 to whatever number is the last.

Yes it is really that simple. And then there are no "preference deals".
Posted by: bigwilly

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 23/07/2010 07:48

Ant, preference deals go further than just voting day. They continue into the new term with tooing and froing of "I scratched your back, now it's time for you to scratch mine" as parties call in 'favours' to get up their agenda, whatever it may be.

They also indicate how much a party is willing to compromise with another in order to get their way. Labour have shown how quickly and easily they'll jump into bed with the Greens to get back into power and this is a pretty good indicator of how quckly they'll support the Green's lunatic ideas in return for their support in parliament.
Posted by: davidg

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 23/07/2010 08:02

Originally Posted By: ColdFront
Quote:
each member that casts nasturtiums on a member of his/her opposition should be required to donate $1000 to that opposition party's coffers. That would make them behave!


We'd have payed off our debt (and the rest of the world's) from Julie Bishop's mouth alone. What a sour ,overpaid oxygen thief she is.


Hahaha she reminds me of the embarassing drunk Aunty who dresses everybody down to make herself feel better. I seriously dont understand how she has made it into Federal politics.
Posted by: Andy Double U

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 23/07/2010 08:19

Hmmmm, if and most likely when the Greens get the balance of power in the senate we are monumentally screwed. This report is not at all far fetched when you consider the policies the Greens have published so far. On the upside they do risk alienating their core voting group which seem to be high wealth individuals living in the cities. Mining tax anyone? The Greens say it doesn't go far enough, want to shut down future exploration and knock back applications to expand what mines are already in operation. Power price increases so far will be a drop in the ocean compared to what WILL happen if these ideologically driven morons get a whiff of power.

The Red-Green Alliance is so compromised it isn't funny. The ALP in their desperation to maintain a grip on power has entered into a truce that is so ideologically opposite to their core supporter group it isn't funny. I have a feeling the disenchantment voters are feeling now with recent governments will be nothing compared to a likely term of infighting between the ALP and Greens. Unfortunately, this will only serve to destabilise things further, at a time when businesses both large and small are desperate for some stability so people can begin to regain confidence....

IDIOTS! Time to do what is best for this country for crying out loud!
Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 23/07/2010 08:32

Originally Posted By: davidg
Originally Posted By: ColdFront
Quote:
each member that casts nasturtiums on a member of his/her opposition should be required to donate $1000 to that opposition party's coffers. That would make them behave!


We'd have payed off our debt (and the rest of the world's) from Julie Bishop's mouth alone. What a sour ,overpaid oxygen thief she is.


Hahaha she reminds me of the embarassing drunk Aunty who dresses everybody down to make herself feel better. I seriously dont understand how she has made it into Federal politics.


...and how on earth can I take my drunken aunty seriously? She is a big part of why that rabble won't be seeing my vote. Imagine her in power? She's already out of control.
Posted by: KevD

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 23/07/2010 08:43

Originally Posted By: Andy Double U
Hmmmm, if and most likely when the Greens get the balance of power in the senate we are monumentally screwed. This report is not at all far fetched when you consider the policies the Greens have published so far. On the upside they do risk alienating their core voting group which seem to be high wealth individuals living in the cities. Mining tax anyone? The Greens say it doesn't go far enough, want to shut down future exploration and knock back applications to expand what mines are already in operation. Power price increases so far will be a drop in the ocean compared to what WILL happen if these ideologically driven morons get a whiff of power.

The Red-Green Alliance is so compromised it isn't funny. The ALP in their desperation to maintain a grip on power has entered into a truce that is so ideologically opposite to their core supporter group it isn't funny. I have a feeling the disenchantment voters are feeling now with recent governments will be nothing compared to a likely term of infighting between the ALP and Greens. Unfortunately, this will only serve to destabilise things further, at a time when businesses both large and small are desperate for some stability so people can begin to regain confidence....

IDIOTS! Time to do what is best for this country for crying out loud!

There is so much about this post and other similar ones above it that I simply do not know where to start.
STABILITY: You want stability by perpetuating the completely unsustainable practices by which we currently live? Spot the problem...And look @ the GFC - no stability there and that was just a starter.
NEWS.COM REPORT: That report is a jumped up piece of media rubbish put together by a right wing paper with no interest in anything other than to appeal to it's right wing reader base. Nothing wrong in them doing it - trying to keep their readers happy - but I'd hope that the majority of people on here are slightly more intelligent than simply reacting to a headline.
MINING: Nothing is ever cut and dry...to say the Greens want to stop all mining is simply untrue...though the long term reality is that there is only so long we can continue to survive by taking from the earth...it 'aint going to be there forever so looking for more sustainable alternates only makes sense smile
Posted by: Andy Double U

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 23/07/2010 08:44

Originally Posted By: ColdFront
Originally Posted By: davidg
Originally Posted By: ColdFront
Quote:
each member that casts nasturtiums on a member of his/her opposition should be required to donate $1000 to that opposition party's coffers. That would make them behave!


We'd have payed off our debt (and the rest of the world's) from Julie Bishop's mouth alone. What a sour ,overpaid oxygen thief she is.


Hahaha she reminds me of the embarassing drunk Aunty who dresses everybody down to make herself feel better. I seriously dont understand how she has made it into Federal politics.


...and how on earth can I take my drunken aunty seriously? She is a big part of why that rabble won't be seeing my vote. Imagine her in power? She's already out of control.


I'll give it to you guys, obviously you've seen what happens when the same has already been done in the ALP. It has become apparent that Gillard is quite obviously inept when it comes things like tact and discretion. Link

This campaign isn't even about an experienced incumbent PM taking on a new opposition leader. Technically, the opposition leader has more experience at leading his party compared to the PM who had leadership served up on a platter... complete with silver spoon!
Posted by: KevD

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 23/07/2010 08:51

Originally Posted By: bigwilly
this is a pretty good indicator of how quckly they'll support the Green's lunatic ideas in return for their support in parliament.

Lunatic ideas? Tell that the same 'aint true with the other parties....both seemingly intent on the destruction of the earth...tell me that 'aint lunatic. Sorry - but so easy to throw those words around when I am sure that, inside, most of us realise that how we live now is crazy - and totally unsustainable. Sure, heading towards a greener future might look a little scary - especially if you are going to have to face up to some of the ways we have been living...but I can't see any other option either.
Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 23/07/2010 08:57

Quote:
Black Nor'easterThere is so much about this post and other similar ones above it that I simply do not know where to start.
STABILITY: You want stability by perpetuating the completely unsustainable practices by which we currently live? Spot the problem...And look @ the GFC - no stability there and that was just a starter.
NEWS.COM REPORT: That report is a jumped up piece of media rubbish put together by a right wing paper with no interest in anything other than to appeal to it's right wing reader base. Nothing wrong in them doing it - trying to keep their readers happy - but I'd hope that the majority of people on here are slightly more intelligent than simply reacting to a headline.
MINING: Nothing is ever cut and dry...to say the Greens want to stop all mining is simply untrue...though the long term reality is that there is only so long we can continue to survive by taking from the earth...it 'aint going to be there forever so looking for more sustainable alternates only makes sense smile


Very true BNE and the scaremongering about just how much power the greens will have has already begun. Personally I think Bob brown escaped from an asylum but I don't believe for one moment that his party will be running the show after the next election. That's rubbish and the same garb was dragged up prior to the last election.
Posted by: bigwilly

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 23/07/2010 09:54

Maybe a lunatic idea such as:

Australia to achieve net zero greenhouse gas emissions as soon as is feasible and by no later than 2050 with a minimum of 40% reduction on 1990 levels by 2020.

While taking into account:

nuclear power is not a safe, clean, timely, economic or practical solution to reducing global greenhouse gas emissions.

I'm sorry but this is pie in the sky stuff and just shows how ideologically driven they are. If they believe we can achieve 40% cuts in 9 1/2 years without nuclear energy then they must be willing to accept a serious lowering of living standards for society.

Meanwhile they want an end to mandatory detention, resulting in a serious threat to the remainder of society from a point of view of security and health from people who have broken the law, jumped the queue and in most instances have already travelled through safe ports of call.

They want us to, without question, accept every global warming refugee that comes to our shores, despite Australia having the greatest emssions of greenhouse gasses per capita within the developed world and despite Australia having some of the pourest essential natural resource pools in the world. While at the same time implementing a sustainable (whatever that is) population policy that encourages family reunions and humanitarian refugees over essential skilled migrants and workers. What will this result in? A serious lowering of living standards for society.

Let's not go into their ridiculous ideas about locking up more land and oceans from recreational users in the name of preservation either.
Posted by: KevD

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 23/07/2010 10:12

Anyone would be pushed to develop a large nuclear industry in 9 1/2 years so don't see how you can include that as part of a 2020 vision?
There is a difference between detention and MANDATORY detention...nobody is talking about letting everyone out regardless of the threat to society
Perhaps because, as you state, "Australia having the greatest emssions of greenhouse gasses per capita within the developed world" there should be an onus on us to accept some of the consequences of our actions should global warming be a (unlikely IMHO) reality.
As per your request I won't go into the debate about 'locking up land' smile
Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 23/07/2010 10:16

Not everybody hunts nowadays which is really the underlying agenda here. The bounce back of fish stocks on the GBR where they have introduced greenzones is undeniable. Even the areas left alone have increased stocks as a result of migration from nearby reefs.

Interestingly these zones were introduced under an LNP government. Deanne Kelly lost her seat as a result of it . As did every other LNP member in its firing line. So to suggest that it is only the greens and labor that lock up land and ocean is deceitful in the least.

Infact GBR under the governing of the LNP mislead those that made a livelihood from the reef by involving them in surveys only to close those very areas off. Deceitful indeed. But then that is from the same government that said they'd NEVER introduce a GST.
Posted by: ant

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 23/07/2010 10:47

Originally Posted By: bigwilly
They also indicate how much a party is willing to compromise with another in order to get their way. Labour have shown how quickly and easily they'll jump into bed with the Greens to get back into power and this is a pretty good indicator of how quckly they'll support the Green's lunatic ideas in return for their support in parliament.


Actually, Labor decided not to get into bed with the Greens last election, instead allocating its preferences to... Steve Fielding and Family First. I think in a "lunatic ideas" competition, they have it all over the Greens.

As for political allies, that is a whole different ball game. Preference deals are merely that, arrangements to try and direct votes to each other. But for preference deals to work, the voters have to hand their preferences over to be used... I choose to allocate my own preferences, and so can everyone.
Posted by: SBT

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 24/07/2010 17:34

http://www.news.com.au/breaking-news/gil...0-1225896387231
Jebuz lady. With the amount of clout you have with all sorts of people where did this bull dust sprout from. I saw the interview this morning and guess who is standing behind her. Penny Wrong. This is just another idea from the US poached by an out of touch government. And I wonder where the money is comming from to pay this from? Mining Tax, ETs. Fair duinkum she is rapidly running out of original ideas.
Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 24/07/2010 20:06

Getting old cars off the road is a great idea for more reasons than just pollution. I wouldn't care which side of government proposed it, it is still a good idea regardless of where it originates from.
Posted by: Keith

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 24/07/2010 20:42

I also think it's good to get rid of old cars (at least those horrible noisy things that are probably unroadworthy anyway), but doing it this way? She must be joking about giving money to people. She's been swallowed up by the vacuity of her own idealism. It's all to get votes. She must think the electorate is daft. It probably is, I fear. What next, abolition of income tax?

There's no way I will get rid of my 12-year old car simply because she says she'll give me a handout. 50 miles per gallon (metric measures confound me) on the highway cycle is pretty economical, and that's as good as when it was brand new.
Posted by: rain gauge

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 25/07/2010 02:00

Anything to get the greens onside i guess.
Posted by: Cheers

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 25/07/2010 14:51

Has anyone seen the news today.
David Barker with his extreme right wing christian views.
Lucky that the liberal party have sacked him from standing for the seat of chifley.
These type of people are nothing but low life scum.
The labor candidate is Ed Husic.
He copped this sort of crap when he stood for Greenway in 2004.
Louise Markus had her low lifes spreading this type of crap at the time.(Hill Song church)
This cost Ed Husic the seat.
You would have to ask the question as to how David Barker had won pre-selection in for the Liberal party in the first place.
Posted by: Cheers

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 25/07/2010 15:51

Look out folks we have another one.
Don Randall,WA liberal MP.
Having a go at Julia Gillard for being a atheist.
It,s good having a PM who is a atheist.
I,m sick & tired of these religious zealots.
More scum from the Liberal party.
Posted by: SBT

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 25/07/2010 16:32

Right wind fundementalists from the US have been trying to worm their way into our government for years. What makes you think they haven't done so already?
Posted by: Cheers

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 25/07/2010 18:06

Originally Posted By: Sir BoabTree
Right wind fundementalists from the US have been trying to worm their way into our government for years. What makes you think they haven't done so already?

I know they have.
Posted by: adam17

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 25/07/2010 23:59

RE $2000 'loan':- It doesn't make any sense.. The reason many have old cars pre 95, is because they were built when quality actually existed, they have full title of their car, and upgrading to a new car is not a financially viable option hence the reason they have the old car still. Unless the money can be used to a contribute to used cars also, a newer post 95 model car that is more fuel efficient, ie - Holden VS Commmodore or EF falcon, that costs about $2050 to buy.

Right wing fundamentalists?
Religions?
Large Earlobes?

And voting is compulsory right?

-- I'm now voting for the party that can make this promise.
A promise, that they will try to keep, a promise to ensure that Masterchef no longer graces our television sets, yes it's analogue because I can't get a new fancy "digital" signal.
Posted by: bigwilly

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 26/07/2010 06:59

Actually Adam, they're probably banking on a lot of people not taking them up on their offer for those exact reasons. If that's the case then they would appear to be seen to be doing something without actually doing much at all!
Posted by: Dave-Wx

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 26/07/2010 12:00

I was getting excited about it until I read more than one news article, as not all of them emphasised that it had to be for new cars! So I certainly won't be one of the participating people for those reasons, find it hard to think about who might do it in that case...though there are a number of people out there who just have any old car that gets them from A to B but can afford something more expensive. Still, they probably don't care and don't see the need to spend >$15k on a new one!
Posted by: Arnost

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 26/07/2010 18:05

Hmmm... The subtext here is that the subsidies for the meager alternative energy initiatives are being phased out:

Quote:
But ... [The proposal] ... will be financed by cutting into existing carbon reduction programs, including $200million from the flagship solar power incentives and $150million off the renewable energy scheme that provides rebates to householders for solar hot water and heat pump systems.


[linky]

Do I hear handouts?
Posted by: Xavo

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 26/07/2010 21:58

Anyone watch Good News Week here?

Pauls Monologue at the start of the show went something along the lines of:

"The Election 2010, promising to be the most confusing election ever. The Liberals are conservatives, the Greens are led by someone who's Brown and Labor is led by someone who is probably never going into Labor.
Posted by: adam17

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 27/07/2010 07:35

It's back on??? Bugger. Will have to watch it on ten online.

Arnost, there is a good letter to the editor that is actually backed by some pretty compelling evidence in numbers, about the inefficenty of wind and solar generation. If anyone reads the Townsville Bulletin, its a good read.
Posted by: Andy Double U

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 27/07/2010 10:35

I think ex PM Rudd harbours some resentment toward the ALP... No logo... Does that mean he is an independent? Or does Rudd think the ALP logo will tarnish his own image?


If the ALP loses this election, they'll have no one to blame but themselves. I've been quite surprised at the the number of decisions they've bungled in the last few months, I didn't think anyone could be quite that inept! It really is embarrassing...
Posted by: Dave-Wx

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 27/07/2010 11:39

I think the govt will win by a little bit...but as NSW shows, you can screw up time after time after time and still keep winning! (which is obviously often a function of a poorly organised opposition, but still)
Posted by: Greg Sorenson

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 27/07/2010 12:21

Did anyone watch Q & A last night? That's what a debate should look and sound like. Lively, audience and home participation, great format. Wished it would go for longer though.
Big fan of Insight on the SBS too, the commercial networks are just powder puffs.
Posted by: Arnost

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 27/07/2010 12:30

Quote:
(which is obviously often a function of a poorly organised opposition,)


or a well organised media...?

linky

The Media Watchdog is always a hoot to read...
Posted by: Keith

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 27/07/2010 13:26

Or an electorate with a dysfunctional intelligence, that gets what it asks for, not what's good for it.
Posted by: Arnost

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 27/07/2010 13:48

More like an electorate brainwashed into believing that independent thinking is anti-social behaviour.
Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 27/07/2010 15:02

Originally Posted By: Dave-Wx
I think the govt will win by a little bit..


I am starting to think it may be a big swing the other way. Particularly as the small mining companies are about to jump in bed with the LNP. They announced the smear before sitting down with the federal resources minister so it can't be viewed as anything but.

The ALP in Queensland will be lucky to survive the next election also. Their biggest error was the handling of the Traveston Dam. The fact they have been building a new road network after decades of neglect will be lost on most voters. Not to mention the increse in health servies and education. The LNP on the other hand have a history of cutting basic services. Hospitals and Schools were closed on mass in Victoria under the Liberal party. They spent nothing on roads up here in North Queensland when in power.

As for the media, it's funny how those who support the opposition see the media working for Labor and those that support the ALP see the media as biased towards the LNP. I guess that's to be expected in an election campiagn though.

For the record I picked the winning government the last 4 federal elections and this time I believe the LNP will get up. Abbott's single biggest weakness is his perception amongst women so expect most of the next 4 weeks to be about cuddling kids and policy on families. Then watch as he fails to deliver on most of it or our cost of living skyrockets to fund it. Afterall he will have a $10.5 billion shortfall when he scraps the mining tax.

Not to mention his increase on company tax which is lunacy given the current economic flatness. The reality at the end of the day is both parties are underdone and the Greens are fronted by a mad man. We all lose regardless.

The political system in this country needs a complete overhaul. The majority of people in Parliament are overpaid and there in lies the grass roots issue. They are more interested in themselves and cannot appreciate the hardship facing most families as they are not on the same playing field.

There is no denying the current goverment could have managed the stimulus better, however at least they went some way towards helping Australians through the recession. They deserve some credit for that.


They also gave pensioners a rise after 11 years of neglect under the LNP and that directly benefited people I know including my parents. That is why they will be getting my vote.
Posted by: Arnost

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 27/07/2010 18:43

Quote:
The majority of people in Parliament are overpaid and there in lies the grass roots issue.


I reckon they are not paid enough... and that's why you have in most cases such a crappy selection of losers on the benches.

Quote:
It's funny how those who support the opposition see the media working for Labor and those that support the ALP see the media as biased towards the LNP.


I guess the ALP may have a point in whinging about the radio jocks. But there is no excuse for the ABC in being so partisan - they have charter by charter have to be fair. But they are not... Red Kezza (Gough Whitlam' press secretary) for example last night blatantly lied:

Quote:
KERRY O'BRIEN, PRESENTER: Last week we conducted our first campaign interview with Julia Gillard. Tonight, it's Tony Abbott's turn, and I spoke with him just a short time ago in our Sydney studio.

Tony Abbott, today's Treasury figures on the economic outlook again project that the budget will return to surplus three years early in 2012-13. That's the end of government debt that you're banging on about - the first developed country to be out of the red and back in the black after the global economic crisis.


Does the bolded bit above in any way suggest that at that particular point Australia will likley be well over $100 billion in debt?

FFS Returning to surplus means you will not have to borrow! Abbott dropped the ball and waffled letting O'Brien get away with a blatant untruth - and so pandering to the brainwashed who walk away with entirely the wrong impression such that "ALP will have it all fixed in a couple of years"... Whereas in reality, at that point and each year after we will have an interest bill of at least $5 billion, and if we repay $5 billion each year (i.e. $10 billion in the out years) we will be giving up the equivalent the entire Federal hospital funding budget for each year!

That's what racking up such a stupid debt means... Think!
Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 27/07/2010 19:44

Dropped the ball or had no idea? Either way he missed it and shouldn't have. Incompetence?


P.s I am please you said "benches" smile
Posted by: Arnost

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 27/07/2010 20:30

Incompetence? LOL. Well at least he's not a blatant liar and fraud like comrade Joolia. It's unravelling on her at the moment - you may be right and the LNP may actually squeak in! Wouldn't that be a hoot... One can only dream eh?
Posted by: Flooding rains

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 27/07/2010 20:38

Oh please the last thing we want is someone like Abbott running the country. Hockey is the only one I can stand. 'Liar and fraud' well the libs have been nothing but liars and frauds in elections gone past with only brainwashing and shear luck saving them on numerous occasions.
Posted by: lookin

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 27/07/2010 20:45

cant agree more floodinrg rains.Joe Hockey as treasurer is a scary thing indeed But Tony Abbott as PM is a thought and a thing this country does not need.With all the ranting and raving little if nothing will come from his policies.He is on the band wagon of what he thinks the p blic want to hear, and not what is best for our long term future.Me thinks its the ramblings of a man so desperate to get into power he will say whatever it takes to get there and worry about the consequences later.
Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 28/07/2010 00:56

Too true LATS. He is only rambling for popularity.
Posted by: Andy Double U

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 28/07/2010 09:32

Originally Posted By: Arnost
Does the bolded bit above in any way suggest that at that particular point Australia will likley be well over $100 billion in debt?

FFS Returning to surplus means you will not have to borrow! Abbott dropped the ball and waffled letting O'Brien get away with a blatant untruth - and so pandering to the brainwashed who walk away with entirely the wrong impression such that "ALP will have it all fixed in a couple of years"... Whereas in reality, at that point and each year after we will have an interest bill of at least $5 billion, and if we repay $5 billion each year (i.e. $10 billion in the out years) we will be giving up the equivalent the entire Federal hospital funding budget for each year!

That's what racking up such a stupid debt means... Think!


Yeah, I reckon Abbott will be rueing that missed opportunity. To me he was over thinking and over analysing everything Kerry said at the beginning of the interview but finished reasonably well. O'Brien's interview technique was ridiculous though. How long did he blather on about immigration? Abbott should have cut him short and told him to stop chasing his tail...

It needs to be spelt out though... we are borrowing $100 million dollars a day to finance this debt, and we are contemplating spending god knows how much on some fibre in the ground so gamers can get zero ping? The priorities are completely whacked! We need to get the basics right, that being delivery of health services, roads and infrastructure yadda yadda yadda... You can't do this when you are in debt to your eyeballs. Case in point, the current blackhole Queensland finds itself in is because we have borrowed stupid amounts of money and frittered it away. Who cares if you run a surplus? If you owe money to anyone they have you over a barrel unless you've got it sitting there at a moment's notice to pay it all back.

I tell you what, I'll support fuzzy wuzzy policies and schemes when I can pay my bank in hugs and kisses, until that day comes, the books need to balance and we need to maintain a strong financial position in order to maintain the quality of life we have now.

Love Andrew Bolt's assessment of the cash for clunkers. Link Every time justification is sought for these complete wastes of schemes it's always the "we aren't sustainable", "we can't rely on our minerals" blah blah blah... So we use some sort of 500 year projection that we will be completely out of resources to justify complete waste and mismanagement? Well here's a projection, in a few million years from now the sun will have swelled and caused Earth to resemble Mercury and I seriously doubt any greeny will be around saying 'I'm really glad we curbed that carbon output' smile
Posted by: ant

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 28/07/2010 10:04

Abbott and the Liberals shoot their economic feet off every time their insane mat leave scheme is mentioned. All this chanting of stopping the waste etc is great, but then out comes the mat leave scheme, which exemplifies the worst middle class welfare imaginable. When they've got the guts to tackle the burgeoning middle class welfare, then I'll believe that they're dinkum about trimming waste and being responsible.

It'll never happen.
Posted by: Greg Sorenson

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 28/07/2010 10:25

I would like to point out that a high speed broadband scheme is essential for Australia to move forward and to remain competitive with the rest of the world, especially in a global economy. Businesses within this country of all sizes and types can trim costs just by negating travel expenses alone for onsite meetings, large file transfers for various projects, medical training and procedures; the list is endless. Services for regional areas will increase also with the vast distances leapfrogged in a nano-second. I don't care which party builds the infrastructure, just as long as it is up to world standard.

We build better ports because we know that that increases efficiency and trade. The same will be true if we open the door much wider with faster internet.
Posted by: Flooding rains

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 28/07/2010 10:45

Well there you go, Gillards ear lobes shows vast wisdom and superb listening and implementing skills. Abbotts shows a bit of a loner, does weird things, can listen well but doesn't interpret well. This is according to some bloke on the kerry ann show using chinese face reading thingos. Still want Abbott to run the country? lol
Posted by: adam17

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 29/07/2010 07:00

Well I just posted about a dozen letters from politicians that landed in my post office box, all marked return to sender.. smile

The only junk mail I have recieved is Anti- Gillard and Anti- Abott, so far niether party has contributed to anything positive. You can just see this is going to be one dirty election. Geez I wish these politicans would try and work for the Australian people, and not think of themselves.. It really is dissapointing, this is Australia's democracy.
Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 29/07/2010 10:43

Hmmmm, not sure I agree Adam.

Labor's company tax cut... LNP response " we'll sweeten it ".

Labor's paid maternity ... LNP response " we'll sweeten it ".

Labor's Morton Rail ... LNP response " we'll sweeten it ".

Anyone else see a pattern emerging? Abbott has no policy whatsoever. It is all about seeing what labor offer and then "sweetening it". This is hipocracy at its greatest and I hope Australians have the capacity to see what he is doing.

The federal ALP's commitment to the Morton Bay Rail link is $740 million. The LNPs? $750 million announced 5 minutes later. What a shameful way to treat the Australian public. I'm sure even some of the hardline LNP supporters are embarrassed by this and they should be. They are afterall supporting a party with no ideas of it's own. How the hell will they run our country?

I have voted LNP twice in the past 15 years and have never been aligned to one party. I have always had a reasonable ability to look into someone's eyes and form a case for what they represent as an individual. The eyes are the window to the soul afterall. I don't see one ounce of good in Tony Abort's and don't even start me on Julie Mishap. Hockey should be out in front of that party. Then they may have got me interested but as they stand, not a chance. I doubt there is a shred of honesty in their leader.

I see an opposition hell bent on not putting its foot in its mouth and that concerns me. This mob are so distant from the LNP 5 years ago it is staggering how much the party has gone astray.
Posted by: Arnost

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 29/07/2010 11:34

On a bit a of a serious note:

I'm hearing that the gos is that Rudd is not the "leaker". Suspicions are pointing in different direction. (And I don't have any firm confirmation - so this purely in the realm of rumour... OK?)

Wayne Swan made a comment yesterday that the leaks weren’t coming from where people might expect. That can be interpretted as it definitely not being Rudd as that is what evryone is assuming.

Laurie Oakes said in response to Gillard retort where she tried to pin it on the Libs as "It's much closer to home". And he said "senior Government" sources - which usually implies ministerial.

Who resigned the same day Gillard was voted in? And who hates her with a passion linky?
Posted by: ant

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 29/07/2010 11:53

Both sides seem to be just trying to out-bribe each other, and are focussing on greedy swinging voters to throw the money at. I think both major parties are irresponsible spenders, and both just want to be in power. Ideals have faded away.

Interesting idea that Lindsay Tanner is the leaker. I'd have expected better of him, he was always one of the more reasoned thinkers. Which raises more questions, if it is him.
Posted by: Arnost

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 29/07/2010 13:07

"Both sides seem to be just trying to out-bribe each other, and are focussing on greedy swinging voters to throw the money at."

Which is very true... and so leads to the reality that the people who ultimately decide who gets into power are the ones that are bribeable! The people of conviction that can't or won't be bribed - well - they don't count any more. And so we have the unfortunate state that the parties are making dumber and dumber commitments and we go into the bread and circuses style of Government.
Posted by: ant

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 29/07/2010 13:11

Spot-on, Arnost. Follow the money... see who is being targeted.
Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 03/08/2010 15:23

http://www.cairns.com.au/article/2010/08/03/120841_local-news.html

At what point does this sort of practise qualify as insider trading? If there "was" one member of the LNP I had any respect for it "was" Joe Hockey. Until 10 minutes ago.
Posted by: Mick10

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 04/08/2010 20:55

the PM is in Townsville tonight and tomorrow.
In the morning i get to hop on a bus with the countries media and tour with the PM, should be an interesting morning I think. A good learning curve for my work anyway.
Posted by: Xavo

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 04/08/2010 21:43

Have fun with that Mic, when I went on Cadet Camp at the RAAF base we saw the Prime Ministers 737 take off and a couple of the other groups got a quick tour of the plane!

Anyway, was watching channel 10 just before, I kid you not 4/7 ads in the ad break were about how crap Tony Abbot is as a leader, 1 was about how crap Gillard is and another was about how we shouldn't let Anna Bligh ruin Australia like she did Queensland...

I reckon, I'd pretty much automatically vote for a party that said no to a campaign and just gave that money to health or infrastructure or something.
But what would I know eh, I'm still in school and these leaders (should) know what they're doing.

Cheers.
Posted by: SBT

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 04/08/2010 22:43

Originally Posted By: Andy Double U
I think ex PM Rudd harbours some resentment toward the ALP... No logo... Does that mean he is an independent? Or does Rudd think the ALP logo will tarnish his own image?


No sure if a graphic of him ramming his election poster where the sun don't shine wouldn't be um child friendly Andy. Appropriate maybe but not child friendly.

(And the real reason is probably that the printer had to knock something up in a hurry and didn't put the logo on by mistake.)
Posted by: ant

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 05/08/2010 13:27

Enjoy the bus trip Mick10. They had some funny footage of her and Swan getting on the media bus earlier in teh week and riding with them, as they got on they were saying things like calm down kids, the teachers are here etc etc, it was actually pretty funny.
Posted by: Mick10

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 05/08/2010 14:10

hi all,
had a great morning touring around with the nations media crews etc with Gillard and Faulkner. Was an excellent learning curve.
She went to a local primary school to chat with the kids. Then met with mayor, off to announce some local road funding for the Bruce Highway then to Lavarack Barracks to spend some time with soldiers and their families.
Posted by: Turtle Girl

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 06/08/2010 19:34

Im confused.Please help. If Krudd is not PM cuz they would lose the election/he was leading them to disaster etc. why is he now good enough to be the spruiker for the ALP???
Posted by: ant

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 06/08/2010 20:56

Um, because the sales guy is different from the CEO?
Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 06/08/2010 23:54


Cop that.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/08/06/2976161.htm
Posted by: markm9

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 07/08/2010 13:39

Why don't they have a debate on abortions or gay marriages to spice things up, it is one area where they have different believes, just an idea, boats get a bit boring.
Posted by: Flooding rains

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 11/08/2010 11:33

Would be nice if the libs would put out their own policies before the Government for once.
Posted by: lizzie

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 11/08/2010 11:38

..but isn't that the whole point to them being the 'opposition'?
Posted by: Flooding rains

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 11/08/2010 11:50

Just sweetening the deals after the fact, no that is not the point of being opposition. And they are meant to be getting all this money from somewhere while bagging Labor out for being in debt and stuff.
Posted by: lizzie

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 11/08/2010 12:22

so what is an opposition meant to do? It would hardly be normal for an opposition - no matter the party - to blindly agree with everything, and say they can do no better...surely?
Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 11/08/2010 13:39

The latest from experts in the field of telecommunications is that the opposition will flush $6 billion down the toilet with its alternative internet plan and keep us in the stone age whilst doing so. ...and they reckon labor waste money.

One telco expert claims it is a kneejerk policy that hasn't even been costed. Hmmm looks to me like Abbott is trying to play match and win. When is his party actually going to announce an original policy?
Posted by: Arnost

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 11/08/2010 14:38

CF,

Seriously, I would suggest that laying thousands and thousands of kilometers of optical fibre to each home is pretty much well a dud idea.

First and foremost: In as little as 5 years time (my prediction) there will be a massive requirement mobile interent. The uptake of smartphones and iPads etc is huge! And laptops are de riguer at the moment in business (and are not fully utilised if you can't access the interent and probably more importantly, the business intranet).

This requirement will mean that the 3G / nextG and even faster networks will appear. So why not use them in areas where there is no broadband service? Ok so maybe you may not be able to watch a hi-def movie as it downloads... but so what? Download and watch later, or (rather than pirating it) why not get the DVD from the video shop?

Second: By throwing around billions will mean that inevitably a good percentage of this will be wasted. You can bet your bottom dollar that there will be frauds and spivs that will rent-seek and feed off the inevitable inefficiencies for little or no benefit.

And Third: I know that this may seem heartless, - but why should the city-folk subsidise the country? The cost of house in the city (whether you rent or own) is significantly higer that that of an equivalent in the bush. And one of the reasons for this premium is that the city gets additional services such as the broadband to home...


I don't see any reason why you can't have fibre-optic to node and wireless from there. Sounds like an eminently more sensible option - and you won't be committed legacy infrastructure like you may very well have with the copper in ground cables that you have at the moment! (And if you want fibre to a business where it's not - then the business can pay for it to be connected - which can and does happen right now)
Posted by: Vinnie

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 11/08/2010 16:54

It's a load of crap that Labor governments don't deliver surpluses.... WA had a Labor government for 8 years and we were not in deficit, and the sky didn't fall in.
Posted by: Arnost

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 11/08/2010 17:06

Maybe in WA - but when was the last time a Federal Labor Government delivered a surplus... smile

(and remember the delivered surplus FY 2007-2008 was Costello's budget! LOL)
Posted by: Andy Double U

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 11/08/2010 17:07

Originally Posted By: ColdFront
...and they reckon labor waste money.


They do, the BER scheme, pink bats, an NBN that increased in price by 10 fold from the original election promise, computers for schools (see SBT's thread), green loans scam errr, scheme, misdirected stimulus payments, it just goes on...

Originally Posted By: ColdFront
Hmmm looks to me like Abbott is trying to play match and win. When is his party actually going to announce an original policy?


It worked well for Rudd at the last election. He successfully took coalition policy, added a bell or a whistle and promised the public he could deliver it. The funny thing is that he, along with most notably, Gillard and Swan, monumentally screwed the delivery of these promises through complete arrogance, ignorance and ineptitude. The best bit (not to mention funny) is that the ALP has gone crawling back to the guy that they knifed to try and realign their campaign and he's carrying on like he's their saviour.

As for the NBN. I personally don't see the value of spending up big time with BORROWED money on a project that might return a slightly bigger profit, percentage wise, than what I get from my I-Saver account. Most hospitals, universities, schools, big businesses already utilise fibre where they need to. In fact, I've got it on the down low that one of the big Optus centres here in Brisbane only runs a 10mbit pipe into their building as they don't see the need for greater data throughput. That's Australia's second largest telco. We run a distributed office setup in our business and all we really need to run efficiently is 1500/256kbps. It's plenty for VPNing in and using a remote desktop, distributing email etc. etc.

There's no doubt about it though, fibre is pretty cool. Stupidly fast, no latency on gaming, has the capacity to stream hi def tv/movies but beyond that, what does having extra data capacity really do for us? To me, the thrust of beefing up the speed of the network has more to do with entertainment rather than really adding value to our lives. Fact is, the product we produce here still needs to be palletised and loaded on to trucks, to be then taken to warehouses and wharves where it can be distributed far and wide. I'd sooner see $43 billion spent on infrastructure and R&D and let the private sector cater for our desire for faster facebook. That's what it boils down to in the end, if we as a general public genuinely needed faster internet, than we would have prioritised it and had no issues with forking over the big $$$ whilst the major players rolled out bigger and better networks. But as it is, it seems that we are typical in our want for bigger, faster, shinier stuff but only if someone else pays for it, the irony is that we'll be paying for it anyway...

Anyway, some light reading and some audio on the NBN:

Sydney Morning Herald - Kevin Morgan - A very expensive fixation on speed.

PDF - The social losses from inefficient infrastructure projects

ABC Audio Stream/Download - Background Briefing - "Hanging by a Fibre" A look into the NBN
Posted by: Vinnie

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 11/08/2010 17:14

It's not just WA, I am sure other STATE labor government have delivered surpluses such as VIC and TAS.
Posted by: Andy Double U

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 11/08/2010 17:18

Originally Posted By: vinny06
It's a load of crap that Labor governments don't deliver surpluses.... WA had a Labor government for 8 years and we were not in deficit, and the sky didn't fall in.


A surplus is not the be all and end all. It also depends on the amount of debt the government has. We dumb mugs here in Queensland keep electing idiots who kept telling us we were in surplus despite racking up a huge amount of government debt. Now the resources boom has lulled, we are getting slugged with big hikes on rates, water, electricity, rego, stamp duty, tolls because the government would otherwise be unable to afford it's repayments. It would have been nice to think that they were using the surplus to pay down the debt, but they weren't... Instead they spent it on a mothballed water pipeline that cost $2 billion dollars that they can't use now because someone figured out there were lungfish in Wivenhoe dam! Not to mention the failed desal plant... the bungling incompetence of the ALP. Couldn't organise a proverbial in a proverbial. At least the incompetence knows no bounds and is beginning to alienate key supporting groups due to doing deals with the watermelons... I mean greens smile
Posted by: Vinnie

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 11/08/2010 17:22

I love those ACA shows that say to save power go with a different provider.... hard to do that in WA when the gas is privatised (only one choice here) and the power (state owned but again only one choice.

We also are slugged by these increases, we are under a Liberal government. I am not sure what they are doing with the money here.
Posted by: Arnost

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 11/08/2010 17:26

Just saw this: "NBN - 20th Century solution to a 21st Cantury problem!"

Got to agree... digging ditches or stringing up cable is so passe.
Posted by: Andy Double U

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 11/08/2010 17:30

Well apparently they privatised the power here, but when the state government is the biggest shareholder and demands a bigger dividend or the government owns the utility and charges private resellers than it is as you said, competition is a farce. What it does do is create a face saving way of 'taxing' your population so that voter discontent is directed at the call centre operator rather than the government responsible.

The situation we find ourselves in now is the direct outcome from voter decisions made years ago. It's only now that we feel the pain, so the outcome from decisions made now, won't be known until sometime in the future. Long after the current government is dead and gone.
Posted by: Keith

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 11/08/2010 17:50

I'm waiting with interest to see what these promises are for commuters in western Sydney, that have apparently just been announced.

Especially in the light of Christina Keneally's exhortation to the locals at a recent Blacktown meeting, to 'get their own funding' for it.
Posted by: GDL

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 11/08/2010 17:57

Vinny 06
NSW is in a mess after many years of Labour.
In this age all political parties will spin big time to get into power,once there its the lobbyists that have their attention not the voters.lobbyists are a blight on our political system,they devalue our vote.
GDL
Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 11/08/2010 22:09

Funny how it's only the LNP hardliners that are against the NBN. Big and small business want it and a friend who will be voting LNP at the next election (always has) who's business (IT) relies on the net reckons the NBN is a necessity. He also reckons Abbotts solution is a total waste of money and wishes he'd change his mind on the NBN. Much better to have a dud service that is already redundant for $6 billion. Yeah that makes sense and as already pointed out by industry experts would only further cement telstra's monopoly as it rides on their framework.

...and if Rudd really did steal the LNP's policies at the last election why did they block every single one of them in opposition? Clearly they didn't believe in their own policies.

...and yep Andy you are so spot on about feeling what the present day government does in years to come. Our current government is going through it now. Labor in Queensland have spent vast amounts of money fixing a state that had nothing spent on it by the nationals for 30 years. The sth east of QLD now either has or will soon have some of the best road networks in Australia. The nationals first mooted the Tugan bypass in the 70's and did nothing. Nothing on dams. Nothing on schools. Nothing on health. Nothing on roads. NOTHING.

Sound familiar? It should because that is exactly what the Howard government did at a federal level for 11 years. They are pretty good at drawing lines on maps but totally useless at getting those lines off the paper and into action.

Any government can sit on a surplus by spending squat. The sad part is they bragged about it while our infrastructure went to crap. Let's go back to that. They aren't called the conservative side for nothing. Children overboard, G.S.T, Work Choices just to name a few. But the single biggest clincher for me will always be that they did nothing for pensioners whilst sitting on a $43 billion dollar surplus and then had the nerve to demand that the ALP put up pensioner payments 5 minutes into their term in opposition. That is of course those ministers that didn't spit the dummy like Costello and even moreso Downer.

Ragging out the current state government of QLD won't wash away the blatant corruption that existed in this state for decades either.

I will never align to one particular party as a life mission like some do. I have voted for both major parties at federal level. But currently there simply is no opposition at both federal and state level for me. I haven't heard boo from our state opposition leader since Lawrence Spongebob stepped out (infact I don't even know his name) and the libs at national level lost me the moment Tony Bigot stepped up to the plate. Hockey would have been far better. Hell at least he looks trustworthy and doesn't walk like his head has disappeared somewhere.

Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 11/08/2010 22:16

...oh and Arnost the single biggest problem with Laptops is slow connection speeds. By bringing Australia up to 100 mbps they also make a huge jump in wireless speeds which is an obvious benefit to freeing up mobile businesses and people that work on the way to and from work. Same too for your ipad and mobile phone data transfer.
Posted by: !SCHUMMY!

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 11/08/2010 23:15

i still have no idea who to vote for, LABOR or LIBERALS this is my first election so i want some good convincing smile im tending towards labor at the moment from the ad campaigns but i am still not definite
Posted by: Andy Double U

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 12/08/2010 08:29

Time for Swanny and Gillard to recalibrate the abacus... Not good news for the ALP from one of the current directors of the reserve bank.

PM 'wrong' on jobs boost claims
Posted by: Arnoldnut

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 12/08/2010 09:00

Speaking of the reserve bank, wonder how Godwin Grech is these days.
Don't need another fiasco like that one.

My wife needs another 'electoral officer' for her Inglewood Vic polling booth ...badly short someone who can count. Pm me if you are localish, have experience and want to jump on.
Need to know of anyone's interest today as time is short.
Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 12/08/2010 13:55

It's pretty obvious to all and sundry in the building industry that the industry is still on its knees even with the stimulus. One can only imagine where it would have been without it. Here in my very street 3 electricians have left town. Several people that were employed by the two biggest construction companies that went broke in the GFC have put their homes up for rent (some are still waiting for tennants) and gone to the mines or into units to offset their expenses and the tiling shop I buy at has stated that several tilers have simply sold up and left town. So it's pretty obvious that the projests are stalled through beaurocracy rather than an oversupply of tradesmen. Contrary to that report.

One gyprocker (who employs several employees) stated that with his company winning a school halls project it saved not only his business but also the jobs of the several people he employs. Yep there was a well noted cost blowout but according to those in the industry it had more to do with the urgency of action to save small business than anything else. It was simply to big to be fine tuned for every single application and had it been done in the usual way it would have been too late.

The flow on effect in spending that money cross other business such as retail is obvious to most.

So just in this area and in the two short years I have lived here it has had a big impact. It's cost is also minute compared to other western nations when compared to GDP and well managable

I doubt the reserve bank can accurately measure just what the stimulus saved us from. World financial experts agree that it certainly would have been a lot worse here if nothing was done. Ibfact they praised our government for its action.
Posted by: Andy Double U

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 13/08/2010 08:27

Another very good opinion piece on the NBN - Do we even need a fibre National Broadband Network?

The comment below quoted from the above article speaks volumes:
Quote:
...when ever has technology cost more in the future than it did in the past?


There is nothing to stop companies from rolling out today's technology in new estates and developments. It makes sense to do it now. As the old copper network fails than look at rolling out fibre as the replacement. What this does is spread the cost of roll out over a longer time period and doesn't land you in the situation of making perfectly good copper obsolete. Why we've got to go the bull at a gate approach at a point in time when the country doesn't have the cash in its coffers is beyond me... sure, if we had a spare $43b lying around it might make sense, but borrowing money at the expense of the future generations doesn't make a lot of sense. Treasury has already ballsed up its projections, fact of the matter is that noone has a crystal ball, and if you ask me, things are going to get a bit tougher before they get better.

Re: Reserve bank. CF, which one is it?

Originally Posted By: ColdFront


or

Originally Posted By: ColdFront
I doubt the reserve bank can accurately measure just what the stimulus saved us from.


On one hand, Bernie the fossil Frazer gains support for shunning coalition policy, but when a current reserve bank director expresses doubts over the ALP's accounting practices, they are to be bagged? Now please don't take this as a personal attack (it is not intended that way anyway), but it seems that when you imply blind bias to those who oppose your views, would it also seem fair to say, given the above quotes, that it might run the other way?
Posted by: Arnost

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 13/08/2010 09:40

Quote:
World financial experts agree that it certainly would have been a lot worse here if nothing was done. Ibfact they praised our government for its action.


These are in most Keynesian economists... And application of Keynesian economics without checks will just pump prime an economy for a bigger fall as the inevitable bubble caused by "free" money bursts.

In any case, though the stimulus may have some impact, it did not have anywhere near the effect that the drop in interest rates had. Most peoples mortgage payments went down by hundreds of dollars per month, most businesses borrowing costs reduced, and this combined with the fact that the speculators on the oilmarket went bust and petrol prices came down by something like 40 or 50 cents p/l meant that there was a stupendous amt of free cash that cushioned the economy. The simple fact that Australia had no debt and strong banks meant that it had a "rational" economy allowing it this freedom.

Spain Greece and at the rate it's going even the US are finding out the folly of unfettered Keynesianism.
Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 13/08/2010 10:14

This is hardly a surprise. I watched the debate between Swan and Hockey on ABC24 late last week and when pressed on when it would be released it was obvious from Hockey's body language that he was lying.


http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/08/12/2981532.htm

....there are some interesting comments in News.com's forums regarding this with lib voters getting ready to swing on this announcement. Costello didn't trust Abbott to handle economic issues. So why would I?
Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 13/08/2010 10:36

Originally Posted By: Andy Double U
.

Re: Reserve bank. CF, which one is it?

Originally Posted By: ColdFront


or

Originally Posted By: ColdFront
I doubt the reserve bank can accurately measure just what the stimulus saved us from.




The linky to the former reserve bank governor was provided to demonstrate the over the top protests by the LNP regarding the government's debt levels. So I'd say it's both. I stand by the latter comment that the reserve bank cannot accurately measure the impact of the stimulus on the economy quite simply because no-one can. The economy isn't static afterall. I'm not sure what else you are trying to extract from that.


From my following of politics in the country in my (roughly) 25 years as a voter it is obvious to me that one party invests in infrastructure and the other then comes in and pays off the investment. One the bank, the other the business so to speak. Unfortunately to my eye at least, the last term of the Howard government's rule took it to the extreme and Abbott is merely a puppet to the man we ousted. Australia's debt is indeed managable and there is still more that needs to be done with health and education that will not happen under Abbott.


Then of course there is that endless list of promises he is making totalling 10's of $billions despite wanting to be seen as a fiscal conservative. It simply doesn't add up. He is either fiscally conservative or he isn't? Seems he wants the butter on both sides to me. Why pull out an outdated broadband package at the 11th hour that will instantly flush $6 billion down the drain if you are "fiscally responsible"?

Maybe he has a significant investment in Telstra shares because they would be the biggest winners with his policy as it further entrenches their monopoly on the telco's by requiring piggy banking off their well and truly tired infrastructure.


If Turnball was at the helm they may have had my ear but not this clown. Apparently there were more than a handful of "decided" lib voters at the conference for "undecided" voters yesterday too including a former lib MP's son. I wonder how they hand picked those?
Posted by: Arnost

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 13/08/2010 11:47

CF - you're a smart guy... Government debt is NEVER OK. And shoot anyone who tells you otherwise on sight - just don't listen to them. smile

Government debt is why all the Eastern European Economies failed last century, Government debt is why the Eurozone is falling apart now, and Govenrment debt is why African and other third world countries can't drag themselves out of where they are.

Debt is like a wonderful pill that can cure a problem - and straight away. Unfurtunately it's a once off use and you can't do it again, and worse, your kids will have to go without to pay it off. Once it gets out of hand - and it does not take much, you can't get rid of it without serious decrease in living standards, and a curtailment of economic growth that will compound the problem even further.

I am most concerned that the world is balanced on a knife edge and there may be the mother of all corrections just around the corner. And I fear that will cost more human lives that you can ever imagine...

I posted up a few things in the population thread suggesting that the US is not as healthy as can be. So consider, the US needs to support its economy as it is still going from bad to worse - and guess what: the US can't cut interest rates any lower, and the only option left on the table is what the Fed just announced it would start doing... buying Treasury debt.

http://www.newyorkfed.org/markets/opolicy/operating_policy_100810.html

That is nothing but printing money - the Zimbabwe solution.

And it is why I make a statement such as that I opened with, and that is why I fight so vehemently against it.
Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 13/08/2010 14:06

Arnost you are using the absolute extremes of government debt as an excuse to shout down what amounts to little in this country measured against GDP. The USA have a far higher debt v's GDP and your alliance to the LNP is well noted.

Zimbabwe has nothing to offer the rest of the world to get itself out of debt. No minerals, no oil, no tech and one massively corrupt government that harbours any wealth that ever existed (sound familiar?) and no nation wants to trade with it for the small amount of assets it does have. Greece is in a similar boat. America's population has outstripped it value in those same fields. No-one wants what it has to offer because its dollar is over-valued and has been for 30 years or more and now it is coming home to bite them. Manufacturing has moved out of the USA into several Asian nations and the IT and big business headquarters are now centred in Hong Kong and Singapore.

So luckily for us our vast areas of resurces are saving our bacon and whilst the Queensland opposition leader Clive Palmer gets filthy rich to the current tune of around $9 billion the LNP says Australians shouldn't be entitled to a bigger share and will scrap that revenue source. Much of which now goes offshore. That's $10.5 billion straight off the bottom line and you talk about labor's debt?

The irony of course is that the miners have agreed to pay it. They openly came out and stated they can pay more tax because they know damn well they are ripping off ALL Australians by not paying more. That money goes a long way towards the kind of security you are talking about. Without that revenue it will be made up once again by the tax payer in the lower income arena, because that is the LNP's way of doing things. By default it removes the willingness for people to get ahead and that inturn affects productivity. it is self-destructive. Suppress the masses.

No pay rises for the lower income earners that actually drive production in this country. What precious little is left.Abbott will look after big business and tip the balance back to them with another form of work choices. Which is just another way of saying "60 hours work for 38 hours pay" to keep the fat boys on the golf course. You know it and I know it. It might suit the people that were fortunate to be brought up through the private education system but they are now more than ever in the minority.
Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 13/08/2010 14:08

... and I do agree regarding a double dip recession. I too think it is just around the corner. As it has come off the back of a major global slowdown we can only hope that some of the money that went out in the stimulus has been put away for a rainy day. Only time will answer that one.

Maybe we have had it too good for too long?
Posted by: Arnost

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 13/08/2010 16:36

Quote:
The irony of course is that the miners have agreed to pay it. They openly came out and stated they can pay more tax because they know damn well they are ripping off ALL Australians by not paying more.


Don't agree.

The miners agreed to pay as they were snookered by the leadership change: Julia simply pointed out to them that there was now no chance of her losing the election, and that if they don't "agree" then with the Greens support (who would were making noises that even the original tax was too little) she will introduce an even more draconian tax... Simple power politics – and it is only when it started looking that she may have a chance of losing that the adds are making a reappearance.

And as for them knowing they were ripping Australians off... Gimme a break - they paid the same amount of tax as any company plus pay mineral royalties on top of that.

From actual ATO tax statistics (h/t Sinc Davidson):
http://www.ato.gov.au/docs/cor00225078_2008COM8.xls
http://www.ato.gov.au/docs/cor00225078_2008COM9.xls

Shows the Net Tax to Net Income (where Mining pays about the same amount of tax as everyone else and the Net Tax plus Royalty expense to Net Income shows mining to have the highest effective tax rate!

And if you look at the return on assets and tax to profit ratios from here
http://www.ato.gov.au/docs/cor00225078_2008COM5C.xls

They are unremarkable. They are just about spot on average in tax to profit and the only reason that they appear to have a higher return on assets than the mean is because the Financial Services industry – which makes up almost half of the revenues – has such a low return!

And finally – all the profit that they make goes as dividends that are usually taxed at a higher differential income tax rates again (i.e. company pays 30% and anyone earning over 80Kpa owning mining shares pays another 8% and anyone earning over 180Kpa another 15%). So the taxman gets the full benefit. So I wouldn’t worry… you don’t miss out.

And oh yeah! If we increase the tax on miners, then either of two things will happen:
– they will make less profit and we won’t get the dividends (and hence the taxman will miss out on the income tax part) or we will miss out in our superannuation and we will have less to retire on, or
– they will pack up and risk their venture capital (which after all this is all about) somewhere else… and then we get nothing.

Look, at the moment the miners pay the Royalty on a per ton extracted basis regardless of whether they make a profit or not. That’s about as fair as it gets. You want more money? Simply have the States (who constitutionally own the mineral rights) increase the Royalty. Simple. And the reason that there is this kerfuffle with the RSPT is because Labor is trying to circumvent the States rights and revenues and direct it their way!
Posted by: Flooding rains

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 13/08/2010 16:42

They won't pack up and go! They have even admitted that half of their claims about stopping projects etc are shams. They would be silly to pack up and leave aus cause at the end of the day it would not benifit them. Cutting a profit from say 10 billion to 7 billion, boo hoo.
Posted by: Arnost

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 13/08/2010 17:36

Quote:
They won't pack up and go! They have even admitted that half of their claims about stopping projects etc are shams.


And that's because they have sunk millions (if not hundreds of millions) in to exploration, feasibility studies, and infrastructure and development for these projects already. And have not yet had a cent of return!

Seriously - this is the problem: someone like Clive Palmer or Twiggy Forrest (and of course the shareholders) can lose everything overnight if one of their investment decissions fails. happens all the time. And so unless they are assured of making comensurate profits the investment typically won't go ahead.

Look at it this way (again from here):
http://www.ato.gov.au/docs/cor00225078_2008COM5C.xls

The mining industry has an average return on assets of 0.16. That means, that for every dollar invested, they get 16c profit. Now that's pretty good (for example for each dollar invested the big banks make 7c profit - and this is the ratio which made $6.1 billion for the CBA just announced). But it's all about risk - if you take your dollar and invest it "risk free" (i.e. RBA Target Cash) you will make 4.5c profit. So if you cut the profit, a risk decission will need to be made - and to put this into perspective if for example you cut CBA's profit by half, to say "just" $3bio [still an obscene amount eh?], it will be better of liquidating the entire company and putting it on term deposit with another bank. It will make $4.5bio in interest - risk free! And there go 40 thousand jobs!

The fact is that the miners 16c profit per dollar has to also cover all the failures where no money was generated and lots sunk in exploration and in development of unviable resources. And if the mining companies get slugged more than they pay now, the risk to reward dynamics change and they will simply not open mines here but rather they will go elsewhere. And towns that depend on the miners are gone.

And all because the Labor government is on a tax grab - and wants to take the royalty revenue which CONSTITUTIONALLY belongs to the States.
Posted by: Arnost

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 13/08/2010 18:25

On another topic:

I notice that the GetUp! challenge was upheld overulling the Howard Govt's changes to the Electoral Act where voters had only a day to register after the election writs were issued.

My take on this - everyone knew that there was an election comming - well then why the F did they not register before?

Everyone knows that there are thousands of votes cast each electiuon that have to be fraudulent where people register bogus adresses.

http://www.aec.gov.au/About_AEC/Publicat...iple-voting.pdf

It's nothing but an invitation to fraudsters. And where seats are decided by a couple of hundred votes - who is to say that the fraudsters did not influence the result? Here's an example of a family that voted 159 times:

http://www.news.com.au/national/sa-elect...r-1225846224751

I despair!
Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 13/08/2010 19:22

Originally Posted By: Flooding rains
They won't pack up and go! They have even admitted that half of their claims about stopping projects etc are shams.


Yep. You saved me writing it Dylan. Scaremongering at its most shameful.

...and Arnost the big miners get massive concessions from government whilst setting up. Their exploration costs are vitually zero and they can march into my backyard tomorrow and announcethey are here to drill and I cannot do a damned thing about it. No other business gets it as good.

They should be paying more. They manufacture nothing. All they do is dug up what belongs to the country as a whole and sell it for massive profits. You can gloss it over however you like but at the end of the day they will continue to invest for two big reasons. First is the huge pot of cash at the end of the rainbow. Second and most glaringly obvious to most is that the resources can't simply be shipped overseas for mining there.
Posted by: Arnost

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 13/08/2010 21:09

Quote:
Funny how it's only the LNP hardliners that are against the NBN. Big and small business want it...


Nobody is against a viable NBN. I'm only against spending $43bio of borrowed money. Assuming that a business wants 100 mbs then what is preventing them from getting a conduit from the nearest hub and paying for it? That's the way it's usually done? And if you really think that EVERYONE will have 100 mbs in my lifetime - you might as well believe that there will be a railway between Parramatta and Epping. LOL.

It's just spin. The only difference between Labors plan and the Coalition is the pricetag... One will use borrowed funds, and the other will use a lot less for similar results. Don't believe me? Read the last paragraph here:
http://www.alp.org.au/agenda/nbn/

cheers
Posted by: Arnost

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 13/08/2010 21:17

Quote:
...and Arnost the big miners get massive concessions from government whilst setting up. Their exploration costs are vitually zero and they can march into my backyard tomorrow and announcethey are here to drill and I cannot do a damned thing about it. No other business gets it as good.


I've been pretty good I think... I have supported most everything. So do you mind if I ask for some sort of proof or support?

Cheers
Posted by: Arnost

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 13/08/2010 22:11

Quote:
Costello didn't trust Abbott to handle economic issues. So why would I?


You of course know that Costello is being taken out of context. Don't you? And I suppose that you believe that Swan is the current Placido Domingo?

OK let's take a look...

Tony Abbott: graduated with a Bachelor of Economics (BEc) and a Bachelor of Laws (LLB)[4] from the University of Sydney where he resided at St John's College, and was president of the Student Representative Council.[6] He gained media attention for his political stance opposing the then dominant left-wing student leadership. He was also a prominent student boxer. He then went on to attend the Queen's College, Oxford as a Rhodes Scholar and graduated with a Master of Arts (MA) in Politics and Philosophy.[7]
Posted by: Arnost

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 13/08/2010 22:20

(cont - iPhone issues)

And what about Placido: Wayne Swan... BA in public administration.

Now who do you think will have a better economic background?
Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 13/08/2010 22:33

It's one thing to study it. It's another to actually be any good in practise Arnost. Plenty of kids did woodwork at school but don't know what a fence rail is as adults. That is of course until they build a fence.

Posted by: Arnost

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 13/08/2010 23:32

Maybe, but in this case I doubt that's so...

In any case - my fight is not about the Libs (who to be honest disappoint me in that they are trying to do a reverse Rudd and move even more left). My fight is against the Greens. Labor in power does not scare me - they are just a bunch of bumbling incompetents that will probably stuff up if they tried to stuff up... LOL. But I think that a Green balance of power is something that could do a bit of damage.

But maybe that will be a good thing and people will finally realize how dangerous socialism is - and there will be a groundswell back to the centre like there is in the US at the moment - anyone for tea? LOL. But then again NSW and even Qld keep voting in Labor - so who knows...
Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 14/08/2010 09:38

....and that is due to a lack of worthy opposition. Let's be frank Arnost, if the LNP had a decent federal leader they could have sat on their hands and said nothing this campaign and won. I have always been a swinging voter but this time around in my eye there is no-one to swing to.
Posted by: Arnost

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 14/08/2010 14:41

Now why would some one want to go into politcs in a centrist party? The media would destroy them in an instant. Only leftoids like Turnbull have half a chance these days. So that is the new reality.

I said this before - the MSM (google JournoList) is really the most destructive element in modern society...
Posted by: markm9

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 14/08/2010 22:17

I found this commercial on YouTube, haven't seen it on television, but from what I have read it will be showing in prime time in marginal seats.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pJTX0iWYX9A

Latest Nielsen poll has a 0.3% swing toward Labor, which is a gain of 2 seats to Labor.

I think there is a Newspoll or Galaxy out tomorrow with around 8% towards the LNP in QLD, that would mean 10 seats gained to LNP in QLD.
Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 14/08/2010 23:36

No need to donate for that ad. Just send it to labor.
Posted by: Dave-Wx

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 15/08/2010 00:33

There's probably a very good reason why Labor hasn't used it (and a helluva lot of people have seen it, its been doing the rounds for a while)...because there are some intelligent people in the party that know the first quote is correct wink
Posted by: adam17

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 15/08/2010 14:57


This is pretty good.
Posted by: bigwilly

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 16/08/2010 07:54

I saw a shortened version of that GetUp ad on tele last night. It struck a chord with the female viewers in the house.

I have to do a pre-poll as I'm away on Saturday, but I still don't know who I'm going to vote for; I'll be starting with Greens last and make my way from there!
Posted by: ant

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 16/08/2010 09:42

I contributed to have that Get Up ad made. They did it very quickly. People seem to have incredibly short memories and seem to be easily led by the media, and that ad reminds them of what Abbott used to say before the spin doctors and image people got to him.

Do people ever stop believing what they used to believe?

I'll be voting Green, and Stable Population.
Posted by: petethemoskeet

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 16/08/2010 12:48

Ant when you vote for the greens you're voting for labor because that's where the Green preferences are going
Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 16/08/2010 13:24

Originally Posted By: ant
I contributed to have that Get Up ad made. They did it very quickly. People seem to have incredibly short memories and seem to be easily led by the media, and that ad reminds them of what Abbott used to say before the spin doctors and image people got to him.

Do people ever stop believing what they used to believe?

I'll be voting Green, and Stable Population.


Amen regarding Abbott.
Posted by: ant

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 16/08/2010 14:12

Originally Posted By: petethemoskeet
Ant when you vote for the greens you're voting for labor because that's where the Green preferences are going


NO they are not! MY preferences go where I direct them.

Please, please before you vote, take the trouble to find out how the electoral system works.

You can direct your own preferences. OR, you an allow other people to do it for you. If you choose that option, however, you lose the right to complain about it.

And as a matter of fact, I will be ensuring that my votes exhaust at Labor, rather than Liberal. But they will go through Green, Stable population and whoever else I CHOOSE to vote for first, with Labor being numbered just before Liberal/National.
Posted by: bigwilly

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 16/08/2010 14:27

It also depends on which House you're referring to.

House of Reps you allocate your preferences by numbering all the boxes on the little slip of paper.

In the Senate, you can either vote 1 above the line or number all 84 boxes. If you go above the line then your vote is subject to preference deals. If you number all the boxes then you control where your vote ends up.
Posted by: petethemoskeet

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 16/08/2010 14:38

How many people who intend to vote for the greens will just copy the how to vote slip they get from the greens rep at the polling booth.I'd hazard a guess and say at least 90%.
Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 16/08/2010 15:50

Originally Posted By: petethemoskeet
How many people who intend to vote for the greens will just copy the how to vote slip they get from the greens rep at the polling booth.I'd hazard a guess and say at least 90%.


The fact remains they have a choice.
Posted by: ant

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 16/08/2010 16:00

Originally Posted By: petethemoskeet
How many people who intend to vote for the greens will just copy the how to vote slip they get from the greens rep at the polling booth.I'd hazard a guess and say at least 90%.


I'd hazard a guess and say very few. People who vote Greens tend to be engaged with the process ie actually thinking. We all saw what happened last election with Labor preferencing Family First which is how Fielding got in.

And Big Willy, I was referring to both houses, thus "I will be ensuring that my votes exhaust at Labor" and yes, I always vote below the line in the Senate. Always.

It's easy enough. Put all your first preferences first, once you've allocated a number to all the people you wanted to vote for, pick a Labor or Liberal for it to exhaust at, and then go through and complete the rest of the boxes as a donkey vote. It won't matter once you've exhausted it at one of the major parties and with any luck, one of your chosen minor candidates will get up before it gets to them. Completing the numbering is just so the vote will be valid.

Which is why I'm not crying about big bad preference deals. I don't care about preference deals, they don't affect me.

So pass it on guys. If you hate the preference deals, tell your friends how to negate them. You have a choice. Control your vote.
Posted by: Seina

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 16/08/2010 16:30

I’ll probably be lodging a protest vote, whatever that comes too. I wouldn’t mind a bit of clear and rational thinking, whoever gets elected.

Seriously, I’m a little peeved.
Posted by: Rime

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 16/08/2010 17:33

Originally Posted By: markm9
I found this commercial on YouTube, haven't seen it on television, but from what I have read it will be showing in prime time in marginal seats.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pJTX0iWYX9A

Latest Nielsen poll has a 0.3% swing toward Labor, which is a gain of 2 seats to Labor.

I think there is a Newspoll or Galaxy out tomorrow with around 8% towards the LNP in QLD, that would mean 10 seats gained to LNP in QLD.


This video does more to sell Tony Abbott in my own opinion. Many of the quotes state inconvenient truths of some of the issues in our society and all what Abbott is doing is calling the spade a spade. That is a relief when you compare that to what we have seen in Rudd and Gillard who have tried their hardest not to say what they think because they do not want to offend.
Posted by: Rime

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 16/08/2010 17:44

Originally Posted By: ant
Originally Posted By: petethemoskeet
How many people who intend to vote for the greens will just copy the how to vote slip they get from the greens rep at the polling booth.I'd hazard a guess and say at least 90%.


I'd hazard a guess and say very few. People who vote Greens tend to be engaged with the process ie actually thinking. We all saw what happened last election with Labor preferencing Family First which is how Fielding got in.


Green voters thinking? That is just funny.

On another note, Fielding was not elected last election. He was elected in 2004. All senators are elected on a six year term.
Posted by: lookin

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 16/08/2010 22:15

Quite surprised no one mentioned todays official launch.Proved to me what an intelligent, positive and dynamic person she is.She also came across as actually caring and believing in what she had to say , and not just spouting off any old rubbish in order to dupe the public into getting their vote.Before I get the, THEY are all the same and they are all liars, replies go have a good look at the speech look at her ,no prompter and no script, talking about what is mostly lacking in this country ,that is bringing back the ability for everyone regardless of who you are and where you live the chance at a better education and far superior health benefits.Also mentioned respect. Not alot of that anymore.Sounded geat to me.When it is all over it wont matter much who is running the economy ,it will matter though who gives Australians the best in what we need more than anything ,a helthy and happy life.To much emphasis these days is placed on money and not enough on actually living your life to its best. Cheers
Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 16/08/2010 23:56

looking at the sky ,I was reading some comments on news.com this afternoon following her speech (which I missed) and the results there were overall positive. Even moreso when that particular website has been pro LNP for the past 5 weeks.

Quite a few people made comments similar to yours about her ability to speak without a script.
Posted by: Andy Double U

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 17/08/2010 09:15

Originally Posted By: lookin at the sky
Before I get the, THEY are all the same and they are all liars, replies go have a good look at the speech look at her ,no prompter and no script, talking about what is mostly lacking in this country


My my my... what does the minder put on the lectern about 12 seconds into this video

Even the ABC mentioned last night (on PM) that she and her minders were busy writing that speech until the very last minute. That's why a transcript wasn't available to journalists upon concluding it. It's all part of this real Joolia tripe that keeps getting bandied around. So is emulating Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton the real Julia? The whole ALP campaign reeks of the good ole US of A style of campaigning.

Originally Posted By: lookin at the sky
bringing back the ability for everyone regardless of who you are and where you live the chance at a better education and far superior health benefits.Also mentioned respect. Not alot of that anymore.Sounded geat to me.When it is all over it wont matter much who is running the economy ,it will matter though who gives Australians the best in what we need more than anything ,a helthy and happy life.To much emphasis these days is placed on money and not enough on actually living your life to its best.


Last time I looked, there were doctors and nurses who were quitting because they weren't being paid by Queensland Health. Now that says to me that health care isn't free, it costs money. In fact all people require money in order to live their life. Even the homeless guy who lives in the state forest in our local area goes into town to pick up his pension, go to the barber for a hair cut, have a wash in council supplied facilities, and buy basic foods from the shops. Funny thing is, he says he is homeless because he completely rejects society, yet he still takes the money and utilises the services...

Being happy and healthy without money is a pipe dream. Maybe I should clear that up, being happy and healthy without a 'currency' is a pipe dream. It doesn't matter who or where you are, something needs to be exchanged to get something in return.

Good education... blah blah blah. Instead of moving forward, perhaps they should go back and just concentrate on the basics. Reading, writing and arithmetic.

Don't get me started on the broadband health stuff. It still requires people to staff it and if they really think the internet is going to reduce their workloads, well they have another thing coming. Then there is all of the associated upgrading of hardware, on top of a stupidly expensive network... Oh and remember the internet successes of grocery watch, and fuel watch?! Resounding success right there... not!

Both parties are hardly putting a strong case forward for election, at least with the coalition, we can have them meddle around for a bit at a lot less cost to the taxpayer! Labor for the past three years has been nothing short of incompetent and after looking at their proposed policies... nothing will change.

Wasn't the NBN a promise from the last election? Oh I get it, if you screw around enough, people will forget what you promised last time so you can re-promise it again! The sad part is that if Labor get re-elected, it will show that they aren't the only mugs in Australia.
Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 17/08/2010 09:29

Nice. Calling people mugs because they are making a choice that doesn't agree with your own. You should respect people's right to vote for who they choose without resorting to name calling. Leave that to the politicians.


Posted by: Andy Double U

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 17/08/2010 09:51

Originally Posted By: ColdFront
Nice. Calling people mugs because they are making a choice that doesn't agree with your own. You should respect people's right to vote for who they choose without resorting to name calling. Leave that to the politicians.


I meant it as a term of endearment of course smile
Posted by: ant

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 17/08/2010 12:00

People who start yelling abuse can expect to have their listeners lose interest. Just sayin. Most people realise that, as soon as someone resorts to abuse, it's because they've got no argument.

Gillard does do best when she really engages and speaks. Actually, all politicians do this well, but so few of them slip the tight leash these days and actually do it.

She's a very good parliamentary performer, I don't know if that gets reported much outside of Canberra. She can really debate very robustly, she's often cutting and witty, and she seems to really know her stuff. I think she does actually believe in the old Labor values, too.

We keep saying we want politicians to speak plainly, say what they think etc etc BUT! When they do so, we and the media scream blue murder. That's why we've ended up with bland, sloganeering politicians. we don't know what they stand for, they've been coached in how to conceal it.

So we get them spouting annoying slogans (Moving Forward, Working Families, Stop the Boats, Big New Tax), being ''on message'', talking in sound bites, and never upsetting the horses.

We get bribery and pork barrelling. Our taxes are now being used to entice a relatively small number of swinging voters in outer suburban areas who want money, although they live in homes they own and are comfortably off. Where's our infrastructure? Well, you can't be handing cash to private citizens AND have large scale government development. It's an either/or.

Mr Howard pioneered this idea, and it's in keepign with Liberal philosophy. It gives the recipients the choice of what to do with the money, including buying services with it. Services and things the government used to provide for all people, now certain people are handed cash, in order to buy it themselves. Free market philosophy.

sadly, Labor don't have the guts to pull the plug on this, evidently their electoral analysts tell them that these swinging voters have become used to being given this money and won't take kindly to having it withdrawn.

Middle class welfare and the greedy mind set it encourages is rotting this country. Personal responsibility diminishes, concepts of fairness fade, and people make a decision on who to vote for based on what is in it for them, who will give them the most.

where this largesse comes from, or who suffers so that it can be given, seems not to occur to these people. It's all me me me.
Posted by: Arnost

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 17/08/2010 12:43

"Well, you can't be handing cash to private citizens AND have large scale government development. It's an either/or."

There is a third option - don't tax as much! And then you don't have to worry about whether to give the money back or to something with it... (and this dithering inevitably is far less efficient than having the taxpayer make their own decisssion on their priorities).

Otherwise - what you say is what I would pretty much well agree with.
Posted by: Arnost

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 17/08/2010 12:50

"You should respect people's right to vote for who they choose without resorting to name calling."

Surely there must come a time when enough is enough and you have to call a spade a spade? Truth sometimes hurts, but - as ant suggest above - there is an unhealthy addiction to public largesse by some segments of society. And this minority in their short sighted greed is dragging down the rest - and if not immediately, then dragging down the prospects of the generations to come who will have a lower standard of living as a consequence.
Posted by: Rime

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 17/08/2010 13:27

Originally Posted By: Andy Double U
Originally Posted By: lookin at the sky
Before I get the, THEY are all the same and they are all liars, replies go have a good look at the speech look at her ,no prompter and no script, talking about what is mostly lacking in this country


My my my... what does the minder put on the lectern about 12 seconds into this video

Even the ABC mentioned last night (on PM) that she and her minders were busy writing that speech until the very last minute. That's why a transcript wasn't available to journalists upon concluding it. It's all part of this real Joolia tripe that keeps getting bandied around. So is emulating Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton the real Julia? The whole ALP campaign reeks of the good ole US of A style of campaigning.


The way the speech was delivered was even a lie. Have a read of the following article.

http://www.theage.com.au/federal-electio...0817-127hr.html

EDIT:

If anyone has fallen for this speech, then simply they are a 'mug'.

Definition of mug (slang): A victim of dupe. wink

Linky
Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 17/08/2010 15:03

I have heard an ad on the radio at the moment regarding the Queensland Police wage claim and the liberals are using it to claim that labor are in some way engaging in "work choices" practices in their handling of the case. What they fail to mention is that the proposed increase of 4% will make them the highest paid police in the country though they are using the election to push for 12%.

Given the LNP are all about cutting back public service numbers and their history of suppressing the public sector I am stunned they are using it in their campaign, but it certainly highlights the dishonest way they have run this campaign.

Anyone that believes liberals spin on this could be accused of that same "dupe". So too the way in which the term "mug" was applied seems also to be a poor attempt to bring shame on anyone that may vote labor.

You can put any spin on it you like to look out for your mate Rime but the fact remains it is a label on people that don't support his view and in this forum it is against the rules and played a big part in this very topic being removed from the forums a few years back. Should we all resort to labelling now to keep things in balance or just cop the insults ?
Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 17/08/2010 15:22

...and THIS proposal is absolute madness. Get the $6500 and go back on the dole. What about all those that get off their butts eachday and have done their entire life to go to work. What do they get?

Send the long term dole bludgers out to sweep streets and clean public toilets and graffiti and then sit back and watch as they race to find more suitable employment.

Some very interesting comments in that thread. I did notice though that the thread was closed early as it wasn't going the LNP's way. Had it been a beat up on the ALP it would run all day like the others in there have. Sad that the media are trying to control democracy in this country.
Posted by: Andy Double U

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 17/08/2010 15:33

Originally Posted By: ant
People who vote Greens tend to be engaged with the process ie actually thinking.


CF, I think the above quote goes to show that comments go both ways. I did consider removing the mugs line from my post but in the end began asking myself why I should? Especially given the above quote. Labels are a part of society, some people find them offensive, some don't. I am sure we have been all called far worse names at some point in the past! I think the WZone mods knew that the discussions could get quite spirited when they lifted the ban, and this I think is a good thing. For me personally, I find no motivation if we are to discuss cardboard topics in a cardboard way. I think I speak for many who post and lurk here when I say that one of the great things about this forum is that people are given the freedom to express their emotions in a polite manner (relatively speaking). Again, from a personal perspective, I've found some of the labels directed towards the pollies, Abbott being called a bigot for example, to be actually quite inflammatory. Truth be told, it also constitutes a personal attack! Now up until now I've been happy to let sleeping dogs lie, but if personally labelling someone a bigot, and to directly imply that those who vote a particular way are the only real thinkers in society then I think perhaps those who find the mug label offensive should try a teaspoon of cement and harden up grin

Now, I've been thinking about the Greens...

If you want to place food, and energy resources in the hands of the rich, then vote Greens! It's rather obvious that if you are going to start affecting the supply of either, then elevated pricing through demand will ensue which will mean that those in the lower socio-economic brackets will end up losing out big time.
Posted by: Andy Double U

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 17/08/2010 15:36

Originally Posted By: ColdFront
Send the long term dole bludgers out to sweep streets and clean public toilets and graffiti and then sit back and watch as they race to find more suitable employment.


Yeah, this was called working for the dole scheme under the Howard Government. Then the ALP was elected and they relaxed many of the conditions because people found it too hard to get work... At least we agree on something CF grin Working for the dole should be reintroduced the way it was prior to the ALP winning the last election.
Posted by: Shayne

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 17/08/2010 15:49

such a shame "The Australian Sex Party" dislikes firearms..id love to vote for both them and "The Australian Shooters & Fishers Party" but find myself conflicted...

Oh how can my two favorite things contradict each other politically...oh the humanity!

maybe i should start my own..call it "The Australian Sex and Shooters Party" or ASSP for short... with a blend of both parties policies, and a strong iron fist on border protection and overseas profit taking..

hmmm...i know..ill get back in the corner.. wheres my dunce hat shaped Alfoil Helmet?
Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 17/08/2010 16:01

Why are you quoting Ant Andy? I am not at his keyboard so have no control over his posts.

By calling Abbott a Bigot it was levelled at a politician outside of this forum and given the way they address eachother they are fair game. To suggest that is comparable to you how you address other members of this forum is rubbish. I have witnessed yourself and various others apply "terms of endearment" to scientists, greenies and pollies in other threads but I guess that is ok. That you found it offensive means you may need some of that "Cup of Concrete" yourself. In the meantime keep your opinion of other posters to yourself. That you considered removing the comment highlights the fact you acknowledged it was provocative.

As for the LNP's work for the dole scheme, it was poorly executed and allowed for and indeed saw some proven cases of exploitation. Hence why it was binned.

...and I'll say it again. I do NOT align and never will align to one party. I have voted for both major parties and a part of me wants to punish this government, but I cannot vote greens and I see no worthiness in the opposition. Had they appointed another leader they may have had my ear but I simply do not trust Abbott and won't be cohersed to swing that way by people who attempt to shame me into doing so. That kind of behavior merely strengthens my resolve and highlights what it is that I don't like about this current LNP. Same scaremongering ,different applicator.
Posted by: Arnost

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 17/08/2010 16:18

"but I simply do not trust Abbott"

You certainly feel very strongly on this - and I find that quite interesting. Do you mind if I ask why?
Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 17/08/2010 17:01

Not at all Arnost. Every single word appears to be rehearsed and he speaks with pauses every few seconds that implies he is cautioning himself on what he will say next. I also look at people in their eyes (the window to the soul) and it has served me well in life. I don't like what I see there. By contrast I see a more worthy individual in Mr Turnball and to a slightly lesser extent Joe Hockey. Abbott doesn't seem comfortable to me and his body language says as much.

I get the impression he is hiding something and don't like the guy. So I cannot vote for him. I get a similar feeling with Bob brown. He actually has a couple of good policies but we all know what he really wants. I don't know the independents in this electorate so won't vote there and that leaves the ALP. I actually think they will make real progress if re-elected and I don't think Julia will be led the way Rudd was. She is far more independent than he.

I don't agree with the coalition's paid maternity leave. If people want a family they should plan. Just like the generations before them did. it will be only add to the 85 cents per $1.00 that currently goes from our taxes to welfare. No matter how anyone tries to gloss it. over, paid maternity leave is another form of welfare.

His ignorance on boat people is also of concern. At some point they stopped being called refugees and were labelled "illegal immigrants". Perhaps if he sat down and talked to some of them about the horrors they encounter in daily life he might be less inclined to "turn them around". Whether they ultimately end up back on their own soil should be up to immigration officials who are trained in that field. Not someone with a phone that may just be sending them to their death. They are people at the end of the day. they would more than likely sink the boat anyway ,resulting in deaths and that blood would be on his hands. His stance on this issue contradicts his comment made today that he "doesn't want to be a leader of the world" and "wants to keep his ego in check".

He simply doesn't stack up to me. 10's of $billions in spending annoucements whilst claiming to be a "fiscal conservative". If he does get in on Saturday then so be it, but it won't be off my vote.


I hope that answers your question Arnost.
Posted by: Arnost

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 17/08/2010 17:04

cheers
Posted by: ant

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 17/08/2010 21:44

Interesting words, coldfront. I totally agree with the paid mat leave and other raft of money handouts to people having kids. The whole thing is inequitable and indefensible. Welfare is for those in need, not those in greed.

I'm a single working taxpayer. I can't afford a house in Canberra, and increasingly, anywhere within commuting distance. and yet, my taxes are handed to people on incomes far higher than mine, who live in houses I'll never be able to afford, all because they have kids.

They don't NEED the money. Many other people need that money, and yet both sides of politics want to shovel money, paid in taxes by people on lesser incomes, living less comfortably, to these people.

I just can't get past that, it makes a mockery of anything else they say they stand for. Stop the waste? Sure, Mr Abbott. Labor are not much better.
Posted by: Cheers

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 17/08/2010 23:24

The ALP saved us from the GFC-FACT.
If it was up to the libs/nats,we would be in big trouble-FACT.
The ALP has VISION for the country-FACT.
The libs/nats don't have VISION for the country-FACT.
The ALP with the UNIONS look after the workers-FACT.
The libs/nats want to screw the workers-FACT.

I still can't believe that most of us are workers with
good'fair working conditions that you can thank the UNIONS with the ALP.
Yet some of you still vote for the libs/nats.
It's time for you to wake up & get your head out of where the sun doesn't shine.
Posted by: lookin

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 17/08/2010 23:35

I wonder if im the mug or you Andy????Time will tell I guess.didnt notice the speech in front but boy she must have a good memeory as I dont recall her looking down at them.If you think for a second that Abbott can afford the promises he keeps making then you have been duped.Hes gone tit for tat with labour trying to out do them on almost every labour commitment.Then he adds a few more.What will suffer ,we will.Our taxes will have to go up either directly or through company taxes.The basics we need in education will not happen ,the health reforms will not happen ,8000 beds with no one to look after the people who go in them as there will not be enough doctors or nurses.Cant recall any money towards them from libs.And your much hated NBN .Would rather have the money spent on a proper network rather than Mr Abbotts patch work quilt.Yes we need money to survive your reply there a bit over the top.I meant that we as a society place to much emphasis on it, almost to the point at times that it takes over lives and in cases destroys them.We need to look at the whole picture not just the monetary part.As for dropping the mining tax thats the biggest mug story of all.Wont hurt anyone to do it we all know that.Will however benefit all of us if it gets to happen.Lot of money to find for the Libs if they get in and drop it . So wheres it going to come from my guess is us .And then theres workchoices but thats just to scary to mention.Cheers
Posted by: Helen

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 18/08/2010 06:30

My question to you all is in regards to how both parties are promising to get us out of debt (a debt mind you, that Labor got us into in the first place).

Where is the money going to come from?

Tony Abbott "appears" to be wanting to spend less and wants to get us out of debt (and will probably raise a few taxes).

Julia Gillard "appears" to be wanting to spend more and wants to get us out of debt (and will probably raise a few taxes).

Can somebody please sensibly (and without name-calling) do the math and explain how this will be achieved?

Personally, I don't trust any of the the three majors, so I'll be voting for my local Lib guy who at least has made his present felt in the right way. I wouldn't have a clue who the local Labor candidate is, so that to me say something about him/her.
Posted by: Cheers

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 18/08/2010 07:07

6% of GDP.
It's no big deal.
This saved us from the GFC.
Posted by: bigwilly

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 18/08/2010 08:03

I got my family into debt.

It's funny how if you leave that statement as it is it sounds pretty ordinary, almost irresponsible actually. But tack onto the end of that "and with that debt - which we can comfortably service - bought them security in the form of a house and land" and then it suddenly sounds responsible, the sensible thing to do.

There is nothing wrong with debt, provided it is used as a tool in a responsible manner. Now I am pretty confident that the debt Labor has racked up saved thousand, tens of thousands or maybe even hundreds of thousands of jobs throughout the GFC. I would hate to think where we would be if we had suffered like other countries have.

As to how they're proposing to pay it back, it would appear that LNP are proposing to slash services and infrastructure spending while Labor are relying on the mining tax. That is at least how I understand it.

Something that I want an answer to is this:

It would appear that there are some people on this board, but definitely people out there in the world are died in the wool ____ (insert name of party) supporters. People who, regardless of leader, policy or direction would vote for ____ (insert name of party). Do those who support, almost unconditionally, understand the power they are forfeiting?

I'll use the cliche analogy of a man and woman througout their relationship. In the beginning, the women dresses to impress, keeps up her looks and has an elevated libido while the bloke treats her like a princess, spends time with her instead of his mates and organises romantic getaways. As their relationship progresses they both feel safe, they both feel that even if some of the gloss fades that the other will still be there. And seeing as though the upkeep of the gloss is a lot of hard work, they're actually a little glad to let it fade. Then they marry and make a life-long committment to eachother. They're both now very confident in the security of their relationship; no longer is there a need to dress to impress, to keep in shape or to organise romantic weekends. They stop working for eachother.

Now this is all purely speculative, I don't know how you would even begin to measure it, but if a political party is guaranteed a vote from you - and given that today's politicos are all about power and winning the popularity contest instead of doing what's best for the country - why would they put in the hard yards if your vote is already secured? If they can rely on your vote by uttering a few 'old party' lines and generally staying on the same course that they have done so for the last 80 years, why would they change?

It is the swinging voters that decide the government of the day and imagine if every voter was willing to swing based on policy, leadership and vision. We might actually have experienced an election with substance, an election that inspires us and fills us with confidence for the future. Instead we've been presented with a choice that is as painfull as choosing one's own method of execution!

Someone made the comment that a particular party was using good ol' US of A tactics; in reply to that, at least the good ol' US of A have a leader, rather than a reactionary manager, and someone who instills confidence in tumultuous times. If either of the candidates we have to choose from were even a fraction as impressive as Obama they'd have my vote.
Posted by: Blizzard

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 18/08/2010 08:14

Originally Posted By: bigwilly
...

It would appear that there are some people on this board, but definitely people out there in the world are died in the wool ____ (insert name of party) supporters. People who, regardless of leader, policy or direction would vote for ____ (insert name of party). Do those who support, almost unconditionally, understand the power they are forfeiting?

...


Yes, well said Will. Its a kind of brainwashing actually. You can usually tell when humans are hoodwinked as we react angrily and defensively when our views are questioned. We have all done this at some point in our lives but it seems it can be harder for some to admit to the error at times - me included of course.

The most accomplished thinkers learn to look at things from a different perspective. Question your own political views/beliefs and you may feel uncomfortable but you will also gain more insights.

Think carefully, challenge your way of thinking about something, amid the discomfort of doing so. Its quite fascinating what defenses the mind comes up with then doing this.
Posted by: Cheers

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 18/08/2010 09:01

Originally Posted By: Cheers
6% of GDP.
It's no big deal.
This saved us from the GFC.

I was going to add more to this statement so I will.
50 leading Australian economists wrote an open letter about how the stimulus package was the right thing to do and was done well.They are sick of Tony Abbort's LIES.
An assessment by Nobel prize-winning economist Joseph Stiglitz that Australia's stimulus package was probably the best designed of any advanced industrial country,both in size, timing & how it was spent.
These people are experts.
I should of added this before.
And if you think I'm in big debt then you are wrong.
My wife & I own three houses & only owe very little on one of them.
By the way I'm just a worker.
.
Posted by: Andy Double U

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 18/08/2010 09:36

Originally Posted By: Cheers
6% of GDP.
It's no big deal.
This saved us from the GFC.


6% of GDP is an incredibly misleading comment to make. Swan actually used the analogy that it is like someone who earns $100,000 / year to take out a $6,000 loan. On the surface it sounds simple enough, heck, it really isn't any big deal.

The question needs to be asked however: Why does someone earning $100,000 / year need to borrow a paltry $6,000?

Obviously there is no money in the kitty, and it needs to be borrowed. Why is there no money in the kitty? The following quote goes some way to explain:


Mon 16 Aug 10 (10:59pm)

I did the numbers on the hypothetical GDP of $100,000, and posted in another story earlier today.

If GDP was $100,000 then the governments take would be about $24,000. They would be currently spending about $29,000.

So, to use Gillards analogy properly, it’s like someone on $24,000, with $29,000 worth of expenditure, maxing out a $6k credit card. Does that sound like a sound financial plan to anyone?

GDP / Debt is used by economists to compare between economies. It’s just a relative measure and doesn’t try and consider how much revenue the govt receives from that economy. The government certainly does’t ‘earn’ the GDP.

EIther Gillard and Swan are innumerate, and/or they are trying to pull the wool over everyones eyes. The answer is they are doing both.


So to correct the analogy, and I'll use BW's debt as an example.

The ALP is claiming GDP as their source of income. That's a bit like BigWilly stating that his income is the sum of his own, as well as his neighbours up and down the street! The next bit the ALP doesn't tell you is how much they are spending. That's like BW heading to the bank and declaring his super inflated income and not declaring any living expenses to justify a tiny personal loan. The banks would smell a rat on that, and so should we! So in effect, you've got BW declaring $100,000 of income, actually receiving $24,000 of that, spending $29,000 / year and asking for a store card with another $6,000 on it... If this happened (and probably has) to an individual, there would be plenty of people lining up to kick the bank for irresponsible lending. So why, do we condone this behaviour when it comes to the government? Because they are hoodwinking the public through pathetically simple analogies designed to make the public think they have an understanding, but have really had a misunderstanding reinforced.

Obama has said it himself in regards to the US economy. They have tried to kickstart their economy through borrowing and putting money into the economy, but it hasn't really worked and he has basically said that enough is enough and that the answer to prosperity is to not dig the debt hole any deeper. Why don't we take a leaf out of that book, repay the debt of the stimulus package before we get all starry eyed about grand fibre optic visions. The solution the opposition has promised costs 14% of the current proposal and will only result in a few extra minutes of download time for the average HiDef movie as one Labor MP so eloquently put it!

Originally Posted By: Cheers
The ALP saved us from the GFC-FACT.
If it was up to the libs/nats,we would be in big trouble-FACT.
The ALP has VISION for the country-FACT.
The libs/nats don't have VISION for the country-FACT.
The ALP with the UNIONS look after the workers-FACT.
The libs/nats want to screw the workers-FACT.


Those facts are untenable. Instead of just regurgitating union/labor propaganda ad nauseum, try adding some links and sources to support your position.

Originally Posted By: Cheers
And if you think I'm in big debt then you are wrong.
My wife & I own three houses & only owe very little on one of them.
By the way I'm just a worker.


You and your wife are in a very enviable position Cheers. You have obviously been prudent with your finances which has led you to both be in a strong position. You have choices should your main income streams dry up. I would nearly bet you have both done without at some point in your life together but it is now when you start reaping the rewards. This is not a position all to different from the Coalition's. I don't think they just hoard money for the sake of it, they recognise that good financial discipline now pays dividends down the track. A major part of the reason that Australia got through the GFC was because it went into the downturn without any debt.

Again, I believe the country needs to rebuild after the downturn, restore our strong financial position. Business at the moment is still not overly optimistic. Mining is probably the only thing really going for this country at the moment. Thanks to the Labor government constantly rolling out the stimulus whilst the reserve lifts interest rates things are still tough! With the cost of water, rates and electricity all sky rocketing, business is feeling the brunt. The interest rate cuts hardly filtered through to business. So whilst revenue has reduced, cost of basic services has gone up. It's not a good position and there is only so long before the government will dry up the cash reserves of business before people begin being laid off (unless of course if there is another giant upswing).
Posted by: Cheers

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 18/08/2010 09:52

I see you haven't had a say on what the 50 leading Australian economists+ Joseph Stiglitz said about the ALPs stimulus package.
Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 18/08/2010 10:11

Originally Posted By: bigwilly

It would appear that there are some people on this board, but definitely people out there in the world are died in the wool ____ (insert name of party) supporters. People who, regardless of leader, policy or direction would vote for ____ (insert name of party). Do those who support, almost unconditionally, understand the power they are forfeiting?



Excellent comment and a point I have been subtley rattling on about for the past few weeks. Indeed that applies to some here and I will NEVER understand that mindset. We had several good years out of Howard but like ALL politicians he eventually dropped the ball. However I recall the federal election thread in here a few years back and that same old "glued to one party" mindset still rings in my ears from way back then.

Considering old Johny lost his very own seat it made even less sense for the fanatics to be so addicted to his party at the time. But then some people still see him as a hero within the LNP supporter group so I guess all hope is lost that what you are talking about will ever chage BW. It applies of course to all sides of politics.

Yes, I helped vote him in but I also helped vote him out. My vote is valuable to me. Mark Latham should be strung up for telling people to post donkeys. Now there is a "Mug".

Posted by: Cheers

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 18/08/2010 10:32

People go to war & die for the right to vote.
Fools only do donkey votes.
Posted by: Andy Double U

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 18/08/2010 10:34

Originally Posted By: Cheers
I see you haven't had a say on what the 50 leading Australian economists+ Joseph Stiglitz said about the ALPs stimulus package.


Fair call, I managed to google around and find the letter and am disappointed to see that it lacked any real detail as to their reasoning for the conclusion they drew. In fact, it seems more like an opinion piece.

I had to have a laugh at this comment though:

"The stimulus package was very organised, very well planned. The timing was really good."


I don't know. Severely skewing/screwing the insulation industry hardly demonstrated foresight, nor demonstrated an understanding of the open market. That's just one glaringly obvious example that brings that statement into very shaky territory.

From the same story:
Tony Makin, a professor of economics at Griffith University, argues that in the critical six months after the collapse of Lehman Brothers, it was a big boost to Australia's net exports that kept recession at bay.

"I'm sure we could find economists to sign a counter letter suggesting that the stimulus did not keep us out of recession and the facts show that was the case," he said.


It's really a letter of opinion, not one of a conclusion drawn from verifiable facts as the comment above illustrates.
Posted by: Cheers

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 18/08/2010 10:44

An experts opinion,like 50 of them.
Posted by: Flooding rains

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 18/08/2010 10:58

I see your the true expert andy.........
Posted by: Arnost

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 18/08/2010 11:07

Quote:
I see you haven't had a say on what the 50 leading Australian economists+ Joseph Stiglitz said about the ALPs stimulus package.


Keynesians... Is it any wonder that Keynesians support the only instance in the world where application of Keynesian theory APPEARS to have worked.

Look - Raja (PN) Junankar who wrote that paper writes on Marxist Economics is so committed to the Keynesian slant on things that ... well he can't do anything else! As to leading? How amusing...

There are more serious financial practicioners who say otherwise: For example McKibbin and

Tom Valentine - as far back as early last year suggested that the "stimulus" will not be effective as "the increase in government expenditure will lead to exchange rate appreciation and a loss of competitiveness, undoing the impact of the stimulus". And this has been mostly borne out.

The fact remains that the reason that Australia did not go into recession was not because of the "stimulus" - it was because of a couple of other reasons that separated it from the other countries where similar stimulus failed.

First, the crisis was a banking crisis and since Australia had some of the strongesdt banks in the world - this served it in good stead.

Second, the Government Deposits guarantee (though in the main un-necessary and with unintended consequences) allowed the banks to maintain lowish margins on their (necessary) overseas borrowings,and becasue the Government had no debt it actually meant something - as in contrast to say Greece.

Third, because of the strength of the Australian economy, the interest rates were high enough that lowering them (monetary stimulus) actually allowed a far higher effect than the cash handounts - the first part of the (financial) stimulus.

By the time the Pink Batts and BER stuff was rolling out - the crisis in Austalia was over and this "stimulus" was pretty much well unnecessary...

And the fact that Australia is rushing into debt (and Andy above is mostly right in pointing out that 6% of GDP is spin and not representative of the level of debt) will not stand it in good stead if (and when!) the second part of the financial crisis occurs - the one that will be started when Spain Greece etc begin to default and the Eurozone will start to fracture and the banks financing them will be left high and dry...

So remember, the lender of last resort - that has always bailed out the countries and banks (i.e. the US) - has itself been swamped by massive debt and will not be able to do much...
Posted by: Andy Double U

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 18/08/2010 11:15

Oh come on guys! Please don't tell me you've run out material and have to resort to the ole 'he's biased' and 'you know everything' retorts?!

Google is your friend! Abbott isn't squeaky clean and some of his policies should be scrutinised a bit more. I've looked at them, I've looked at the Greens and I've looked at Labor's. Now I'm not an idiot, I'm not going shoot down the party that I believe would benefit myself, my family and my friends the most!

Now, would any of you guys be able to point me to the stories written about union fury when four young insulation installers were killed in a horribly botched, mismanaged and incompetently delivered scheme? What about the union fury when Queensland Health completely bungled their payroll system and continue to do so?

Picking holes in the Labor/union record is like shooting ducks on the water, it's not a challenge! Those at the helm aren't even competent enough to sweep the mess under the rug in the same way the state governments have been for the past decade. Look, I'll put a 1 next to Labor if you guys can convince me that the waste and management so far has been worth the $$$, the shattered businesses and deaths of four people... until then it won't happen grin Now I don't think that makes me biased beyond reason and to write me off as that is really just a cheap shot. I've got some teaspoons and bags of cement fellas laugh
Posted by: Keith

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 18/08/2010 11:21

Do we have a link to the statement by those experts? I could only find (a whole lot of) stuff about Dr Stiglitz, whose credentials especially lie in the area of 'market socialism'.
Posted by: Cheers

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 18/08/2010 11:23

Killed because dodgy employers didn't do what employers should do.
Posted by: Arnost

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 18/08/2010 11:28

Oh yes - as for Stiglitz

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704204304574543503520372002.html

FFS! He's one of those who's "considered" opinion steered the world to the financial crisis we just had! I guess they hand out the Nobel to the likes of him and Krugman in the same way they handed out the Nobel peace prize these days - i.e. whatever's politically correct...
Posted by: Blizzard

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 18/08/2010 11:28

Originally Posted By: ColdFront


.. Excellent comment and a point I have been subtley rattling on about for the past few weeks. Indeed that applies to some here and I will NEVER understand that mindset...



I think its important to understand that mindset. I think it applies to us all in different ways. How many of us know that certain things are bad for our health and yet we just go along with them without really questioning them? Me!

Recognising the silliness and stupidity within myself without condeming myself about it helps me to be more accepting of the views of others.

Politically, I'm just as 'stupid' or 'misguided' as the person I disagree with. I have to see that clearly, then I will be able to listen more carefully to my opponents point of view. Otherwise my ego gets in the way and I will think that I am 'better' than them.

Its bloody hard to think clearly and without our egos getting in the way but it sure beats the alternative.
Posted by: Arnost

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 18/08/2010 11:32

Keith:

The letter is here: linky
Posted by: Cheers

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 18/08/2010 11:33

Originally Posted By: Keith
Do we have a link to the statement by those experts? I could only find (a whole lot of) stuff about Dr Stiglitz, whose credentials especially lie in the area of 'market socialism'.

Here we go again Keith,REDS UNDER THE BED!
Posted by: ant

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 18/08/2010 11:37

It's important to always remember that economics is not a science. Even economists will admit that. It doesn't follow rules like those of nature. It's based on human behaviour in as such, ranks along with sociology, psychology and other fields of human behaviour. This is why it is so hard for them to predict what will happen. They have theories and models, but when it all goes awry, they can only account for it after the fact, by looking at what happened.

What I do know is, in Feb last year everything here was great, the american financial crisis was in full swing and we were watching from the sidelines. I went to the US for a month's skiing and saw what looked like the start of a Depression, people lining up for things, everyone knew (or was) a person who'd lost their job, and the house of cards effect was going full bore.

I came back in march to find it starting here, my job was gone, the whole atmosphere had changed.

And somehow, Labor's spending short-circuited what was happening, it stopped (or paused).

The idea came from the US, a while back Mr Bush sent cheques out to all taxpayers. I got one! Pumping money into the economy, it's actually quite tricky. Labor did the US thing of giving people money who'd spend it, plus setting up the insulation scheme and school building scheme. The idea of those was to do soemthing useful (insulation and school buildings) but also, to quickly pump money into the economy.

Well, it worked. Anyone who has been to the US and seen the GFC effects will find it a very sobering experience. And I still wonder if what we're seeing is the start of the end for the american pyramid scheme economy.

Peopel can speculate, but we'll only know after the fact.
Posted by: Arnost

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 18/08/2010 11:42

Cheers:

When an economist says: "I don’t have an awful lot of confidence in market prices" - it's time to call the men in white suits as he has certainly lost his marbles... Either that, or admit that he's a socialist. I direct you to the WSJ article I linked above...
Posted by: Keith

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 18/08/2010 11:43

Originally Posted By: Cheers
Originally Posted By: Keith
Do we have a link to the statement by those experts? I could only find (a whole lot of) stuff about Dr Stiglitz, whose credentials especially lie in the area of 'market socialism'.

Here we go again Keith,REDS UNDER THE BED!

Wilson Tuckey at your service. LOL
Posted by: Rime

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 18/08/2010 12:12

I can't believe the hypocrisy I have read in the last few pages. It is ironic. Andy and Arnost come out with very strong arguments and no one bothers to counter the argument other then make accusation of being biased and stuck on a mindset when they themselves are stuck on a mindset. It is pretty obvious that Coldie is stuck in his ways as much as Andy and Arnost.

Fair enough to stick to your own convictions. I admire that even though I may disagree at times with that conviction, but you must have some other point of argument against what is being said and a reason why you disagree with it.

We are always stuck in some form of mindset one way or another, but that mindset can change with time given a good argument or personal circumstances. I think it is pretty obvious by now that I am conservative and most elections I will either vote for a Coalition candidate or an independent candidate who is conservative leaning, but I haven't always been like this. Truth be told, I once was a supporter of the ALP and to a smaller extent, the Greens. My mindset had changed as I got older. I now will never vote for either of these two parties in a month of Sundays.
Posted by: bigwilly

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 18/08/2010 12:22

Thanks for the insight into the States Ant. You hear comments like: "Worst recession since the Depression" but for us here in Australia who fared pretty well, it isn't until you hear an on the ground account of what things were/are like that you can truly appreciate the potential that we seem to have so far averted.

Andy, my comment re debt was more aimed at the rather pathetic 'lowest-denominator' approach of the Liberals and their campaigns - I suppose I should really have expected anything more from them, but still its disappointing. My comment was aimed more at the lack of context surrounding the whole debt issue; something that you have provided clarification on.

Now with Mod hat on:
Can I also thank you all for continuing what has been a pretty good, mature debate. Here we are at 15 pages and so far we've had virtually no problems. Keep it up.
Posted by: Rime

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 18/08/2010 12:25

Originally Posted By: ant

The idea came from the US, a while back Mr Bush sent cheques out to all taxpayers. I got one! Pumping money into the economy, it's actually quite tricky. Labor did the US thing of giving people money who'd spend it, plus setting up the insulation scheme and school building scheme. The idea of those was to do soemthing useful (insulation and school buildings) but also, to quickly pump money into the economy.


This was the problem though. The US already was in high debt and their interest rates were already relatively low. There was nothing in the US to create a stimulus other than the government pumping cash into the economy.

Australia was a completely different ball game. The government had no debt, our budget was in high surplus and our interest rates were high enough to create a stimulus. Added on this, China's growth was still strong enough to keep our resource boom from dwindling. There were not many developed economies in the world that had this to boast about when the GFC hit.
Posted by: AaronD

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 18/08/2010 12:33

i dont understand this whole recession that that went on.. from my point of view, in the last 2 years I have finished uni and scored a decent job while managing to have money to spend and save (both like crazy) and take out a loan and pay it back.. my family has extended their home loan to get $100,000 of extensions to the house and we have not struggled.
were not well off neither are we below the poverty line but i mean if i ddint watch tv or read the papers i would have thought nothing wrong.. so someone has obviously done something right.

is it the big corporations that are the ones affected? the people on multi-million dollar wages who are greedy and invested all their money all over the place to make more of it??
Posted by: Arnost

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 18/08/2010 13:02

What Rime said... I can not stress the importance of the ablility to reduce interest rates had. Consider, the rates dropped from 7.25% to 3.0% in a couple of months. It is a benchmark that is commonly used where for an average home loan ($250K) each 0.25% drop means a saving of $40 or so. A drop of 4.25% (and yes it was not all passed on) would mean some $700 to each house hold budget each and every month. The reate drop would have a similar impact on businesses.

This outstrips the "Government Stimulus" by an order of magnitude - FACT. And it's effect was immediate from the time the rates began to drop in October 2008. FACT. Labors cash handouts had some influence - but lets face it, were more of a political stimulus thaneconomic. FACT. The Pink Batts and BER did not kick in till after the crisis was over. FACT.
Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 18/08/2010 15:26

Originally Posted By: Rime
It is ironic. Andy and Arnost come out with very strong arguments and no one bothers to counter the argument other then make accusation of being biased and stuck on a mindset when they themselves are stuck on a mindset. It is pretty obvious that Coldie is stuck in his ways as much as Andy and Arnost.



Then you haven't been reading my posts have you. I have NEVER been aligned to one party. Arnost and Andy are intelligent enough to defend / answer for themselves and can you show the deceny to address me by my correct forum name?


I too have put numerous comments up that have been valid and dodged by those that don't agree or found them difficult to counter. That is their choice and I respect their choice. I took the time to answer Arnost's post when he requested it so don't try to drag into some issue you have with other posters.

As you obviously missed it I will say it again. I have voted for both parties twice in the past 4 terms. Hardly biased.
Posted by: Andy Double U

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 18/08/2010 15:40

laughlaughlaugh Some people have waaaay too much spare time.

Posted by: Shayne

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 18/08/2010 16:34

hmm...i cant wait for the election to be over..lmao
Posted by: Vinnie

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 18/08/2010 17:09

I find it hard to believe that Labor or Liberal will bring the budget to surplus by 2012/13.....
Posted by: Rime

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 18/08/2010 17:39

Originally Posted By: ColdFront
As you obviously missed it I will say it again. I have voted for both parties twice in the past 4 terms. Hardly biased.


I did not miss it. I have also voted for other parties in the past. My point being is that we are all sticking to our guns no matter what so no one can accuse the other side for being biased because we are all going to be guilty of that.
Posted by: Keith

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 18/08/2010 17:43

Did anyone see Kerry O'Brien's interview with Tony Abbott last night?
Posted by: ant

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 18/08/2010 20:36

Originally Posted By: Arnost
Cheers:

When an economist says: "I don’t have an awful lot of confidence in market prices" - it's time to call the men in white suits as he has certainly lost his marbles... Either that, or admit that he's a socialist. I direct you to the WSJ article I linked above...


I think what that economist is admitting, is that "the market" isn't some independant, objective entity. It's a bunch of people, buying and selling.

And sometimes, people will buy and sell at times or in ways that confound economists, and doesn't help their dry, objective models at all.

Somtimes that Economically Rational Man is just a person, being greedy or cautious, who doesn't understand what he's meant to do.
Posted by: adam17

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 18/08/2010 21:00

Originally Posted By: Keith
Did anyone see Kerry O'Brien's interview with Tony Abbott last night?


Nah, I've given up watching interview's with politicians, I find it very frustrating often cursing at the TV when they cannot simply answer a direct question with a direct answer. You can see the likes of Kerry O'Brien and Tony Jones look on their face of frustration, I'm surprised neither of them have gone and done their nut whilst on air, I know I wouldn't last 5 minutes.

Over the past 6 weeks of what seems to be eternal hell of a plethora of advertisements seeking to point out opposing parties faults, I have genuinely tried to take an interest in this upcoming election, but the deeper I go in searching for which party or candidate is right for me as a voter, the more I realize, that they are all bloody crooks, just some are not as bad as others. The top it off, the very electorate I'm supposed to vote in has it's head offices some 380km away, to see my local federal member will take me 4 hours each way (assuming I don't blow a tire on the goat track) Get a load of this rubbish > http://www.aec.gov.au/profiles/maps/qld/2009-aec-map-qld-division-of-dawson.pdf I don't know who draws these maps, but geographically a 5 year old could see this is rigged. I can drive to my local GPO faster than those in the Northern suburbs.

The best thing to look forward to at the moment, is the defining point when the whole thing is over. It doesn't matter who gets into power, the next day, will be just that, another day. It seems the last 3 years were a total waste of time.
Posted by: Seabreeze

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 18/08/2010 21:41

Wow, that boundary for Dawson is ridiculous! I know they aim for each electorate to have similar amount of voters but surely there's a better solution to the current arrangement. You'd think that ideally you'd want Townsville altogether in the same seat. You could reduce the size of Herbert to the north of the city and give that area to Kennedy, put the missing part of Townsville in Herbert, then extend the northern half of Dawson's western boundary further inland to compensate for Kennedy's new part and it's own loss of the missing part of Townsville to Herbert.
I'm sure it's probably not that easy but the current situation can't possibly be the optimum result!
Posted by: Mick10

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 18/08/2010 21:53

dawson is just a stupid seat. the southern suburbs of townsville with a member who is lcoated 400km to the south in mackay. just stupid!!!
herbert seat going to be very interesting, margine of 0.03% at the moment and close contest. we have had gillard here 3times this election, abbott once and a host of other big knobs including Rudd and Hockey.
Rumours are Abbott might be in town tomorrow. not confirmed yet though.
Posted by: adam17

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 18/08/2010 22:12

At least he'll save on travel costs from Herbert to Dawson.
Posted by: SBT

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 18/08/2010 23:04

Finally made up my mind who to vote for. It was a 3 way tie between In Formal, Sex Party, and Fishing and Lifestyle Party. Guess I like fishing n camping more than anything else these days so they will get the nod.

As I heard on the radio from my favourite pinko on LNL ABC the two main contenders wouldn't have a snowballs chance in hell in a back room personality contest and as for brains well they both leave me dumbfounded that either one could have been elected to head a party when I have grave doubts about their ability to hold a decent conversation for longer than 3 minutes. Everytime I see and hear Gillard i immediately think of Mrs Ronald mcDonald for some reaon and as for Abbot - shudder speedos. Nah my vote will not go to either of them and espicially not the stinky Greens.
Posted by: Cheers

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 18/08/2010 23:42

Originally Posted By: Keith
Did anyone see Kerry O'Brien's interview with Tony Abbott last night?

Yes,I did watch it. It must of been a full moon last night.
Very backward.
Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 19/08/2010 09:31

So after watching the leader forums last night I stunned to learn that according to Tony Abbott the Global Financial Crisis only ran for 8 weeks. Wow, could have fooled the rest of the world. But then New Zealand didn't go into recession either. I am convinced this guy cheated to gain a bachelor of economics.

Posted by: adam17

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 19/08/2010 10:14

If there were a position advertised in the paper for the role of the Prime minister, what would the qualifications be? Personally and professionally?
Posted by: bigwilly

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 19/08/2010 13:16

I think the answer would be similar to the conundrum of who the wisest man is: he who claims he isn't.

You'd probably have to choose the person who showed the least attraction toward the gig and go from there!
Posted by: adon

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 19/08/2010 14:24

In my ideal parlimentary system would ban political parties and ALL MPs and senators would be independant. Then everyone would have true representation of their area and the stupid crap that goes on in election campaigns would be far more subdued. We should be a republic and the president would be directly elected by the people and the president would appoint a leader of the house of reps. The house of reps would then appoint ministers for all of the departments. Because all political parties would be banned, all elected reps would actually be in government so your local rep would always be part of a government. All MPs would be allowed and encouraged to introduce legislation for debate and voting.

I know for a fact that I would much prefer to vote in a person who would have a direct impact on the running of the country EVERY time they are elected. I also think that we would also have a better representation of the true thinking of the country being put forward and parliment reflecting our beliefs and concerns. ATM unless your local MP happens to be a senior member of the government or oppostion, they basically make up numbers for the thinking of a select few. This is not true representation of the people but mearly the selection of somebody who most closely matches your views. The person who is voted to represent you may not agree at all with the line his/her party is taking but unless they have the guts to cross the floor(most likley ruining their potential rise to the top of their party). They mearly make up the numbers. Independants my nature more closely represent their constituants as they can vote for or against what they like/dislike without fear of offending a party elite.

The worst case scenerio is what could happen in this election. A minor interest party having the balance of power. IMO these are the greens and they would be devistating for our country. They are anti everything that Australia does and if they were to have actual power, our mining, farming and god knows what else would be in big trouble. They are not true environmentalists but infact socialists in disguise using people's concern for the environment as a back door into power. They are for govenment interference and regulation in every part of your life and for the restriction of freedom even further than now. Voters beware! Read their policies in detail before potentially voting for them!

So I encourage people to vote independant. IMO the more of them the better. I have voted for the Shooters and fishers party in the senate as they are the most anti green party. I also am a shooter and a fisher and the greens want to ban both fishing and shooting. So if you like to do either DO NOT vote for anyone who could result in the greens holding a balance of power.
Posted by: Arnost

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 19/08/2010 16:05

It is interesting that you say that BW! I never was a fan of Abbott – my view of him was not much better than that of CF. LOL. And I thought Turnbull was a very smart operator – but was a self centred prima donna… And I had lots of respect for Hockey - he’s my local member, and little things, like playing Santa Claus (relatively anonymously) at the local community Xmas party encouraged this.

To drag the story out a bit more: as most here could guess – I’m a fiscal conservative, and the only reason that I started to participate in these forums was to learn about the weather and climate – to convince myself one way or another whether AGW / CC was a problem that demanded the drastic solution that Cap and Trade is… And whilst I will happily admit that the globe has warmed, and even that man is partly to blame for this, CO2 is in my opinion only a minor contributor to this. So when the vote to pass the CPRS was coming up in the Senate – I was one of many thousands (and hundreds of thousands at that) of voters who lobbied the Liberal senators and local representatives not to pass the bill.

Now, Abbott was one of the few Liberals with the guts to take a stance that was demanded by the rank and file [URL=http://www.perthnow.com.au/news/tony-abbott-resigns-from-liberal-front-bench-over-ets-stance/story-e6frg12c-1225804259933] on this issue – and it was only to delay the vote post Hopenhagen... It was not a leadership issue for him personally – which he did not want as he was more than ready to let Hockey have it. But when Hockey wussed out with suggesting conscience votes and such crap, he put himself up as the only principled contender. And the outcome to not support the CPRS will ultimately be one of the best things that has happened to Australia – it was truly a bad policy and [sarc] just see what a huge issue it is this election! [/sarc].

So whilst my opinion of Malcolm has not changed – though he does have a bit my respect as he has also an unwavering and (to him) principled stance on the CPRS, I now think Hockey is a lightweight blowing in the breeze and it is Abbott that now I think is true. And the more I know and read about him… the more this view of him is reinforced. He has convictions, principles and you know exactly where you stand with him. And this in such contrast with most of the other politicians of all persuasions.

(By the way CF, you said he has “shifty eyes” or such – I have been thinking about this. I reckon that he can not tell a lie with a straight face… Think about it).
Posted by: Arnost

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 19/08/2010 16:14

"In my ideal parlimentary system would ban political parties and ALL MPs and senators would be independant."

All you really need to do is to ensure that all members of Parliament can vote independently on day to day issues - but you will still need parties to ensure that confidence is maintained in the leadership, and to ensure passage of critical bills like budgets and supply.

And then if this is so and your member votes against something you support or vice - versa... then at next election you vote for someone who will vote for your interest!

Simple.
Posted by: !SCHUMMY!

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 19/08/2010 20:45

hey everyone i am just wondering if this Labor/Greens policy is true or not, that they are going to ban all recreational fishing in Australia?? I heard it from a few friends today but it is very hard to believe but if its true I know who I'm voting for................LIBERAL....i love fishing!

here is the document that i got shown:

Quote:
MARINE PARKS
I apologise for adding this to the report, but it is so important for the future of fishing. If you want to stop the introduction of Marine Parks that discriminate against recreational anglers across the country, then you have the power.

It is this simple. If you vote for the Greens or labor, fishing as we know it may be lost forever. The Liberal party has put their hand up and backed both recreational and professional fishers. Anglers are not against marine parks, if they are implemented with real science for a positive outcome.

The Greens want recreational fishing GONE. I have waded through the countless press releases and this is the conclusion I have come up with.

A vote for Greens and Labor is a vote against recreational fishing.

NEVER IN A MILLION YEARS DID I THINK I WOULD EVER MAKE A POLITICAL STATEMENT IN ANY MEDIUM, LET ALONE THIS REPORT. I am not telling you how to vote, just informing you of what implications your actions may have.

I am sorry to all the people I have just offended, but at the end of the day the future of fishing is far more important than whether or not you like me.

- Paul Worsteling
Posted by: Cheers

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 19/08/2010 20:52

I'm a fisho & he(Paul Worsteling) is talking CRAP.
Posted by: !SCHUMMY!

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 19/08/2010 21:01

talking crap as in dont vote for them or
talking crap as in not true?

i still havent decided who im voting for either
Posted by: lookin

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 19/08/2010 21:03

crap as in its crap.load of rubbish.as if rec fishing will be stopped.scare mongering for there own interests is all
Posted by: !SCHUMMY!

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 19/08/2010 21:08

ok good glad to know its crap, i couldnt live without fishing, from your past experiences with each party who will be the best to vote for and why? i need help deciding as this is my first election
Posted by: Helen

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 19/08/2010 22:07

Dredging up the broadband issue, both governments are touting this speed and that speed for their national broadband schemes, but what's the point if you don't have the bandwidth to match? Those stuck on Bigpond wireless, like myself, get a max of 10Gb, so incredible speeds are not really going to make a big difference, when it all runs out quicker. frown
Posted by: lookin

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 19/08/2010 23:55

Abbott now planning to cut one billion from pharmacutical benefits scheme. it begins already, just wait and see what happens if the goose actually gets the golden egg.
Posted by: lookin

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 19/08/2010 23:58

shummy ,you vote for who you think will be the best government.I dont think anyone should tell you which one is right for you.Just dont waste your vote it is important. Cheers
Posted by: ant

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 19/08/2010 23:59

The Liberals have always disliked Medicare (and the PBS) as it disrupts the sacred market. If you wnat to have some fun, get some medication you buy for $33 or whatever it is, and do a google search for how much it costs in the US. And then have a think about it.
Posted by: Dave-Wx

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 20/08/2010 00:40

Originally Posted By: Helen
Dredging up the broadband issue, both governments are touting this speed and that speed for their national broadband schemes, but what's the point if you don't have the bandwidth to match? Those stuck on Bigpond wireless, like myself, get a max of 10Gb, so incredible speeds are not really going to make a big difference, when it all runs out quicker. frown


I think thats more a Telstra business problem, rather than a 'Telstra government' problem...as the business itself would set the data limits (and Telstra is probably the slowest out of all ISPs to slowly reach out from our prehistoric download limits)

I would think that download limits will slowly increase over the next 5 or so years to such an extent that they aren't quite as much of a problem as they used to be by the time whichever broadband rollout is done.

I remember 1 gig of Bigpond wireless cost a helluva lot more a few years ago than it does today...so they are slowly but steadily getting there!
Posted by: Cheers

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 20/08/2010 08:04

Originally Posted By: !SCHUMMY!
talking crap as in dont vote for them or
talking crap as in not true?

i still havent decided who im voting for either

CRAP as in untrue.
Posted by: bigwilly

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 20/08/2010 08:20

I wouldn't say it is completely untrue (the fishing issue). What is untrue is that if the Greens get any power that recreational fishing across Australia will be banned.

However the Greens make no secrets about their dislike of groups who take from the environment (hunters and fishers mainly) and even though there mightn't be an outright ban of rec. fishing, things like expansions of Marine Parks (not based on the science) only start the rot, they're the foot in the door the Greens need to begin targeting rec. fishers. They've done it with hunters and shooters, they've done it with industry and they want to do it to fishers.

All of this (particularly the fishing and hunting) is pretty ironic, given the environmental benefit that surrounds the harvesting of feral/exotic animals and fish. I've still got maybe 15kg of venison in the freezer; in the first instance I removed an exotic animal from the environment and secondly it has a minimal carbon footprint with only about 300 food kilometres as opposed to commercial meat which can have up to 1000 if you buy it locally and 10s of thousands if its from overseas.
Posted by: Keith

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 20/08/2010 08:30

This is a good link to help people decide their own preferences in the Lower House. It lists all the candidates by state/seat, and who they represent.

If you get a 'how-to vote' flier you can easily change the 'party line' and write down your own preferences to take to the polling booth.
Posted by: Keith

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 20/08/2010 08:36

Schummy, you must make up your own mind. Don't let politicians or the views of others dictate the terms. Take into account what they say, then evaluate them. You only get one vote. The link in my post immediately above should help.
Posted by: Cheers

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 20/08/2010 08:52

If you are worried about the Greens policies then put them last.
Posted by: MikeM

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 20/08/2010 08:54

i'll be putting all of them last, no one is worth voting for this year. They all think they are just it.
Posted by: adam17

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 20/08/2010 08:55

There was a good list in Today's local paper in their election coverage section, it tabled the list of "promises" from Labor and Liberal for caparison, it sets out that Labor is promising more than the Liberals, however, if history is anything to go by, Labor Promised a lot of things last election, and delivered very little, one more day to go. One more day.. Can't wait till its over. I was watching a little bit of Insight on SBS2 last night - well as best that I could given the cloud cover interrupting my Digital Signal, and the general consensus is that both parties have not brought anything significant to the table, for fear of being able to actually deliver, and as we've seen the cam pain over the last few weeks has been based on negativity, sadly much like the USA, this works, but it was also pointed out that a Victory by either party isn't going to be as glamorous because of the way the campaigns were operated.

States like WA, NT, SA and Tasmiania have been left out almost completely because the major marginal seats resides in QLD and NSW, from where we are seated, we stand to win either way, any money spent up this way would be welcomed with open arms. The only question is, who to vote for, I suspect that Liberal will come out ahead, as there is still alot of bitterness on Gillard coup.
Posted by: Cheers

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 20/08/2010 09:06

And Labor delivered very little,Thats absolute CRAP mate.
Posted by: adam17

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 20/08/2010 09:13

Well, they delivered NBN to a couple of homes and businesses, a few house fires etc.. Oh.. we got a few new boats too. smile
Posted by: Helen

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 20/08/2010 09:20

There's a good piece from Garry Linnell, Editor of the Daily Telegraph: A Government that’s lost its way

He makes some very valid points which to me, doesn't appear to be biased.

If the Liberals do happen to snare the win, then Labor, if they play their cards right, could be a real force to be reckoned with at the next election.

Keith, thanks for that link, now I know who the local Labor candidate is, even though this area has not heard "boo" from him... not even a poster on a power pole!!!
Posted by: Andy Double U

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 20/08/2010 09:23

Originally Posted By: Cheers
And Labor delivered very little,Thats absolute CRAP mate.


Labor's first election term... FAIL!

Here are some extracts from Rudd's launch speech of 2007: "We will establish a Petrol Price Commissioner and a national inquiry into grocery prices ... establish Australia's first national emissions trading scheme ... build a state of the art, fibre optic to the node, National Broadband Network ... GP SuperClinics around Australia ... providing for every Australian secondary school student in years 9 to 12 with access to their own computer at school."

And there was this knock-out line: "I am saying loud and clear that this sort of reckless spending must stop."

So how did all that work out?

FuelWatch? Dropped.

Grocery Watch? Scrapped.

Emissions trading? Shelved.

Broadband? A $4.7 billion promise in 2007 has blown into a $43 billion scheme today.

SuperClinics? Just three built.

Computers in schools? Delayed, and the overall cost now doubled to $2 billion.

How about that "reckless spending" that would stop?

Panicked by the recession that never hit, Labor spent $1.5 billion on shoddy "free" insulation, and now, with about 200 houses burnt, must spend up to $1 billion to pull it out or make it safe.

It's also spending $16 billion on a school building scheme so colossally rorted that between $2 billion and $6 billion has been wasted.


Oh and we shouldn't forget about the health promise, you know the one where Rudd promised to wrestle control of the health system away from the states, but somehow paid over another $2 billion and still didn't get it... How does that work!?

Fact - Labor completely bungled its first term. What makes anyone think another one would be any better with the same captains at the wheel? Swan needs to go, dummy spitting Rudd in a front bench position will destabilise the party. Roxon is a point scorer pure and simple, I haven't seen a decent policy yet. Gillard is the best performer and has done OK, but is still responsible for a horribly rorted BER scheme.

Re: The Greens and Recreational Fishing.

The Greens aren't out to ban Recreational Fishing per se`. What they are doing however is closing off areas which are worth fishing. In Moreton Bay they say they have only closed off a small percentage of it whilst leaving other areas open. Fishing in those areas is like hunting in the desert. You're not going to find much, if anything. It's a policy to discourage recreational fishing and it will hurt the industry, but business sense has never been a Green's strong point. Stuffing up real environments with ideological policies is their strong suit...
Posted by: Cheers

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 20/08/2010 09:32

AND lets not forget what Tony NUTTER Abbort has done:
A big,very big supporter of work NO choices
Put S*%T on the late great Bernie Banton.
Was involved big time in putting Pauline Hanson in prison.
(I wasn't a supporter of PH but it was very dirty)
He made a big deal about a child that ended up not being his.(WHAT A FOOL)
Was going to become a priest-The MAD MONK.
The truth of the matter is he is just a big wanker.
Posted by: Andy Double U

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 20/08/2010 09:45

Originally Posted By: Cheers
AND lets not forget what Tony NUTTER Abbort has done:
A big,very big supporter of work NO choices
Put S*%T on the late great Bernie Banton.
Was involved big time in putting Pauline Hanson in prison.
(I wasn't a supporter of PH but it was very dirty)
He made a big deal about a child that ended up not being his.(WHAT A FOOL)
Was going to become a priest-The MAD MONK.
The truth of the matter is he is just a big wanker.


Now now Cheers, you and I both know that you are grabbing a lot of straws there. All of your 'points' are nullified by the fact it is the party who chooses the leader. If you think the Coalition is going to let Tony walk all over them with his more extreme views then you've got another thing coming. Remember it was only six weeks ago that Kevin Rudd was the Prime Minister of this country and Labor axed him because they knew he wasn't going to be able to deliver them back into power... My only regret, not seeing him booted from office by the public, but by greedy, power hungry, faceless Labor party power brokers. Such a shame...
Posted by: ant

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 20/08/2010 09:49

Tony Abbott often claims that he doesn't let his religious views affect his policy and decision making. And yet, when he was Health Minister, he saw to it that the abortion pill was not made available here. He did it very sneakily, too.
Posted by: Cheers

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 20/08/2010 09:50

So you think someone like this should be PM.
You must be kidding.
Posted by: Cheers

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 20/08/2010 10:02

The LNP has a guy(BOY) standing for the seat of Longman.
Wyatt Roy
He is 20 years old.
It's the first time he can vote in a Federal election.
You must be kidding
Posted by: adam17

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 20/08/2010 10:17

Originally Posted By: Cheers
The LNP has a guy(BOY) standing for the seat of Longman.
Wyatt Roy
He is 20 years old.
It's the first time he can vote in a Federal election.
You must be kidding


Now now, that's age discrimination, you can be a crook, no matter how old you are.
Posted by: Cheers

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 20/08/2010 10:19

I will pay that one LOL
Posted by: Flooding rains

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 20/08/2010 10:22

I am starting to ponder the fact that Tony Abbott may be our next PM. SHUDDERS!!!! Ok so the Labor party may not be that great but Julia Gillard I reckon would be one of our greatest PM's. I could hack Hockey as PM, or Turnbull (only just) but Abbott, is this the man to put on the world stage?

I am even more sick of the little clones that get around in puny Pine and garden gnome Hunt.
Posted by: Arnost

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 20/08/2010 11:05

Quote:
"But Julia Gillard I reckon would be one of our greatest PM's"

The left spun up Obama the same way, gave him a Nobel prize before he even took office as everyone was convinced they were looking at the greatest American president ever... Hmmmm. Reality turned out a bit different. And I suspec that reality will turn out a bit different for Julia as she's cut from the same mould.

She is an opportunistic, power at all costs and by all means politician.


Just look at this - she's a behind in the polls and so she goes and does a 180 on the BIGGEST issue in this election:

"In an election-eve interview with The Australian, the Prime Minister revealed she would view victory tomorrow as a mandate for a carbon price..." linky And just like Rudd won last election under false pretences by posturing as being a conservative "Howard Lite", Julia's on the way to doing the same - winning on more false pretences...

I ask in turn - is this who you really want Australia to be associated with?

The only reason that the left is in such a kerfuffle over Abbott is that deep down he's a principled person who they can't bribe and corrupt. And the lefies just can't handle that! All they can do is criticise him on what he said 30 years ago, or said in support of his leadership.

The key difference between the two can be summed up by comparing the adds..

How many Liberal adds have there been picking on Julia's early past. I think they you will agree that they have all been focused on her performance in parliament over the last 3 years... Which is what you have to asses (and not Obamaesque hopeychange)!

And then look at the "positive" Labor adds - a photoshopped pic of Abbott with his eyes pointing in different directions - screaming he will bring back workchoices as some sort of fact?

FFS - Abbott voted against a lot of Workchoices in (Liberal) cabinet for going too far! And that is a FACT.

Honestly ask yourself what do you think that Julia would have done with ammunition like this against here oponent? An atheist, lesbian, communist...!



Our glorious leader! LOL!


Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 20/08/2010 11:06



FR , I have had a feeling that the LNP will get in on the weekend for a few weeks now and that hasn't changed. I'm like you. It is Abbott himself that I can't stomach but if he gets in I will have to live with it. That's life...........
Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 20/08/2010 11:08

Originally Posted By: Arnost

She is an opportunistic, power at all costs and by all means politician.


It's funny that I see Abbott in exactly the same light.
Posted by: Flooding rains

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 20/08/2010 11:10

How has Obama been different in reality? He has done many good things with extremely limited resources. Massive debt and 2 wars to begin with then a GFC to make things worse. He hasn't even really had a chance.

You guys go all with all your BLAH BLAH.......unfortunately you may be the happy ones come Sunday morning.
Posted by: Keith

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 20/08/2010 11:20

Bob Carr looked as 'ugly' as Abbott (if not worse) but it's not the party leader that makes the policies, no?

I don't think it's good to vote on what the party leader looks like.
Posted by: Vinnie

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 20/08/2010 12:04

This election will be like the episode of South Park

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Douche_and_Turd

We could end up with a hung parliament like what happened here in WA in the last election !
Posted by: Dale Small

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 20/08/2010 12:15

Personally I'd like to hang the both of them.. but good luck tomorrow lol.
Posted by: Keith

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 20/08/2010 12:20

I don't know when the last time was that we had a hung federal parliament; it's certainly not been recently. Apparently Keating went to sleep on election eve (1992?),only to find that at the end of the next day he'd won a substantial victory, after he thought he'd lose.

State government issues in western Sydney are likely to see a 'punishment factor' dished out, as was apparent in the Penrith by-election...assuming of course that voter sentiment hasn't changed. The people of NW Sydney have been punished long and hard in transport matters. Even the local council once struck a higher rate for people in Kings Langley whom it assumed were 'silvertails'. I don't know if that's still current rating policy, though.

I think a hung parliament this time is unlikely, but whoever wins is unlikely to have much of a majority. If so, it will make both major parties ensure they keep their performance up to what the people want of their representatives. Next time around will see a substantial win for the 'winner', whoever that may be.
Posted by: Keith

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 20/08/2010 17:53

Well, here's something original. Harvey Norman's other half in business, Domayne, is putting out ads in red and black..a la Labor Party.

Domayne must think the ALP's color scheme is effective. Funny colors for capitalists!
Posted by: Keith

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 20/08/2010 18:09

Hung parliaments:

The last one was in 1940 (Menzies by one seat).
Posted by: Arnost

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 20/08/2010 18:24

CF,

For someone who I think (without really knowing you - but said with all sincerity) a is really smart bloke, I am absolutely fascinated with the vitriol you dish out to Abbott...

Your reaction would be very understandable IF you laid out the same to the oposition... but it's very one sided. Have you actually done any research to confirm your bias? For example:

linky 1
linky 2

Now, 6pm the day before - the result is way too close to hazzard a guess on the way things are going to turn out tomorrow.

Is that not something absolutely amazing? Abbott took on the "poison chalice" Leader of the Opposion role in Novemeber last year where EVERYONE - including the Lib/Nat party members - KNEW that under his leadership he was going the be decimated at the next election... What do you think were the chances of him winning then? But he did it becasue it was the RIGHT thing to do - and the grass roots DEMANDED it. No one else stood up for them...

Now, he may loose tomorrow - but even if he will, he has already defeated three major Labor figures. Rudd is off to the UN, Gillard will be left lying gutted in the ditch within 6 months wether she wins or loses, and the only substantive Labor figure (Tanner) has quit.

But you know - the Green vote is up double to last election. Most polls allocate Green preferences 80/20 Labor's way - as was last election. I just have this niggling little feeling that this increase is driven by people who intend their vote to be a protest - and will vote Green and then have their preference exhaust through the dross on the ballot. If this happens - Labor is dead.

And if this happens, then maybe, just maybe, we will have a shot at riding out what very likely will be the real tsunami of the financial crisis yet to come. And given the new Senate will not sit till July next year - then the Libs can pass a lot of remedial legislation through (though unfortunately Abbott will be true to his word and not pass much needed workplace reform) reversing the excesses still in play, and hopefully set Australia up for the storm to come.


Posted by: Arnost

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 20/08/2010 19:12

Sorry that this is a bit late Helen...

Quote:
Dredging up the broadband issue, both governments are touting this speed and that speed for their national broadband schemes, but what's the point if you don't have the bandwidth to match? Those stuck on Bigpond wireless, like myself, get a max of 10Gb, so incredible speeds are not really going to make a big difference, when it all runs out quicker.





Whether either policy gets implemented - your speed should increase. Both policies will create an equivalent broadband "spine" to a node... Probably the nearest major regional centre. This spine will carry the Tbps type volume.

Where the policies differ is that from here:

Labor promises the optical fibre to your doorstep

Whereas the Lib/NP plan will allow private enterprise to take it from there. If you are near the node - probably fibre is the go (i.e. business if they want it can then at their expense extend it if the local telco can't do it - with doctors surgeries etc being subsidised). If you are a fair distance away, you should have a wireless connection of at least 12Mbps.

If you are extremely remote - you will be satellite linked... both policies equivalent.

I would however note, that the 12Mbps speeds are that what is available with current technology. For example it was announced that wireless speeds of 100Mbps and more are on the horizon with WiMax2: http://www.engadget.com/2010/08/15/wimax-2-standard-and-its-theoretical-1gbps-downloads-to-be-fin/

And they don't require wire in ground or on powerpoles. And you can stream hi-def movies to your iPad.

And besidesm 12Mbps will allow you to download the entire Encyclopaedia Brittanica in about 5 minutes. And that's not really slow! linky
Posted by: Helen

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 20/08/2010 19:58

Thanks for the reply Arnost, very much appreciated. It still doesn't address the lack of bandwith though. We're capped at 10GB which only allows me to stream four 1 hour shows per month along with some gaming (for my daughter) and some net browsing... usually we're capped in week three of our month and then have to survive on 64kbps or less (usually less) between three PCs. Forget catching up on TV episodes we've missed, that's just a pipedream out here. LOL

According to a statement on Aussie Broadband's site, here in the Mid North of SA, we're amongst the worst for services. I've put in my register of interest for WiMax, but like with ADSL, I'm not really holding my breath (towns either side of us have ADSL2) as our little town has an elderly and not-too-computer-savvy (or interested) population.

So for now, we'll just pay a huge price for very little service whilst our city cousing start looking at 500GB/1TB plans for the same cost. frown Yep, I know it's a telco issue, but until we get some real competition out here, Tel$tra has us by the short and curlies. Still, that the price we pay for peace, quiet, no street lights and no neighbours... recklon I can live with it... just. wink
Posted by: Mick10

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 20/08/2010 20:03

our local seat of herbert is going to be a cliffhanger. wouldnt be surprised to see counting in this seat take up most of next week.
our other seat, dawson has thrown in some fists this week, last weekend labor runner mike brunker king hit another bloke, claimed it was in self defence of course. its a real fight in dawson!!
my decision has come down to the local candidates not the party leaders.
herbert has had more funding money promised to it than any other seat in the nation, $500million in promises made. National highway repairs and motorway extensions, new infrustructure like a cruise/navy ship terminal, new entertainment centre. flooding works, health improvements at our local hospital, which despite being one of the newest in the state its also the worse performing. we have had a smorgasboard of pollies coming and going spending the $$$$$$.
Posted by: Keith

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 20/08/2010 20:11

In my local seat (Greenway, a marginal seat; it was Parramatta last time), there are 11 candidates. I have slightly changed the order of preference for the party I intend to support. At least we don't have the Australian Sex party. There are two independents not aligned to any political party, but I don't know much about them though you could probably tell from their position in the party 'line'.

When I first moved here (1977), the sitting Labor member, Mr John Armytage, was living right over the road.
Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 20/08/2010 20:12

You seem almost offended that I don't support your view Arnost. I respect your choice. Try to respect mine. After all I can assure you I am not the only person here that doesn't like the guy. It seems that your reference to my "reasonable" intelligence implies that it should mean I support the LNP which borders on offensive.

If he gets in he gets in. If he doesn't he doesn't. I can live with either outcome but have a preference for one over the other. Either way life will go on after the results are known. As I have voted for both parties in the past 14 years or so I won't suffer the pain that the hardliners in each side of politics suffer once their party is defeated.

As far as Gillard and Abbott are concerned which ever one loses they are still assured of a bright future elsewhere in the world outside of politics. Mark Latham is the biggest oinker ever to grace the floors of parliament and he still seems to be earning a good living ( perhaps not one of integrity however) . I'm certain that two far more intelligent individuals like Jony Gillott will do just fine and life will go on.

I have a small amount of vitriol for Rudd too but I haven't bothered to post it here as it would merely ignite a fire and be misread as justification to those opposite. The vast majority of Australians still don't properly understand what transpired the day Kevin Rudd was sent packing. Gillard is merely a consequence of events, not their cause. I personally believe that "IF" (and it's a BIG IF) she gets in she will take the country in the right direction and labor on to better things. That is why I am voting there. I trust her. I was getting pretty peeved with Rudd in the lead up to his removal.

Whilst I want the NBN, the two big killers for me with Abbott are the scrapping of the mining tax and the paid maternity (read welfare) scheme. People should plan for a family. Not use my taxes to do it. Once the scheme is in it is in for good. There is no going back and cuts to the PBS , health and education will come thick and fast if it blows out (as predicted). I wonder what medicines while be cut from the PBS in his $billion cut? My ventolin? My father's diabetes meds?

They are the conservatives and they CUT. Whilst middle Australia suffers they wind back basic services and have a history of doing just that. It doesn't affect them because they are wealthy already so they sit back and gloat about a surplus whilst average Australians go backwards. That is what ultimately did Howard in.

The mining industry whilst on the one hand has helped the economy, it has also in many ways helped send certain areas backwards and this is being ignored by the LNP and their voters. When mineral exports boom the dollar soars and as a consequence tourism (which this city is dependent on) and pretty much every other exporter suffers. So it makes perfect sense that when the mining sector booms that it pays it's share of "super" profits tax. Anyone in the industry with an ounce of honesty will tell you that the threat to suspend exploration was rot. These companies make truly phenomenol profits on something that belongs to all of us and should be ashamed at their dishonest smearing regarding the tax.

These are the main reasons that I have locked in my vote. then there is the smearing of the plain packaging on tobacco products. The LNP's failure to acknowledge the severity of the GFC and by Abbott's own tongue ,claims that it ran only 8 weeks .

...and you wonder why I don't have anything nice to add?
Posted by: Arnost

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 20/08/2010 20:12

Cheers Helen,

Though I'm no expert (and so anyone can correct) you should get an improved service regardless of who gets in - assuming promisses are kept. It's the size of the "pipe" to your are (node) that is the limitting factor. If the taxpayers pay for the increase in capacity to your area - I'm guessing laying optical fibre rather than depending on copper, then speeds and capacity will improve. And once you have spare capacity - competition should serve to provide more speed at cheaper prices.
Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 20/08/2010 20:28

Originally Posted By: Andy Double U

Broadband? A $4.7 billion promise in 2007 has blown into a $43 billion scheme today.



This is misleading. The NBN now is a far bigger project than was annouced in 2007. They are two completely different projects. Not a cost blowout as you hint at. The one announced in 2007 was a similar scheme to what the coalition is proposing now. It rode on telstra's network but they wanted to continue to charge rental to the other telcos.

Somewhere along the way telstra decided it wanted to keep its monopoly (which it will under Aboott's proposal) and wouldn't play ball and so the government changed direction and moved away from riding on telstra's framework. The new proposal is a complete roll out of a separate service. Hence the different costings.
Posted by: Helen

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 20/08/2010 20:32

I should also mention that fibre optics have been (for at least 5 years) laid to our exchange... it's just not been hooked up. frown
Posted by: ant

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 20/08/2010 21:19

Well said, Cold Front. And yes, while they "reward" the well off, they punish the poor. It's always been the Liberal way. So rich mothers get more largesse courtesy of the taxpayer, but things that help ordinary people, they'll be cut. I think it's obscene.
Posted by: Arnoldnut

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 20/08/2010 21:48

My brother said it for me in the Melb Age Wesburn: fringe town takes centre stage
‘They are all the same — there’s no difference between the policies'
And he is one of those having the other house in town as well as the nice house on the hill in Wesburn ....and a few investment properties ....and he ain't impressed with neither.

They have all been such a weak showing of Statemanship, if you like ....more like a footy club committee .....lets not upset anybody hey! ....all weak as the proverbial.

The Grech affair was how we ended up with Abbott ...let's not forget. Mr Abbott I won't even speak of as he makes me crawl, he and his cohorts/keepers.
Posted by: lookin

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 20/08/2010 22:41

well said coldfront
Posted by: Cheers

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 21/08/2010 00:07

I can't understand why people would vote for Abbort.
He and the LNP party are such silver spoon low life scum.
Most of us are workers & don't forget that.
It's funny how you get people who act like they were born silver spoons in the mouth
but were born with plastic spoons.
They forget were they come from & how they got to were they they are.
They don't care about anyone else'
Even their kids or grand kids.
They are so far up them selves it's not funny.
Don't let this silver tail get in.
Your kids & grandkids will thank you for it.
It will mean that you are not a low life like the others who vote for him.
Think about your kids & or grand kids.
At lest you owe them that.
Posted by: Seabreeze

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 21/08/2010 00:47

Originally Posted By: Cheers
I can't understand why people would vote for Abbort.
He and the LNP party are such silver spoon low life scum.
Most of us are workers & don't forget that.
It's funny how you get people who act like they were born silver spoons in the mouth
but were born with plastic spoons.
They forget were they come from & how they got to were they they are.
They don't care about anyone else'
Even their kids or grand kids.
They are so far up them selves it's not funny.
Don't let this silver tail get in.
Your kids & grandkids will thank you for it.
It will mean that you are not a low life like the others who vote for him.
Think about your kids & or grand kids.
At lest you owe them that.

Abbott wink
As for the rest of the post, especially the last half, very judgmental and irrational.......
Posted by: Cheers

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 21/08/2010 07:34

Originally Posted By: Freeze
Originally Posted By: Cheers
I can't understand why people would vote for Abbort.
He and the LNP party are such silver spoon low life scum.
Most of us are workers & don't forget that.
It's funny how you get people who act like they were born silver spoons in the mouth
but were born with plastic spoons.
They forget were they come from & how they got to were they they are.
They don't care about anyone else'
Even their kids or grand kids.
They are so far up them selves it's not funny.
Don't let this silver tail get in.
Your kids & grandkids will thank you for it.
It will mean that you are not a low life like the others who vote for him.
Think about your kids & or grand kids.
At lest you owe them that.

Abbott wink
As for the rest of the post, especially the last half, very judgmental and irrational.......

No'no'no it's just the truth
Posted by: Arnoldnut

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 21/08/2010 07:36

here is the fly in the ointment with Abbott
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/08/08/2976836.htm?section=justin
Everyone nmay think it sour grapes with me but australia doesn't need our social welfare run by catholic orgs.
they have a huge grasp on our schools and welfare systems and use that system to conceal their own shortcomings.
I'm one who wishes to take centaCare to supreme court for this but the justice system is to gutless.
And that is the problem we have .....Abbott get's in it will be worse.
Sorry couldn't let it go without saying something ...we have enough islamic terrorism from without .....we don't need this christian terrorism within our system. They need to be gone if our social welfare system is to come of age.


Posted by: Arnoldnut

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 21/08/2010 07:44

As for election day itself ....I couldn't ask for better.
Woke at 7am to find my wife has already left to do her bit as a polling officer /whatever.
Sheindoors won't be back 'til at least 9:30 tonite ....heeehaaa!
Posted by: lizzie

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 21/08/2010 08:40

Originally Posted By: Cheers
I can't understand why people would vote for Abbort.
He and the LNP party are such silver spoon low life scum.
Most of us are workers & don't forget that.
It's funny how you get people who act like they were born silver spoons in the mouth
but were born with plastic spoons.
They forget were they come from & how they got to were they they are.
They don't care about anyone else'
Even their kids or grand kids.
They are so far up them selves it's not funny.
Don't let this silver tail get in.
Your kids & grandkids will thank you for it.
It will mean that you are not a low life like the others who vote for him.
Think about your kids & or grand kids.
At lest you owe them that.


It's fine that you can't understand why people would vote for Abbott...some can't understand why others will vote for Gillard..
...but that statement to me, is a trifle offensive, and very sweeping.

It suggests that anyone of 'means' is uncaring and undeserving of their achievement and wealth. Sure, some people are simply born into it and others achieve it off the backs and hardwork of others...but how about the ones who actually work for it? The ones who don't sit back and expect others to provide for them instead of making an effort?
Do you begrudge say, a Doctor a Lawyer an Engineer, for their (relative) wealth? They train, study and work hard to achieve it.
Where anyone 'comes from' should have no bearing on their ability to think and consider their own vote.


To claim that they 'don't even care about their own kids', is frankly, outrages. All these politicians, from any side, are still people, just normal people with families when they go home.
One could say that at least they are standing up for what they believe in rather than just sitting back whinging.

I will never get everyone to agree wih how I vote, and my political thinking...what I do wish for, however, is that everyone actually thinks about their vote.
To say I vote a particular way because my parents do, or I vote this way 'because of where I come from', to me is a waste if it has not been carefully considered.

So today I will go and quite proudly place my vote...and Cheers...if that makes me 'a low life '...

So be it.
Posted by: Arnoldnut

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 21/08/2010 08:47

I've used that "Don't care about our kids!" often when arguing about this economy based on land/house values.
"Leaving the debt to our kids!" is maybe what is meant there ....is with me anyway.
Posted by: Flooding rains

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 21/08/2010 08:50

The Herbert Electorate has had both leaders here like 10 times, most spending promises in any electorate and is one of the closest run races yet there is a sense of nobody care. No one gives a stuff and its the same almost everywhere (cept in these forums wink ).
Posted by: lizzie

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 21/08/2010 08:54

Originally Posted By: Arnoldnut
I've used that "Don't care about our kids!" often when arguing about this economy based on land/house values.
"Leaving the debt to our kids!" is maybe what is meant there ....is with me anyway.


Very true Mike...
But which party will not leave any debt?
The way in which our society is heading, with the ever increasing demands and expectations, that costs...
Posted by: Arnoldnut

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 21/08/2010 09:06

Greece is learning it's lessons on greed and long term govt corruption ....be it systemic in their case.
The yanks go into a japanese style recovery and we will still sit on our hands.
We need to loose this blurred vision of the world ...I see the penny is starting to drop about a few things....not least sustainable population.
Sustainable population doesn't work with this pyramid/ponzi system we call our economy ....I think everyone can understand that.
Posted by: Seabreeze

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 21/08/2010 10:49

I've done my part for today. smile Hopefully, after today Abbott will be PM.
I also decided to number all 84 boxes on the Senate ballot. Was starting to regret that decision at around 50, lol, but I completed it.
Posted by: Keith

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 21/08/2010 10:59

I'm not sure that I understood preferences in the Senate enough to know how numbering each box would work so I just numbered above the line..and I was in a hurry (sort of) anyway. I thought there'd be a queue a mile long but not so.
Posted by: SBT

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 21/08/2010 11:11

Well the green form had 4 choices Liberal, Labour, Family First, Greens so it went in the box marked but I had to think long and hard and the libs ended up with my vote as the lesser of 4 evils. But the big white one had a one mark in the Fishing and Lifestyle Party. Last election we managed 10% of the vote in Herbet so this time I am hoping we at least double that and send a strong message to the Greens to keep their bloody hands off the GBR or there will be trouble. I still firmly believe that the Greens have a place helping Australia - at about 10 to the acre and 6foot down in really poor country.
Posted by: lizzie

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 21/08/2010 12:04

Originally Posted By: Freeze
I've done my part for today. smile Hopefully, after today Abbott will be PM.
I also decided to number all 84 boxes on the Senate ballot. Was starting to regret that decision at around 50, lol, but I completed it.


Me too Ezz!

I must have stood there for half an hour...even one of the Polling Officers wandered over to see if I needed any help!
Posted by: KevD

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 21/08/2010 14:40

Voted Green and proud smile A voice of sanity in a corrupt political system.
Posted by: AaronD

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 21/08/2010 15:01

me too BNE smile
Posted by: Helen

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 21/08/2010 16:25

Voted for Liberal here, as did hubby... and funnily enough, the only representative outside the polling booth, was the one for Rowan Ramsey... not Labour, Family First or Green reps here... not even their posters. grin
Posted by: Shayne

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 21/08/2010 20:39

gawd..waited in line for an hour to vote, was so sore at the end i just put a 1 above the line on the white one for one nation and numbered the greens last on the green one..

at least whatever happens.. bureaucracy wins..in the end..
Posted by: adam17

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 21/08/2010 20:57

Gawd it is so close so far in the house of reps labour looks pretty sad with over half the votes counted so far it looks like its down to the wire.
Posted by: lizzie

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 21/08/2010 21:07

At this stage, I think a Hung Parliament is likely...
Posted by: oldmate_99

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 21/08/2010 21:40

First year I voted against Liberal, only cause of the local guy is a douchebag. I wont vote Labour but just couldn't vote for the Liberal guy, so my vote went to Greens then others with Labour last.

I am liking the hung Parliament, that should keep them on their toes. We wont know the outcome til Monday or Tuesday after postal votes and recounts. tired
Posted by: lizzie

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 21/08/2010 21:46

Yeah, and with several seats so very close, the re-counts will go on for weeks!

...and the huge number of pre-polls this time around.

Hung Parliament would certainly be interesting...
Posted by: Shayne

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 21/08/2010 22:07

the Australian Sex Party would be loving the idea of a hung parliament..almost ready to pop their corks at any time i bet.. wink
Posted by: ColdsnapIII

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 21/08/2010 22:35

Gee, we are very well 'hung down under' aren't we.
Posted by: Mick10

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 21/08/2010 23:16

wow, really close one hey.
locally the liberal candidate looks like taking the seat of herbert. been liberal hands now for about 15 or so years.
dawson has had a massive swing to the libs. rather surprising there.
Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 21/08/2010 23:27

Not really Mick. Brunker is a clown. At the moment the ABC have it LNP 73 and ALP 70. Predicting a 3 seat majority to the LNP. So possible they will form government.
Posted by: lookin

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 22/08/2010 00:46

fox news has it 73 each with 3 ind and 1 green
Posted by: lookin

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 22/08/2010 00:50

cant wait to see who the best crawler out of gillard and abbott is.just hope these ind and greens think long and hard before jumping on board with either party
Posted by: Cheers

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 22/08/2010 04:40

Looks like Australia is becoming a bunch of six fingered backward hicks.
Welcome to the 1950's
Posted by: lizzie

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 22/08/2010 08:43

That statement is so cynical, Cheers...

Whilst it may not be the ideal situation, it IS how the country appears to have voted - equally between the two major parties.

Still so way too close to call really, what with the large number of pre-polls...
Posted by: Arnoldnut

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 22/08/2010 09:09

What a fizzer!
'Pinball politics' would be the best way to describe what going to occur in our houses of parliament until another election.
Hung parliaments can certainly can be damaging to the country as a whole and I hope these guys have the maturity to properly understand this.
....but looking back over the outbursts and accusations laid in the last few years, I doubt they can do that.
Posted by: Andy Double U

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 22/08/2010 09:19

Originally Posted By: Cheers
Looks like Australia is becoming a bunch of six fingered backward hicks.
Welcome to the 1950's


laughlaughlaugh If that is the descriptor you use for those who voted out one of the most incompetent governments in history, then I wonder how you would describe those who voted for the ALP to get back in. I notice CF hasn't condemmed your comments yet...

Now, who wants to see Bob Katter as speaker of the house? grin
Posted by: Cheers

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 22/08/2010 09:58

Now you are lying ADU.
Australia has done the best in the world to survive the GFC.
The world has acknowledge this.
Who was incharge,the ALP.

If Abbort gets in I better purchase a horse & cart + making sure
I don't run over anyone with two heads.
Posted by: Ruckle

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 22/08/2010 10:53

What if they had been in charge for the 10 years prior to the GFC and we were therefore (naturally) already broke? What would they have done then?
Posted by: lizzie

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 22/08/2010 11:04

Originally Posted By: Cheers

Australia has done the best in the world to survive the GFC.
The world has acknowledge this.
Who was incharge,the ALP.



Australia only survived the GFC because our banking sector did not get exposed to the mess that the European and US banks.
Our trade figures were still strong through-out all that, particularly mining.
ALP were just minding shop.

That's my thoughts, anyway.
Posted by: Dazza_XL

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 22/08/2010 11:16

It'll be interesting to see what happens in the coming days.
But I do like this comment from Bob Katter.
Originally Posted By: ABC News
"I can't speak for the other independents, but as far as I'm concerned the gong goes to whoever to allow rural Australia to survive.

"We've had 12 years of LNP [Liberal National Party] government - they smashed us into the ground and the ALP government in three years hasn't restored anything.


I reckon he's spot on...
Posted by: lizzie

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 22/08/2010 11:21

The fact that Bob Katter is billed as 'Independant' is laughable.

He is a Union/Labour lapdog from way back.

Fact is, at the moment, the Coalition is over 400,000 votes in front on a two party prefered basis, but because of our ridiculous preference system, that will put them slightly behind, even when the majority has voted otherwise.
Posted by: SBT

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 22/08/2010 11:24

Australia survived the GFC because once again the Liberal/National governments reined in spending and created a surplus that was held onto for just such an occasion. The labor government is akin to your spendthrift uncle who likes bright shinny toys and cannot be disuaded from spending huge amounts on rubbish. The $900.00 Plasma TV handout is a case in point. This along with our more than adequate banking laws has stopped the Ponzi Schemes that the US Banks oragsmed themselves into with the ridiculous Prime housing loans. I am not a fan of either party, Labour or Liberal. Labor got exactly what they needed, a savage smack in the nose and it should be a wake up call to them to change their policies and start giving the people of Australia what they want. Stong government by a strong leader and Mrs Ronald McDonald isn't it. I voted for teh Fishing and Lifestyle party because NONE of the 4 lower house candidates or parties has any hope of attracting my vote. It is a pity that an independent didn't stand.
Posted by: Flooding rains

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 22/08/2010 11:29

QLD did its best to try and get rid of Labor cause they all took into account state Labor and how Krudd was kicked out. Thing is state is state not federal and Rudd's approval rating was plummeting anyway here, so he gets kicked out and people who might not have voted for him anyway are outraged. Absolute crap. As a result we let some Ewan Jones clown get in and a 20 year old liberal clone (shudders at the thoughts of more Pynes and Hunts) get in.
Posted by: markm9

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 22/08/2010 11:29

The two party preferred is 50.68 ALP and 49.32 LNP.

If the seat total ends 73 each, you would think any deal done would have to be with the ALP.

This looks like it is going to be a long drawn out affair, maybe back to the polls.
Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 22/08/2010 11:38

No-one has won anything. Whichever party takes power (I'm guessing the LNP) they will be held to ransom for their entire term by Katter, a green and 3 former Nationals. They are former nationals for a reason.

Expect the country to stagnate until the GG says enough is enough and we all go back to the polls.

The result in the polls shows that people voted on state issues from where I stand. Qld and NSW will see LNP government at their next state election. That Abbott lost ground in Vic and Sth Australia highlights that many people don't like him. That the swing to the greens was more than double that of the LNP merely highlights it further.

Now if he wants to work with the indepenents the first thing he will need to do is dump Julie Bishop into a minor role. He already knows she has a major image problem which is why she was completely removed from the election campaign. Considering she is his deputy it is remarkable how she was swept out of the public eye for 6 weeks.

Interesting times ahead.


Here's the big question. If the ALP is to become the opposition, who will lead it?
Posted by: Mick10

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 22/08/2010 11:38

not sure on the exact legalities of it, hopefully someone on here might know.
but i am sure the GG has a say in who gets to govern on a hung parliament aswell doesnt she? but again, as markm mentioned, the possibility of another election is not off the cards. imo, that would favour the LNP.
Posted by: Flooding rains

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 22/08/2010 11:41

Oh and another thing, Maxine Mckew got kicked out by a tennis player after she got rid of Howard.....
Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 22/08/2010 11:42

I'm not sure that it would Mick. The leaks in the second week of the ALP's campaign coupled with state issues in NSW and Qld cost it dearly. Even in WA where there was predicted to be the biggest swings it didn't play out as forecast. So the leaks wouldn't factor in in a new poll and those that protest voted and today are asking "what have I done" might actually swing back away from the greens to labor. After all they don't like Abbott. So it's not that clear cut.

Either way, I'd prefer a majority government from the ALP or the LNP than a hung one that won't progress this nation anywhere for the next 3 years.

FR, McKew did nothing in the seat after she outed Howard. That's why she is gone. She has no-one to blame but herself. She will regret that dribble that she said last night in years to come but it ain't that unusual from a deposed polly. Every side of parliament has those types in its ranks.
Posted by: Keith

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 22/08/2010 11:43

Yes. Maxine was only in for a hit and a giggle.
Posted by: Keith

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 22/08/2010 11:45

I thought Katter was an ex-National Party member?
Posted by: Mick10

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 22/08/2010 11:50

yeah katter was ex national. been indepedent for past 10 or so years.
maxine will probably get a job back at the ABC, sure she will be right!!
Posted by: Keith

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 22/08/2010 11:56

This quote from the latest Nine News election coverage:
Bad blood between The Nationals and the three country-based independents in federal parliament will make it impossible for the coalition to form government, Labor parliamentary secretary Bill Shorten says.

"The National party has spent the whole parliamentary time knocking the independents and vice versa," he told ABC Television on Sunday.
"The idea of (Nationals leader) Warren Truss and (Independent) Bob Katter sitting down and breaking bread, while they might have to on the odd issue, there's no love lost there."

It would be odd for ex-National Party people to do a deal with Labor unless the people who voted them in had the intention of supporting Labor. In other words, surely they'd be risking their chances next time around with those voters.
Posted by: Flooding rains

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 22/08/2010 11:58

One must wonder if the state Labor was not voted in 2 years ago (they were on the nose for a while and even moreso now) then there would be no way there would have been so many seats lost in QLD. As is the NSW and QLD goverments will be voted out next election anyway......
Posted by: Dazza_XL

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 22/08/2010 11:59

Originally Posted By: Keith
I thought Katter was an ex-National Party member?


Correct, it was his father who originally started out with Labor.
Posted by: markm9

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 22/08/2010 12:00

They said on ABC Boothby has come back to the ALP, so if you give Brisbane to the LNP and Corangamite and Lindsay to the ALP, I come up with,

73 ALP and 72 LNP.

Hasluck is also very close which has been given to the LNP, if that was to go to the ALP you would have,

74 ALP and 71 LNP.
Posted by: lizzie

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 22/08/2010 12:37

Originally Posted By: Mick10
not sure on the exact legalities of it, hopefully someone on here might know.
but i am sure the GG has a say in who gets to govern on a hung parliament aswell doesnt she? but again, as markm mentioned, the possibility of another election is not off the cards. imo, that would favour the LNP.


If GG was to send us back to the polls, lets hope it is done with little fanfare this time around.
Posted by: Seabreeze

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 22/08/2010 12:45

Ultimately, it will be three ex-National Party Independents that represent rural Australia who will decide on who governs the country. Bob Katter, from what I've seen is a bit of a loose cannon. Tony Windsor and Rob Oakshott are more well-behaved in comparision. Labor in all three seats is unpopular, especially in Lyne where they've managed just 13.3% of first preference votes and a paltry 8% of first preference votes in my local electorate, the New England (while I haven't gone through every electorate in Australia, I'd be confident in saying that would be lowest first preference Labor vote in an electorate at this election). In all three electorates, the Nationals came a clear but well-defeated second.

It is likely that the Green MP will side with Labor and the fourth independent in Hobart is described as being sympathetic to "green" causes, so he's probably going to side with Labor.

Either way, I'm expecting a reasonable amount of money to be thrown at us in the seat of New England. Armidale Hospital, Tamworth Base Hospital and the Somerton bridge replacement are things that I expect will benefit. A future Bolivia Hill upgrade (between Tenterfield and Glen Innes), about a 1.5km stretch on the New England Highway (a National Highway) could also be on the cards if there's enough attention brought to it and Tony Windsor himself has been labelled it a ‘deathtrap’. That little bit has caused deaths over the years (as recent as three weeks ago) and needs widening and a slight realignment, on an otherwise increasingly and fairly safe, well-built highway.

Personally, I'd rather see the Independents side with the Coalition, and that choice would also it would reflect rural Australia's clear anti-Labor sentiment at this election. IMO, an Abbott-Hockey led Coalition (instead of Abbott-Bishop) would a force to reckon with in either opposition or government.

An interesting week/fortnight ahead, that's for sure.
Posted by: Mick10

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 22/08/2010 13:09

bob katter said on sunrise this morning that from his point of view. the table is wiped clean and now its up to the party's to come forward and present their cases.
katter will listen to anyone who is going to give the bush a fair go, and NQ in general. he is big supporter of NQ statehood and hates the SE corner of Qld.
Posted by: !SCHUMMY!

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 22/08/2010 14:13

i just wanna know whose PM, its never taken this long to count votes
Posted by: Shayne

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 22/08/2010 14:20

i could imagine Bob with the balance of power..great for some of my interests..bad for some of my others..

as long as Bligh has no chance of screwing the rest of the country like shes given QLD the pineapple up the blerta..ill be happy..
Posted by: Arnoldnut

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 22/08/2010 14:33

So who's got the healthiest team ...all we need now is someone to breakdown, quit or die and we'll have the biggest and toughest bi election you have even seen smile

I'll have to agree with Dazza ..Katter had it in one
'We've had 12 years of LNP [Liberal National Party] government - they smashed us into the ground and the ALP government in three years hasn't restored anything.'
Posted by: Arnoldnut

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 22/08/2010 14:46

Originally Posted By: Keith
This quote from the latest Nine News election coverage:
[i]Bad blood between The Nationals and the three country-based independents in federal parliament will make it impossible for the coalition to form government, Labor parliamentary secretary Bill Shorten says.

"The National party has spent the whole parliamentary time knocking the independents and vice versa," he told ABC Television on Sunday.


I think this will play a very big part in what happens now Keith.
the ALP on the other hand has kept a respectful approach to independants from what I've seen.
That has got to help .....I see the LNP is still keeping up its 'midnight visits by faceless labor thugs' mentality.
It's more likely 'midnight visits from BHP thugs' these days.
Posted by: Keith

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 22/08/2010 16:48

Well, I'm not sure that Bill Shorten is qualified to comment on National Party/Independent relations given that he's a Labor man, and that he hasn't been an MP all that long, though no doubt union experience would have taught him a lot about politics.

Bill is only saying this to promote Labor's cause. I can't see what other possible reason he would have for it.
Posted by: Xavo

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 22/08/2010 16:50

So I'm a bit confused. Who's actually running the country at the moment? Is it still Julia or are we in some sort of limbo? The calm before the storm maybe?
Posted by: Keith

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 22/08/2010 16:51

Julia and Labor are still running the country in a caretaker capacity. It's what they call a 'constitutional convention'.
Posted by: Dale Small

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 22/08/2010 16:56

Been following this sham of an election from over here very closely, still havent seen 1 decent policy proposal from either major player, just a lot of personal attacks and grudges hinged at people.. worst performance of any federal election I can recall in my lifetime.

I think the public were just fed up & now look at the outcome. Just desserts for all concerned in honesty.
Posted by: Keith

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 22/08/2010 17:16

Perhaps they can start cleaning up their act by stopping their personal attacks on each other in the House, especially in Question Time.

I don't think either that defeated Labor candidates, nor the NSW Labor Premier, should be coming out and publicly criticising Labor's campaign...unless they want Labor to self-destruct in coming months.
Posted by: lizzie

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 22/08/2010 17:20

You don't think Labour is already headed in that direction anyway, Keith?
Posted by: GDL

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 22/08/2010 17:23

A loose cannon just might be good for a while, when compared to all the rusty ones that he shares the parliament with .
Posted by: Vinnie

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 22/08/2010 17:26

We had a hung parliament here when the Liberal Party changed their leader to Colin Barnett and Labor called an early election to capatlise on it. The Nationals formed a minority government with the Liberal Party.

Probably the reason we still have no daylight saving or shops in some suburbs being closed on Sunday... cos the Nationals don't want it. Since when does the country dictate what the city wants.
Posted by: Vinnie

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 22/08/2010 17:30

Originally Posted By: Shayne
gawd..waited in line for an hour to vote, was so sore at the end i just put a 1 above the line on the white one for one nation and numbered the greens last on the green one..

at least whatever happens.. bureaucracy wins..in the end..



When I found out about postal voting, I was pleased I didn't have to go through all that. It is not like the electoral commission will check whether I satisfy the conditions for postal voting.
Posted by: Keith

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 22/08/2010 17:31

Originally Posted By: lizzie
You don't think Labour is already headed in that direction anyway, Keith?

I think there are always 'shakeups' after an election especially if there's a perception within the party (no matter which one) that certain individuals were the cause of any malfunctioning campaign. Politics is so vicious. It seems to be more about power than genuine desire to put the good of the people first.

And I'm not happy about an atheist possibly being the PM but then, all humans fall short whether they are atheists or not...it's why we have nasty politics. So-called 'religious' (depending on one's understanding of that term) people can be just as bad. I mean, look at the Tsars of Russia.

But that topic's best put aside here.

Posted by: Anthony Cornelius

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 22/08/2010 17:33

The preferential system has been brought up a bit - personally I'm not a big fan of it. It means that while in theory you can "protest" vote for a minor party, you ultimately always have to vote Liberal or Labor. Because whoever you preference before the other (Liberal or Labor, even if they're 7th and 8th), your vote will eventually get to them through the preferential system.

I'd much rather it just be you place a 1 beside who you want to get in and it be left at that (perhaps with the option of assigning preferences if you choose to do so). Then that gives people the real power to voice their opinion (ie, they really can choose not to vote for a major party should they choose not to).

There were a few cases where preferential votes helped the greens - but 99% of the time it would go to the ALP or Libs. I also think it's crazy that some candidates only had 30-35% of the vote yet through preferences that got them over the line!

AC
Posted by: Vinnie

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 22/08/2010 17:34

Originally Posted By: vinny06
This election will be like the episode of South Park

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Douche_and_Turd

We could end up with a hung parliament like what happened here in WA in the last election !



And I was right..... smile
Posted by: lizzie

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 22/08/2010 17:36

Just about all of the speeches last night, from all parties, were fairly below the belt at some point.

I never thought I would say this, but Bob Brown's interview was probably the most gracious, in terms of relating to other campaigners...he at least thanked and congratulated everyone...
Posted by: Shayne

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 22/08/2010 18:31

Lizzie, im not big on Bob Brown (hes a bit of a prude and a wowser)..but at least he was professional...

And Vinny, i didnt even know i was having surgery until the week of the election..so i had no chance at any other option..Luckily the AEC offical that i was seen by is my daughters teacher, and she let me jump the que a bit and gave me somewhere to sit down..i was in a fair bit of discomfort and pain towards the end there..far out..

At least it looks like Bligh is Cactus..Labor will drop that Dud like a hot potato..with buck teef...and Queensland will be better for it..
Posted by: Seabreeze

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 22/08/2010 19:50

It seems Hitler is a bit annoyed by the election result!


Taiwanese explanation of the election:
Posted by: Keith

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 22/08/2010 20:00

I've seen the Hitler one before..just the sub text has been updated. I thought he was going to have a heart attack.

Funny how Gillard and Abbott look to have Chinese features in the other one.
Posted by: Dave-Wx

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 22/08/2010 22:14

Originally Posted By: ColdFront
Whichever party takes power (I'm guessing the LNP) they will be held to ransom for their entire term by Katter, a green and 3 former Nationals. They are former nationals for a reason.

Expect the country to stagnate until the GG says enough is enough and we all go back to the polls.


The 'others' tally will be 3 ex-Nat's (independents) one left leaning/Green independent, and one Green MP I'm pretty sure.

And I don't think there will be too much stagnation...yes sure its an unstable time (and depending on what issues come up we may be headed to an election again soon), but the majority of things put into parliament are passed without fuss eg: the budget etc.

Originally Posted By: Flooding rains
One must wonder if the state Labor was not voted in 2 years ago (they were on the nose for a while and even moreso now) then there would be no way there would have been so many seats lost in QLD. As is the NSW and QLD goverments will be voted out next election anyway......


NSW yes, (and until yesterday) I thought QLD might keep struggling on just as NSW Labor most probably should've bowed out 1, possibly 2 terms ago. The problem there (as here in QLD) is that the opposition has been poor...and the government has to nosedive further, as it has now, such that Mickey Mouse could be the leader of the Coalition in NSW and still win the next election.

Maybe QLD Labor will do a NSW and keep winning (as the LNP is still a shambles here) but who knows!
Posted by: !SCHUMMY!

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 22/08/2010 22:22

on 60mins earlier tonight said that we wont find out our new PM till the end of the week :0
Posted by: Dave-Wx

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 22/08/2010 22:23

Oh and on the 3 ex-National independents, my mail is that (and take it as you will):

There is a fair bit of bad blood between Oakeshott and the Nationals, there was some bad blood back in the early 90's when Windsor was disendorsed by the Nats for the state seat of Tamworth (for a DUI offence), but maybe bygones will be bygones there, and Katter will be genuinely receptive to those that respect and appreciate the 'non-city' people and will most probably wipe the slate clean (as mentioned somewhere else) when it comes to the Nats/Coalition.

Some other stats - in terms of Vote 1's:

43.17% voted Coalition
38.51% voted Labor
11.42% voted Green (very impressive, nearly 1/3 as big as the Labor vote tally!)
Posted by: !SCHUMMY!

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 22/08/2010 22:39

it is very close

http://vtr.aec.gov.au/
Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 22/08/2010 23:00

Originally Posted By: Dave-Wx
Originally Posted By: ColdFront
Whichever party takes power (I'm guessing the LNP) they will be held to ransom for their entire term by Katter, a green and 3 former Nationals. They are former nationals for a reason.

Expect the country to stagnate until the GG says enough is enough and we all go back to the polls.


The 'others' tally will be 3 ex-Nat's (independents) one left leaning/Green independent, and one Green MP I'm pretty sure.

And I don't think there will be too much stagnation...yes sure its an unstable time (and depending on what issues come up we may be headed to an election again soon), but the majority of things put into parliament are passed without fuss eg: the budget etc.

Originally Posted By: Flooding rains
One must wonder if the state Labor was not voted in 2 years ago (they were on the nose for a while and even moreso now) then there would be no way there would have been so many seats lost in QLD. As is the NSW and QLD goverments will be voted out next election anyway......


NSW yes, (and until yesterday) I thought QLD might keep struggling on just as NSW Labor most probably should've bowed out 1, possibly 2 terms ago. The problem there (as here in QLD) is that the opposition has been poor...and the government has to nosedive further, as it has now, such that Mickey Mouse could be the leader of the Coalition in NSW and still win the next election.

Maybe QLD Labor will do a NSW and keep winning (as the LNP is still a shambles here) but who knows!


I agree on pretty much all of that. As bad as Bligh's government has been I don't see much option . As it stands I will be voting independent at the next state poll. I wouldn't be surprised if we see a few endorsed in Qld next time around.

This state government has done some really good things but they have been offest by some really bad ones. Unfortunately the state grew in population too quickly and they got caught on the hop. But the Traveston Dam issue was debacle.


there is some induication that the independents elected this weekend prefer labor's NBN going on that news article (liny below). It will be interesting to see how that plays out.

http://news.ninemsn.com.au/national/election2010/7949177/independents-seem-to-favour-nbn
Posted by: Keith

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 23/08/2010 08:18

And now we are hearing that the Governor-General is being accused of 'playing politics'.
Posted by: Arnoldnut

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 23/08/2010 09:53

Where's that Keith ......I found this stuff.
I saw where MINING magnate Clive Palmer said ''We need to make sure that the Governor-General is totally impartial,...etc''
http://www.smh.com.au/federal-election/governorgeneral-must-be-impartial-palmer-20100822-13b3b.html

He also said in the same breath
"Australians had spoken on the mining tax and it ''should be ruled out entirely''
Palmer is of course impartial himself when he calls for mining tax "to be ruled out entirely"
Posted by: Keith

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 23/08/2010 10:14

Originally Posted By: Arnoldnut
Where's that Keith ......I found this stuff.
I saw where MINING magnate Clive Palmer said ''We need to make sure that the Governor-General is totally impartial,...etc''
http://www.smh.com.au/federal-election/governorgeneral-must-be-impartial-palmer-20100822-13b3b.html

He also said in the same breath
"Australians had spoken on the mining tax and it ''should be ruled out entirely''
Palmer is of course impartial himself when he calls for mining tax "to be ruled out entirely"


I saw it on the TV this morning. It could just be a media beat-up. However, in context, reference was also made in the same bulletin to Sir John Kerr's sacking of Whitlam; he too was said to have been compromised.

When you look at it, the appointments of both state Governors, and Governors-General, have always historically been recommended by the government of the day so it's pretty clear there's going to be a certain level of bias. Apparently some think that there is a compromised link to a relative of Bill Shorten. I don't know whether that's a situation that's happened before, though. If it's enough for an MP to be dismissed for misleading the House as to his/her financial interests, it's enough for our Constitutional safeguards to include provision that no vice-regal functionary should have any personal direct or indirect relationships to any member of Parliament or the Senate.
Posted by: Andy Double U

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 23/08/2010 10:22

Originally Posted By: Keith
Apparently some think that there is a compromised link to a relative of Bill Shorten.


Yeah, he's her son in law... which could work both ways!!

Not knowing her from a grain of salt of course, but I don't think anyone in her position would be stupid enough to be overtly biased in this situation. I think most people would understand the gravity of the situation as far as possible consequences for the country as a whole.

I wouldn't want to be any of the independents or the party that manages to form the government. In my opinion it is a poisoned challis. I think the price for wheeling and dealing could be very high on both sides which could stir some long lingering discontent, with the punishment being dished out in future elections.
Posted by: Keith

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 23/08/2010 10:30

Do people think that a government should only be given power if it has a sufficient majority to govern without independents' support? As it is, I don't like the ultimate power that's been given to just a few...and that's what's happening here. Nothing will get through without the sanction of the Greens and/or these independents.

In any case it might all depend on the final count of postal and absentee votes. Last I heard, the Coalition was ahead by one seat but it could all go back and forth.
Posted by: Arnoldnut

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 23/08/2010 10:49

I can see the cartoonists doing plenty of mother-in-law jokes in the next few days grin

How can having a mother-in-law in the job be an advantage??
Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 23/08/2010 10:55

Originally Posted By: Arnoldnut

"Australians had spoken on the mining tax and it ''should be ruled out entirely''
Palmer is of course impartial himself when he calls for mining tax "to be ruled out entirely"


Obviously the $9 billion in personal wealth isn't enough.






[/quote]
Posted by: Keith

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 23/08/2010 11:01

Originally Posted By: Arnoldnut
I can see the cartoonists doing plenty of mother-in-law jokes in the next few days grin

How can having a mother-in-law in the job be an advantage??

It just 'shortens' (ouch!) the odds of a hung parliament..
Posted by: Arnost

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 23/08/2010 11:41

There is another seat that is still in play and it's not getting much of a mention. And that's Grayndler. It very easily could fall to the Greens:

http://vtr.aec.gov.au/HouseDivisionFirstPrefs-15508-121.htm

The Greens are ahead of the Libs there at the end of the count Saturday. It just may be that if the seat needs to go to third and fourth preference, then the Liberal voters may have preferenced Greens ahead of the Socialists and Labor... We'll just have to see if the postals and pre-pols (which normally favour the Libs) will push the Libs ahead of the Greens in primaries - giving Albanese VERY comfortable win 2PP.


I reckon Albo is not sleeping too well at the moment!

By the same token, in Denison - the Libs have got ahead of both the Independent (who's projected to win the seat) so I think that will now be an easy Labor victory 2PP.

http://vtr.aec.gov.au/HouseDivisionFirstPrefs-15508-194.htm

And by the same token - there are a MASSIVE amount of pre-pols and postals still outstanding. In some seats between 15-20K! These may yet force a few seats from won to dubtfull over the week as they are counted... and make this quite interesting.

And probably why the three ex National independents are biding their time waiting to see what will happen...
Posted by: ant

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 23/08/2010 12:56

australians have spoken on the mining tax (said that mining man)? Um, the Greens receiving their highest vote ever sure supports that! Only not in the way that mining man thought.

Those three ex nationals, they left the nationals for a reason. I've always wondered at how the nationals can march with the liberals, who are increasingly driven by economic rationalism (as is Labor nowadays), while the nationals are mostly agrarian socialists. Yes, really. Look at their policies.

So my read is, those three are committed, thinking men with principles. They are the old fashioned politicians with reasons for being in politics that aren't about being in power, it's about making a difference for things they believe in.

And I reckon they already know that they and their constituents have a lot more in common with the Green and the independant/Green than many would think.

We do have a hung parliament. You need 76 seats to form a majority government, and no one is going to get 76 seats. The party with the most seats might be able to find agreement with the cross benches to form a government OR, the party with the fewer seats might form a minority government if they are better able to find agreement with the cross benches.

At this point, I'm actually feeling a bit happier about this situation, than with Liberal or Labor forming a government outright. Even though I ensured my votes exhausted at Labor, they were basically a least-worst option. I have issues with many of their policies, and with the way they've done things.

I'm ready to see what the 5 cross bench people can do with this situation. Even Bob "mad as a" Katter: he speaks oddly, but if you actually listen to what he says, or writes, or actually does, the bloke is pretty solid.
Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 23/08/2010 14:10

News.com are claiming Abbott has said he will backflip on the NBN to gain support of the independents. Given this was one of his key election promises to scrap the NBN and that most who voted for him agreed I find this rather comical. Power at any price I guess.
Posted by: Arnost

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 23/08/2010 15:39

Usual media beatup CF... I wouldn't get too excited about it. Here's what he actually said:

Quote:
"Obviously, I accept that broadband is important because I put forward a very good broadband policy. I don't want to pre-empt the discussions that I expect will be had over the next few days, just to say that I intend to be very pragmatic, but within the broad policy parameters which we discussed during the election,"
Posted by: Helen

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 23/08/2010 15:50

CF, I have to respectfully disagree that people voted for Abbott because of the NBN. I think more may have been concerned about the internet filter, which was a killer for Conroy. And really, if Abbott has done a backflip on the NBN, it's a win-win situation for Australia. A bigger concern for me and my fellow rural friends, is that the city will benefit from faster internet speeds long before the country will, when really it should be the other way round... but what gets me even more than that, is that fibre optic cable is already to our exchange, but won't be hooked up any time in the forseeable future (according to a reputable Tel$tra tech).

I'm proud to say I voted Liberal, but not for Tony Abbott (because I don't think he (nor Julia Gillard for that matter) are leadership material), but for Rowan Ramsey, who DOES give a toss about us country folk. smile
Posted by: Keith

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 23/08/2010 16:19

Let's also remember that the media love to find 'backflips' because they know that that is a psychologically emotive term that gets people's hackles up (as well as ratings).
Posted by: Andy Double U

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 23/08/2010 16:59

Mean while if another election is run in the short term, Labor is doing its best to lose more seats thanks to infighting...

Labor members bag party's 'faceless men'

I don't think discipline has been a strong suit in the ALP's deck of cards for quite some time, but this takes the cake. The federal branch waggling it's finger at the states, the states pointing it back... and the best bit is they think they can cobble together a stable government with the support of the Greens and three mad hatter independents?! I don't like their chances! To top it all off, there is now a bit of leadership speculation in the form of Bill Shorten being made leader of the ALP before the next election! Centrebet has Bill Shorten at $2.70 to Julia Gillard at $4.10. However unlikely it seems, it is only going to destabilise the ALP further.

If only the ALP was imploding on itself from opposition rather than from where it is now which seems to be a just better than 50:50 chance of forming government. crazycrazycrazy

Love the Green's spin on polling night, basically holding their hands up and protesting their innocence at splitting the Labor vote and somehow claiming that they were robbing the Nationals of their vote... Earth to Greens (tee he laugh bad pun) but the Nationals have been absorbing into the Liberal party for a while now, your new found votes came from your new found buddies who you did a preference deal with.

Bob Brown made an interesting parallel.
A couple of days ago a baby whale was born in the Derwent [River] for the first time in 200 years, two days later we’re seeing the new birth [of a party].


Ahhh yeah, looking forward to seeing what other devine signs may mean to Green's policy...crycrycry

Migration is looking like an attractive option!
Posted by: Keith

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 23/08/2010 17:38

The DLP split Labor (and very bitterly) in 1950, though not due to direction of voting preferences. That was in the direction of the Right. The Greens have done the same thing, in principle, to the Left.

The only reason the Greens and Labor wouldn't merge would be that they would form another leftist factional group. But otherwise I think they are all a shade of one another.
Posted by: Arnost

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 23/08/2010 17:38

On the NBN... if the media stops beating up on this, it actually may be a win/win/win!

The introduction of the fibre spine to regional centres is common to both the Lib/NP and the ALP policies. And that's what the ex-national independents will want! So get together and make at least that happen. There is no way that it can be delivered to the door before the next election... And what happens then can be the next argument.

By the way Helen, the spine may already be there as you say (but not connected), however, getting the broadband to the house, and then rewiring the house to use it is the expensive bit... And that is the problem in regional centres since the cost of doing so can never be recouped asd there isn't a critical mass op potentially paying customers.

And if the spine is there, then anyone that needs it (if the Cost/Benefits Business Case stacks up smile ) can pay to have a dedicated fibre strung up to their place!

http://www.verizonbusiness.com/au/products/data/ethernet/

(And I'm sure that hospiyals clinics can be subsidised if need be...)
Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 23/08/2010 17:55

Originally Posted By: Helen
CF, I have to respectfully disagree that people voted for Abbott because of the NBN.


I spoke to several people voting LNP because of the NBN and in particular its cost which he went on about for most of his campiagn . One of whom had a child exposed to a paedophile in a chat room and was actually all for the filter. Different horses for different courses I guess. I personally don't like the idea of a filter but it has been explained to me by several people in IT that it won't work anyway.
Posted by: Arnost

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 23/08/2010 18:42

As I said earlier, even though the media is calling 73 for Labor, I'm guessing that this number is still very fluid. smile And yes it may be that Labor gets to 74 (winning Hasluck), but I think that it is more likely to lose a couple that have already been "called" by the media -

Seats to watch: Grayndler, Lindsay, Greenway and Coorangamite

These seats have been called for Labor - but the margin is less than 1500 votes - with about 15,000 pre-pols and postals to come in each one. And pre-pols typically favour the Libs, and in this case, they may have been lodged at the time that the "leaks" were fresh in everyones mind.

It is still possible for the Lib/NP to have a majority! poke
Posted by: lookin

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 23/08/2010 19:56

arnost , I doubt it.The parties and political commentators know pretty well whats happening.Not an exact science I know, but 99% of the time they get it right.I think in at least one of the seats I believe the Libs didnt even run a postal vote drive.
Posted by: Arnost

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 23/08/2010 20:27

Yeah I know... But you can always live in hope eh?

And my hope is that with a Lib govt we could have gotten at least one sensible budget through before the porkbarreling and greenbarrelling will start in earnest from 1 July next year. (A Labor minority government would still have issues getting stuff through the current Senate as thy would have to bribe the Greens AND both independets - whilst the Libs would only have to bribe one indie LOL). Whilst minority governements are not typically dangerous (can't agree to any major reforms) they are known for their waste.
Posted by: SBT

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 23/08/2010 22:36

I work with clients who are your average mug punters everyday and without doubt 99% of them wouldn't know what a NBN was anymore than I would know what a goes through a womans mind sometimes (I think i do but i am always incorrect) Most if not all know that ADSL is faster than dial up and thats about it. The capped plans are rediculous - 25GB with a download speed that will see people blow that in the first day. Anyhoo the baloney being spread by both parties is enough for this voter to throw any future political support fair behind ANY independednt who raises their heads.

The whole elction was a hate/smear/fear campaign, with no policies, no real personalities as leaders and no clear direction for the future. No wonder the public was confused and voted accordingly. The best outcome would be Labor gaining power and the opposition forcing a double dissolution sometime in the next 24 months. This would allow themselves to get rid of the deadwood with big ears (who in their wildest immaginations could see Abott as prime Minister - it could have been a script from Yes Minister if it wasn't real), promote Joe Hockey as a viable alternative and get some damn policies set in concrete to offer to Joe Public.

The Internet filter was a sop at best and a smokescreen to placate the right wing religious fruitcakes who are either controlled by the same right wing fruitcakes in the US or at least bankrolled by them who want to control what we see and what biased form of bulldust they believe in. The filter is an ill concieved plan, thought up by the technology challenged, for their own agenda and you can bet your bottom dollar that it has nothing to do with protecting children.

It is all about internet censorship and controlling what you can access. And the absolute worst thing about it is that it is about as effective as flyscreen in keeping out a cyclone. Any 12 year old with 2 minutes seraching on Google will be able to shortcut it.

No the country needs strong, committed leadership not back stabbing clueless females or wing nutted religious fruitcakes running teh country. No one ends up winning and you and me will only end up much worse off.
Posted by: Popeye

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 23/08/2010 23:35

Yeah I reckon neither of them in my opinion fit the role. OK lets call this election a draw this time round. Throw them both out, get a couple of new leaders in and lets 'take two' at the polls in a months time. And this time round give some decent policies that people can actually agree with rather than roll their eyes at.

I suppose with the influence of trying to win the independants vote we might actually see something half reasonable come out over the next week. Its a pity it will take all the sucking up in the world to woo their votes to achieve an interesting set of policies for our country to run with.
Posted by: Arnost

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 23/08/2010 23:37

Quote:
The best outcome would be Labor gaining power and the opposition forcing a double dissolution sometime in the next 24 months.


The Libs will be totally irrelevant in the above scenario - yes I know that his will be some sort of heaven... smile the only way a DD could occur is if the indies supported a no confidence motion in the lower house or if the Greens block supply or if Labor gets and pulls a DD trigger after having it's legislation voted down more than once.
Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 23/08/2010 23:43

I still think the libs would have won had they had Turnball at the helm with a majority government. The swing to the greens was double that of the LNP and that says people simply do not like Abbott. Particularly as in most seats it meant preferences to flow to labor. I reckon there'll be a few in the LNP wishing that the one vote difference had gone the other way in the leadership spill.
Posted by: Dave-Wx

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 23/08/2010 23:57

I think if most people honestly disliked Abbott we wouldn't be standing here today talking about hung parliaments...how long is it since a 1st term government has been thrown out? That in itself is a great achievement (someone must like Abbott!) and also given the fact that the Coalition was dead and buried 12 months ago (again, someone must like him poke )
Posted by: Rime

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 24/08/2010 00:13

LOL. If Turnbull was still Liberal leader, Rudd would never have been dumped, the ETS would have passed through the senate before last Christmas and thousands of very angry conservative voters would have filled the ballot box with donkeys and the media still would be thinking that the sun shines from Rudd's back passage. The Liberals would have been wiped out. End of story. They would have lost all their traditional voters and they would never have won over the Green and Labor voters because there would be no need for them to vote Liberal when their own respective parties already offered the same deal.

Abbott has truly proven what type of leader he was through all of this. No body 12 months would have ever thought that any Liberal leader could bring the coalition back from the dead.
Posted by: Arnost

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 24/08/2010 01:04

Exactly Rime! If Turnbull won it may well have been the end of the Libs. The protest vote would have lost them half the seats they had as people voted and preferrenced to exhaustion the independents and third tier parties like the LDP and the inevitable anti-ETS type parties.

I would have - and I sent emails to that effect to all the Senators and local members. And even though the Libs got the message I still voted 1 and 2 for the Nationals on the senate ballot - just to make sure that there is someone who will say no.
Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 24/08/2010 10:20

It's interesting that LNP supporters didn't like Turnball but non-LNP supporters did. Though it is also worth noting that non-LNP supporters favoured an ETS. Gillard put it back on the agenda in her campaign and still won the popular vote. Clearly the swing to the greens shows people simply were not prepared to support Abbott. Given that there are so many people digruntled with the way the government has handled its policy in the past 6 months it is blatant for anyone that doesn't have a hardline LNP stance that Abbott is the reason the LNP doesn't have a clear majority. He's the reason I didn't vote for them and I am not the only one. Comments were levelled at Abbott, not the party. I suspect that many voters that swung to the greens on the weekend would have supported Turnball.

I spoke to numerous people in the lead up to Saturday and they held the same view. They simply do not trust him. Given that he is now prepared to backflip on the NBN I can see why.
Posted by: Flooding rains

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 24/08/2010 10:21

About people liking Abbott, it was more about people not liking Anna Bligh and NSW state governments...... Its so clear to see.
Posted by: Keith

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 24/08/2010 11:52

I wonder how many backflips Julia will perform..although I hear she's already said the carbon tax is not negotiable. I'd say that's more because she'd be humiliated rather than because it's 'in the melting pot'. And some of the people must have liked Abbott for the Coalition to have come from so far behind, or, if they didn't, took the more mature view of things and defined their vote by policies instead of personalities. The Coalition's vote, of course, was after preferences for the Greens and others were allocated.

If Turnbull had been in charge, I wonder if some of those Greens voters would have voted for him on the basis that he was once a Labor man (albeit years ago). A lot of people like to dig out an MP's past in considering their votes.
Posted by: Greg Sorenson

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 24/08/2010 12:00

Or maybe a combination of both:)

The benefit of the situation that we now find ourselves in is that now perhaps regional and rural issues may finally come to some level of concern
for both major parties. The Liberals during the Howard years failed to deliver essential services to these areas, and labor in it's 3 yr stint has promised
big with little output.

The NBN may be the deciding factor and last night on Q&A Tony Windsor stated that educational, health and communications that Broadband infrastructure
would provide for his constituents would be telling, so i expect to see some movement from Abbott on this. So too will there will be movement on the mining tax
from Gillard.

So whoever gets into power within a minority government, need to take a look at the examples set whereby politicians can act like responsible adults and put
party lines aside for the benefit for everyone. This whole election campaign has been negative, boring, with little to be inspired by. Watch this space because finally
we can start to see some much needed changes.
Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 24/08/2010 12:35

Can anyone see this scenario playing out?

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/08/24/2991520.htm
Posted by: petethemoskeet

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 24/08/2010 13:02

HaHaHa!!!!!!!
Posted by: Greg Sorenson

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 24/08/2010 13:04

A great idea, but a utopian idea. Too many interest groups behind the scenes shaping policy in this country, too many egos on the line.
Posted by: Keith

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 24/08/2010 13:11

Originally Posted By: ColdFront
Can anyone see this scenario playing out?

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/08/24/2991520.htm

It's not as odd as it seems. I think it was Malcolm Turnbull as Opposition leader who suggested trying to reach bipartisan agreement on certain issues, but Labor would have none of that. He would ask the Government (Rudd at the time) to join him in discussions and I got the impression Turnbull was almost advocating joint party decisions on the issues in question (I don't recall what those were). I take it that Rudd's rejection of Turnbull's offer meant that those issues were not matters in which policies would become aligned (exceptions would have been committing troops to Afghanistan). Now, whether Turnbull had in mind the same sort of thing as Oakeshott now has in mind, is probably hard to tell. But I think there's a precedent there for Oakeshott's proposal and on the face ot it they look identical.

Whether it's constitutionally viable is another matter. It would seem to override all constitutional conventions. I would prefer to see another election called and let the people decide...even though Oakeshott's proposal would only be a 'holding pattern'.

Posted by: Andy Double U

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 24/08/2010 13:26

Originally Posted By: ColdFront
Can anyone see this scenario playing out?

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/08/24/2991520.htm


Apparently it has worked well in South Australia, according to the pollies that is! Ask the general public and the opinion might differ somewhat.

The cynic in me says that whoever was handed a cabinet position from the other team had better watch out! I doubt it would be done for innocent reasons, more to gain some sort of political leverage. Heck, there's some pretty passionate exchange on this forum on political issues, can you imagine what it would be like be like between individuals in the parties themselves?!

I think it is better for everyone in the short, medium and long terms if they actually get it sorted out properly now. Forget the 'we must solve this quickly' rhetoric being bandied around (within reason of course). If an inherently workable solution can't be found then I think it has to be back to the polls. A joint cabinet in my mind is a recipe for destabilisation, there's enough undercurrents within a political party without inviting more in from the outside.
Posted by: Keith

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 24/08/2010 13:40

The 'joint cabinet'/party or whatever one wants to call it, could replace Julia's 150 illuminati that would decide on climate change. After all, there are 150 seats in the House. May as well throw in all the socialists, not just some of them.

Just kidding of course. Julia's idea is ridiculous enough.
Posted by: Helen

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 24/08/2010 14:20

Originally Posted By: Andy Double U
Originally Posted By: ColdFront
Can anyone see this scenario playing out?

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/08/24/2991520.htm


Apparently it has worked well in South Australia, according to the pollies that is! Ask the general public and the opinion might differ somewhat.


Well according to Mike Rann and his cronies, yes. Independent, Peter Lewis, had the deciding vote on whether Labor or Liberal got to rule. As a disgruntled ex-Lib, he chose Labor, who allegedly bribed an MP to cross the floor and gave him the majority and in the process they basically screwed Peter Lewis... the rest as they say is history and we've been under a carefree spend-as-you-will Labor Government ever since.
Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 24/08/2010 23:35

I'd say there is a more than even money chance that the LNP will be forming a minority government with 73 seats of its own in coming days. Labor would need all 4 independents and the green to form government. I don't see that happening.

Regardless, as the LNP has run an election campaign on conservative rule I suspect we will be back at the polls again in 12 months as the 5 that hold the balance of power start listing demands for their electorates. Particularly Mr Katter.

It won't take long for other elected members to cry foul and tip it all upside down.
Posted by: zonr

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 25/08/2010 00:23

Is Julia's idea really that ridiculous?in todays world of minor parties and hostile senates the peoples assembly would do a better job
Posted by: Keith

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 25/08/2010 08:36

Sorry zonr but I don't agree. The people's assembly is the Parliament. By all means get some opinions, but she's going to make a decision solely, it seems, on the basis of that contrived forum. Maybe I've misunderstood the proposal but I've not seen anyone say anything positive about it in the public domain. In any case, who decides whats its composition is going to be? She's not going to get people in the forum who would prejudice the carbon tax and associated climate change issues; she's got too much hanging on it getting through.

Hostile Senates and minor parties, despite their undesirability, are still part of the country's constitutional makeup that has served us well since Federation. And assuming the forum's decision carries no legislative weight but has to be ratified by both Houses, what's the point of the forum in the first place? The forum would be no different to a left-wing pressure group. I'm cynical enough to believe that it would be stacked with Julia's climate change 'yes men'.

You don't go changing the legislative process by acting in the guise of a dictator and bypassing it. The fact that she's prepared to bypass the elected assembly of the land in order to make a policy decision is not only setting a dangerous precedent but shows how dangerous this woman really is, in my view. Makes me wonder if she's taken a few leaves out of the communist party's manifesto.
Posted by: Cheers

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 25/08/2010 09:56

What is it with Kings Langley.
Some people there think they were born with a silver spoon when it's really a plastic one.
Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 25/08/2010 10:49

Originally Posted By: Keith
Sorry zonr but I don't agree. The people's assembly is the Parliament.


Except that the two behave completely different. 150 public people might actually come to a consensus whereas parliament as we know it has one side pretty much voting down the ideas of the other side in an almost religious way as they are the "opposition". So they are not the same. If we had juries run the same way as parliament no-one would ever be convicted.

All those opposed to her idea said the same thing as you Keith but it ignores the underlying reality that Labor and the LNP seldom (if ever lately) agree on anything. I actually see some merit in both parties working us through the next few years. If not we will be going to the polls sooner rather than later.

Somewhere along the road the "people's" assembly stopped being run by "ordinary" people and was replaced by a rabble of poorly behaved so-called adults.

Blind Freddy knows that Abbott won't calm down and adopt a softer approach as a leopard can't change its spots and most are smelling something is up on his NBN backflip. Meanwhile Gillard won't be backing down on the mining tax and the media made sure that was unpopular.

Now we have potentially 4 independents and a green to throw a massive fly in the ointment of the "people's assembly" and they will ALL arrive with list of demands for their electorates. Given that Katter is armed with claims of zero spending by either party and wants roads, dams and internet I'd say any chance of a return to surplus under either government by 2013 is now as remote as the voyager probe.


Katter has already said "it is my way or no way". Not much room for negotiation there. Unless the LNP can cut a deal with the other independents and leave him out of the process. In which case they would get one term only.

It's a mess.
Posted by: Keith

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 25/08/2010 11:50

Yes CF I agree, it is a mess. There are two things we can do (apart from a forum): change the voting system if the present one doesn't work, and in any case, call another election for the lower House.
Posted by: Vinnie

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 25/08/2010 13:45

What happens if they call another election and we end up with another hung parliament lol ?

So if Labor ends up with 72 seats and the coalition 73 , do seat numbers automatically mean that we will get a Liberal minority government ?

Why would people want a government that used it's majority in the senate to ram through its extreme workplace laws and one that is like a person with a huge amount of money in the bank who won't buy a new pair of jeans cos they want to keep the huge money amount in their bank.

Then again, who would vote for party that says they are fiscal conservatives and spend a lot.

Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 25/08/2010 14:47

Originally Posted By: Keith
Yes CF I agree, it is a mess. There are two things we can do (apart from a forum): change the voting system if the present one doesn't work, and in any case, call another election for the lower House.


The problem is "who will change their vote"? It's all too soon to get a different direction I feel. You may get some that vote LNP after some labor MP's dummy spits but then you may get some swing the other way after Abbott's backflip on the NBN or protest voters changing their minds on reflection but largely I feel it would remain where it is. It's a very sticky issue.

I do feel though that Abbott is in a better position than he was two days ago to form governemnt. Similarly labor's chances have melted away a bit. Like the rest in here I just want it sorted for the sake of the country as a whole. We have witnessed a one in seventy year event and I'm already over it .

I wonder just how much further this nation would have progressed if we had several parties of twenty making its decisions?
Posted by: Keith

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 25/08/2010 14:53

I don't know the answer to any of your comments, Vinny, but we have to work with what's available (on the economics side of things, both parties say they are fiscal conservatives).

We might get another hung parliament, and we might not. But you can't put a policy decision in the hands of 150 people. I still say that it would be pointless in the light of needing approval by both Houses. If you took a statistical sample of 150 to make a decision on anything it simply wouldn't stack up. I can't see how 150 (unelected) people's views can possibly represent the will of the people. As I said before, we have 150 people--elected, mind you, not appointed by a politician--who already represent the will of the people, hung parliament or otherwise.

I guess I'm a lone voice here and that's fine, but I stand by what I've said.
Posted by: Seabreeze

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 25/08/2010 15:32

Originally Posted By: Keith
I guess I'm a lone voice here and that's fine, but I stand by what I've said.

For what it's worth Keith, I completely agree with you. smile
Posted by: ant

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 25/08/2010 16:25

"fiscal conservatives" don't shovel truckloads of cash (middle class welfare) at people living in comfortable circumstances. And both majors have been doing that. I know I registered my disgust at that by voting Green, and maybe many others did too, in various ways.
Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 25/08/2010 22:07

If there was ever a justification for the increase in tax on mining companies this must surely be it? Now that is a super profit.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/08/25/2993371.htm
Posted by: Dave-Wx

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 25/08/2010 23:05

Don't forget they get charged company tax and all the other things that go with being a business in this country. While it may sound good in theory to whack an extra tax on them because "well they make billions anyway", I'm pretty sure we would make a helluva lot out of them already having taxed a percentage of the millions and billions they make.

I'm pretty sure (not 100%) on the above so anyone can feel free to correct me if I'm wrong about what they are or aren't taxed currently.

And of course there's the factor that if we whack extra taxes to try and play Robin Hood with them, they will just go elsewhere where they aren't taxed as much.

And on the 'fiscal conservative' thing...I really had to laugh when Rudd talked about that in 2007, though I guess his spin on that and many other issues was happily bought by everyone! I know I was happy to give him a run when he and Labor got in, so imagine how convincing it would've been for your average swinging voter out there!
Posted by: Orebound

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 25/08/2010 23:30

As far as Im concerned any "super" profits achieved by the mining companies can only serve to enhance the economy through the flow on affects of any healthy business. To decrease profits through taxes or whatever has next to no affect on the big players but DOES have an affect throughout the greater community due to the flow on affects of decreaaed spending and the exponential consequences of less money circulating in the community. One has to ask can the "government" repay in kind the money they intend to extract from these companies who in reality are doing nothing more than we all aspire to which is to be successful in what they do. Its a fine line between playing Robin Hood and playing Al Capone IMO. We have to ask how we would have sustained ourselves through the GFC had the mining companies been been handing over 40% to an incompetant government. For mine the money is ALWAYS better in the community than in the hands of our "fiscal conservative" friends in Canberra.
Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 25/08/2010 23:42

Originally Posted By: Dave-Wx
they will just go elsewhere where they aren't taxed as much.



That has proven to be a false claim by the miners. The minerals are in the ground here and they make truly massive profits on them. They ain't going elsewhere. Some of them have come out and said as much. Some even said it was fair they pay more tax.
Posted by: Dave-Wx

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 25/08/2010 23:46

Alright then fair enough...I just thought there would've been a good reason for the mining ads hammering us on TV like an election campaign! Hopefully others (thanks Orebound) who know more about it can share their thoughts too - I think Katter has said that he doesn't like the mining tax one iota. Which is interesting (and not surprising at the same time) given his electorate represents a significant percentage of our big mining areas.
Posted by: Orebound

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 25/08/2010 23:59

Agreed they arent going anywhere CF but neither are the minerals, which is why it means nothing for these guys to "shelve" projects for as long as it takes for appropriate governments to come and go. I dont see that there is any doubt that increasing taxes/decreasing profits can only serve to decrease activity at this point in time. Through the course of my time in the Pilbara I have seen more projects shelved over costing issues than have actually EVER gone ahead and this tax will only serve to make sure that these companies bide their time, hence stalling the economy. Cant really see too many positives in handicapping the only "constant" in our economy. It really only become an "idea" once the Labour government had blown all the bucks. Smells of desperation to me.
Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 26/08/2010 00:00

Yeah Katter is against it. But then he originates from the conservative party so it goes without saying. Gillard publicly announced that the big mining companies agreed they can pay more tax. none of them came out against that statement so it's fair to say they made a deal that suited both the government and the miners.

The tax is on Super Profits and the smaller mining companies are still running a scare campaign on it claiming it hurts exploration. The tax doesn't even apply until they ;a) start mining and more importantly ; b) earn super profits in the order of $billions. So the miers are using dirty tricks to avoid paying more for what actually belongs to ALL Australians. The big companies know it. That's why they reached an agreement.

Orebound you will find that the reason projects are shelved is entirely due to demand. At the moment the demand is there so they will mine as much as they can get their hands on. As demand tapers, the price falls and projects are shelved. Don't forget they are contracted. They can't simply shut up shop. Legal action would ensue.

Also don't get too drawn in on the debt claims orebound. Arnost was right in saying that debt isn't good but the level of debt measured against our GDP is quite small. The mining tax would no doubt help offset that but it will also go a long way towards paying for our infrastructure requirements and that is good for all Australians. that she is firmly standing by it despite perhaps losing the support of the independents and inturn loss of government says more about her credibility than anything else.
Posted by: Arnost

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 26/08/2010 00:11

The fact that somebody makes a profit is never, NEVER NEVER a justification for increasing tax. That is nothing but opportunistic and pure theft.

Look - you can always incease the Royalties currently applicable (happpens all the time linky) and Bob's your uncle - the owner - i.e. the State - gets more per ton!.

And if it gets up, then because the Federal Govt will effectively pay the State Royalty by allowing it to be fully deducted against MRRT liability, then watch this space as:

This will allow the State Govts at no cost to the miners to jack up the Royalties - i.e. reduce the income tax,

Reduce prices since why would any miner charge more simply for the privilege of sending a bigger tax payment to Canberra? and

Allow creative accounting by vertically integrated companies with ultimate owhership overseas, such that a tax intended to transfer Australia’s mineral wealth to Australia’s citizens instead transfer mining companies’ shareholders’ wealth overseas in the form of lower resource prices.

And its probably unconstitutional! It does not belong to ALL Australians - it belongs to the States.
Posted by: Orebound

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 26/08/2010 00:16

And legal action to the big players represents pocket change in the grand scheme of things. Demand is well and truly met through any number of existing projects and I personally have seen many many projects shelved for reasons as small as debate over over royalties or the like after many many millions of dollars have already been spent. If I had a dollar for every "shelved" project then it would be me paying the "super profits" tax! Lets not for a minute be led down the garden path with the moral arguement that we ALL have a right to these profits when the reality is that is nothing more than a debt recovery scheme IMO.
Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 26/08/2010 00:18

Orebound our mineral wealth and the benefits of mining are undeniable but ..... it also damages other areas of the economy as a result of its success. Strong demand for our minerals drives up our dollar which stuffs international tourism (also worth $billions) and slows exports on manufactured goods. So it's a bit of a catch 22.

Also of significance is mining's strong demand for trades which leaves shortfalls in other sectors again pushing up prices due to labor demand which inturn forces up prices on pretty much everything we manufacture from cardboard boxes to the family car to new homes.

At the end of the day I'd rather they pay more than we see cuts to basic services such as health, education and the PBS. but that's just me.

Arnost taxes have gone up under both sides of politics for a century or more. When I work I do so for profit. Several years ago that profit was cut by a further 10 % overnight the moment I chose to enjoy any of it in the form of a GST. Life goes on.
Posted by: Arnost

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 26/08/2010 00:26

Quote:
The tax is on Super Profits and the smaller mining companies are still running a scare campaign on it claiming it hurts exploration.


The small miners will now pay more under the MRRT than they would have under the RSPT. How so? Because under the RSPT, they would have got all the royalties they pay to state taxes rebated regardless of whether their projects were profitable. Under the MRRT, the royalties are only credited against profit. So if they make a loss on a project, they still have to pay the royalties.
Posted by: Orebound

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 26/08/2010 00:27

Its all interesting debate but as eluded to by Arnost, its not for ANYONE to deny a person or companies right to make money!!! Where does one draw the line? Not alot of incentive to those marginal mining companies sitting on the threshold now is it? I wonder why the same idea wasnt thrown around while we were in surplus? Maybe because its the miners that put us there!
Posted by: Arnost

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 26/08/2010 00:43

Quote:
the level of debt measured against our GDP is quite small


The Govt debt to GDP thing is spin and a furphy. The debt that the Govt is committed to is some $150bio against a tax revenue of some 280bio. That's the true measure. linky

And to put this $150bio into perspective the Federal Government will pay $48 billion in interest over the next four years. There's the govt's NBN in the bin!

Now Australia's GDP is some 1.3 trillion - so if you want to compare apples to apples - we curently owe nearly 90% of that overseas. Nearly $1 trillion! linky And that's what is really scary - coz the world is not looking too crash hot at the moment...
Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 26/08/2010 01:01

Originally Posted By: Orebound
Its all interesting debate but as eluded to by Arnost, its not for ANYONE to deny a person or companies right to make money!!!


Based on that I shouldn't pay tax. Nor should anyone which means no roads, no hospitals ,no schools. The list goes on.
Posted by: Arnost

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 26/08/2010 01:18

Quote:
"Based on that I shouldn't pay tax."


It does not mean that at all! If you prevent someone from making a profit, then you CAN'T collect any tax - and then no roads, no hospitals, no schools. The list goes on smile.
Posted by: Arnost

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 26/08/2010 01:32

By the way... This is what I'm talking about (as the DOW is about to bust down through it's support leves at 10,000).

Some of the bad juju out there at the moment:
Dow Faces Bouncy Ride to 5,000: Strategist
Morgan Stanley Says Government Defaults Inevitable
The Hindenburg Omen tripped again

It is not a time for profligate spending and borrowing. The above may not amount to anything and the PONZI will continue - but it has to bust sometime.
Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 26/08/2010 12:00

Abbott's refusal to put up his costings to treasury may well be his undoing. I have read weeks and weeks of liberal LNP biased in one particular news site and suddenly it is hard to find anyone defending his decision in there. Numerous LNP voters have said that if we go back to the polls they will swing unless he reveals his costings.

It isn't the figures that concern people, it is the secrecy when people expect those running the country to be transparent. Before I get jumped on I'd like to point out that I agree that not all aspects of how government is run should be transparent but his stance on this costings issue is proving damaging.

The reader comments on news.com are 95% against him (and not necessarily pro labor) so he needs to rethink his stance. He has also gone on the attack again against Gillard less than 12 hours after announcing the "Nice Tony". That didn't last long.
Posted by: ant

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 26/08/2010 12:15

Abbott's refusal to expose coalition policies to costing scrutiny says to me that either there are things in there he doesn't want being exposed, OR, they know that the costings are full of errors (or deliberate untruths). Either way, it's definitely damaging their credibility.

I'd love to see both majors becoming a bit more responsible with their spending. The crazed bribe-fest started by Howard (pumping money at the "Howard Battlers") needs to end, and be dismantled.

Taxpayers' money needs to be used for things only governments can do. Howard and then Rudd, rather than making a strong public school sector, gave cash straight to people so they could pay to send their kids to private schools. The country would benefit as a whole from that money being used in a wholistic way, across the entire sector, not handed to individuals.

Ditto health.
Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 26/08/2010 14:13

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/08/26/2993775.htm

Pretty much everyone in the thread below this news article agrees with you ANT. Surely they are not all ALP supporters? This is very damaging for Abbott. What is he hiding? If he doesn't trust treasury and ,most of them served under Howard then how on earth will he work with them in government?

His call for the "mole" to be caught first is a sure sign he is hiding something. I suspect he knows where the leak came from and it was a set up to block access to his costings in the leadup to the election. Afterall, when the moles were assisting the LNP against Rudd and Swann last year I didn't see Abbott wave a protest flag on some moral ground.

Take some time to read the comments below that article. Hardly anyone is justifying his stance and it is a slap in the face to the indepenents that he needs to form government. Even those who support him must surely be able to see the transformation in him this week. This is a different man to the one we saw making a speech on Saturday night.
Posted by: Arnost

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 26/08/2010 14:56

Quote:
"Abbott's refusal to expose coalition policies to costing scrutiny says to me that either there are things in there he doesn't want being exposed,"


Maybe... But I suspect that he does not want his costings scrutinised by treasury for the simple reason that it's locked onto Labor - after all the fifth member of Rudd's kitchen cabinet was Ken Henry.

Why? Because it's a guaranteed loser of a move. An error will inevitably be found as there will be an assumption which Treasury (as it has access to confidential/secret info) can identigy as WRONG or someone will somewhere identify that an assumed discount rate in the Libs costings should be 4.3% rather than 4.4% (markets have changed over the last month) and use that to "find" an $800m hole... And you can bet on this - it will immediately be leaked - or made public by the indies. And that's going to more damaging (Can't get your costs right, Can't get your costs right, Nyah Nyah) as that'll be on TV each night at the next election campaign and the Libs will have little or no defence.

Sometimes you have to chose a lesser of two evils - and hope you can manage the flack, which in this case is by opening up your books to the thee independents and then have the accountants who did it explain why and substantiate that. If the independents then walk out and say its a crock then OK... different story.

Also remember - the independents are more stuck than the Libs. Abbott probably would be only too happy to let Julia take over and with the indies "help" burn herself out in the next 12-18 months achieving nothing as a minority party (for that is Abbotts fate as well should he get in). And the independents, if they support Labor in any way leave themselves open to a campaign where (in electorates where the Labor vote is like 10%) they can have a national campaign where "A vote for Win/Kat/Oak is a vote for Labor". The indies probably want an early election but they can't be seen as the catalyst for it... for that's electorally bad as well.

So I think that Abbott's in a position of strength here...

And by the way, Swann's very timely "leak" may have swayed enough voters at the last minute to influence the result of this election - and that is why it is criminal. And another thing - there is nothing in the laws / constitutiuon / or charter of Budget Honesty that says an opposition HAS to submit their costings to Treasury.
Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 26/08/2010 15:23

Who says it was Swann's leak? There are plenty that think it was orchestrated by the LNP as an excuse to hide their costings until after the election then use Howard's "We inherited debt" line as an excuse to not role out policy. as well it could be argued that it would be perceived by voters as dirty tactics on labor's behalf and indeed damage them. One ecomonic expert who just appeared on ABC 24 confirmed as much.

The only people arguing that Abbott shouldn't reveal his costings are LNP hardliners. The independents have been elected by the Australian public and so are entitled to be involved in the process of forming government in a hung parliament. The treasury was largely employed under Howard and suddenly isn't good enough. What gives? As one commentator pointed out, Abbott chose a private company that the media couldn't gain access to when getting his costings checked. Why?

It's interesting that you claim Swann is the source Arnost. To use a phrase similar to your own words "can you provide me with a link to back up your claims?".

Like so many I don't see a position of strength for Abbott. I saw a strong opposition leader a week ago. Where has he gone? I see a much less convincing man at the helm this week. He has rapidly paled since Saturday night when I believe he thought he was going to form a majority goverment based on his speech.
Posted by: Arnost

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 26/08/2010 15:56


"Coalition frontbenchers have accused Mr Swan of being the source of the leak and have asked the Australian Federal Police to investigate."

from here: linky

OK - maybe a guilty until proven innocent comment from me... So I withdraw that.

But it was Treasury that leaked, and he is the Treasurer so he is ultimately responsible.
Posted by: Andy Double U

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 26/08/2010 16:07

Wasn't it the Howard government that opened up Treasury to cost political party costings? And I am pretty sure Kevin07's costings didn't get leaked, so why wasn't the same confidentiality extended to the Coalition? And if you remember during the utegate saga, the ALP managed to rat out Godwyn Grech oh so quickly when he leaked... the ALP has issues, lots of them, starting at remaining in power at all costs. They either know who leaked, or couldn't give a rats about it. Either way, the ALP is condoning the leak and as Wayne Swan is the minister of treasury he is politically responsible. It's not even a question of whether the coalition is hiding anything or not, treasury has compromised itself and quite simply can't be trusted. You can guarantee they won't want the Coalition getting into government because I'd bet my last dollar the big broom will come out and sweep those little ALP minions onto the dole queue.

Tell you what CF, if you would be happy for your accountant to spill the beans on your financial activities to your competitors and your customers then your comments might carry some weight, until then they really are just hollow words.
Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 26/08/2010 16:08

I'm sure that convenient from an LNP supporter's view Arnost but it doesn't actually alter the fact that the vast majority of people employed in the treasury were put there by the LNP under Howard and that it is there to serve all sides of politics.

Andrew Robb was just caught out on ABC 24 spinning a similar yarn and when pressed on the LNP's own treasury leaks he soon backed down. Given that you appear to be reasonably rational Arnost it is a little disappointing that you believe people shouldn't be accountable for their own actions. Unless it is proven that Wayne Swann was the source of the leak he is not responsible. I doubt very much that it originated from a labor source. There's simply too much at stake. Much easier to work from a position of knowing where the AFP are less likely to look.


Plenty of the comments in the news linky above point to the obvious fact that when the treasury leaks favoured the LNP they did nothing about it. Now the shoe is on the other foot it is suddenly a major issue. The independents are wanting to know what he wants to hide.

Don't even bother with the "at all costs" line. Abbott came out 10 minutes after the election and stated he was prepared to backflip on the NBN. Despite it being one of his major election commitments. Gillard has stated she will not back down from the mining tax despite the independents (especially Katter) not wanting it. So such comments are baseless.
Posted by: Andy Double U

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 26/08/2010 16:18

Originally Posted By: Arnost
But it was Treasury that leaked, and he is the Treasurer [Wayne Swan] so he is ultimately responsible.


He half curtsied/bowed to Bob Katter!! laughlaugh



Someone should have told him that Bob knows what to do with a snake in the grass, grab the .22 loaded with buckshot!
Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 26/08/2010 16:23

I could post various unflattering images of the "mad monk" but it won't do the thread any favours.
Posted by: Andy Double U

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 26/08/2010 16:28

Originally Posted By: ColdFront
I doubt very much that it originated from a labor source. There's simply too much at stake.


Labor has surprised time and again with their own stupidity and incompetence on all manner of decisions. If you make enough bad decisions, some are guaranteed to get through the net so maybe they got lucky? Spin and slander are their strong suits! Nothing is below the Australian Liars Party!

Originally Posted By: ColdFront
Don't even bother with the "at all costs" line. Abbott came out 10 minutes after the election and stated he was prepared to backflip on the NBN. Despite it being one of his major election commitments.


Point me to the link where Abbott has signed up to a $43 billion dollar white elephant! The most he has said is that he will review it. The above quote would be typical of an ALP fanboi imho.
Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 26/08/2010 16:31

...and now the labelling begins (again). Way to go.

Reviewing a policy is a long way from total dismissal 4 days earlier.
Posted by: Andy Double U

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 26/08/2010 16:32

Originally Posted By: ColdFront
I could post various unflattering images of the "mad monk" but it won't do the thread any favours.


I'm sure you could! I was actually pretty elated to find an unflattering photo of an ALP member on the ABC website! It rarely happens, if ever, so I had to share the joy! grin Still, doesn't look as though he is far from getting on his knees and doing some serious grovelling.
Posted by: Keith

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 26/08/2010 17:16

In Sydney we are getting re-runs of political advertisements from a smoking lobby (or anti-smoking..not sure which). They must think we are in for another election.
Posted by: SBT

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 26/08/2010 17:21

Bob is a character. Yes he has some pretty cockeyed views on things but the one thing you could never accuse him of is a lack of heart or not having his electrates best interests in his heart. You can bet pounds to peanuts that he will make a decent decision. Yes he thinks that there are no gay/lesbian cowboys/girls and that the NT should be given the north of WA and turned into a state (and not before time) among other things but he is a man of his convictions and is a good bloke to have in your corner when doing battle with DVA and other government departments. I would much rather see him welding power than some spineless no personality fwit.

For my money another election is on the cards and it will be called in 5 to 6 weeks time. Labor has been given the bloody nose they deserve and they need to sack some people, come up with some decent policies and add some personality to the leadership or they won't have a hope of winning the next election. The first party to drop the back stabbing negative campaign and bring out some decent policies will win.

Both Abbott and Gillard are losers and can't lead a party to victory with their current policies. Time for a leadership change and start again.
Posted by: Arnost

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 26/08/2010 17:36

Hmmm...

I note that only Corrangamite is now in the marginal seats:
http://vtr.aec.gov.au/HouseMarginalSeats-15508.htm

Probably a long shot for the Libs but the grey noamads may still play a role: The postal votes are (as at today) breaking 56.19% to 43.81% the Libs way.

All the other are (I won't say comfortably) in the Lib/Nat column - which is then 72+1 (the on being the WAN National) versus Labors 72 (as a maximum if they win Corrangamite). Interesting times still ahead. They have not started counting postals in the seats which are also "close"... This election will not be decided for a while.
Posted by: lookin

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 26/08/2010 21:26

Oh dear what is Mr Abbott afraid of.Could it be his massive list of spending was never going to happen???Or does he not want his band of loyal believers to know hes been lying to win votes. As I said earlier he was saying and doing anything he could to win votes.We may see him now in a different light.Interesting hey?????
Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 27/08/2010 00:49

The funny part is that he is accusing Gillard of some security issue over her agreeing to open the books to the independents (she is currently checking the legal side) and yet he took his costings to a private firm.
Posted by: Helen

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 27/08/2010 08:42

Originally Posted By: Keith
In Sydney we are getting re-runs of political advertisements from a smoking lobby (or anti-smoking..not sure which). They must think we are in for another election.

Getting them here too, Keith. They're ads from the Retailer Traders Association... basically, the little guy is hurting. frown
Posted by: Arnost

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 27/08/2010 09:36

Originally Posted By: ColdFront
The funny part is that he is accusing Gillard of some security issue over her agreeing to open the books to the independents (she is currently checking the legal side) and yet he took his costings to a private firm.


Not even the opposition is allowed acess to Treasury confidential information - only when an opposition party wins an election do they get to see the real books. That's how it usually works so why should the independents get this access?
Posted by: Dale Small

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 27/08/2010 09:46

Because they hold the axe & can chop both Gillards & Abbots head off.. which I suspect they will do in a few weeks.
This election has broken every rule in the book, so why not break a couple more for the sanctity of the country. Were in the eyes of the world, rather than being the laughing stock as purported in the world media at present.. nut it out & move forward.

Aussie govt... forward.. lol.
Posted by: Keith

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 27/08/2010 11:31

Gosh, not both heads I hope! What a headless monster that would create! We might end up with the Beast from 666 fathoms.
Posted by: Vinnie

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 27/08/2010 11:43

I heard Antony Green on ABC News 24's show The Drum say that we can't just go back to the polls, whoever forms the minority government would have to show to the governer general that it was unworkable and the independents would have to show to the gov general that they couldn't make an effort with whoever was in power.
Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 27/08/2010 12:28

Originally Posted By: Arnost
Originally Posted By: ColdFront
The funny part is that he is accusing Gillard of some security issue over her agreeing to open the books to the independents (she is currently checking the legal side) and yet he took his costings to a private firm.


Not even the opposition is allowed acess to Treasury confidential information - only when an opposition party wins an election do they get to see the real books. That's how it usually works so why should the independents get this access?


Because regardless of who they choose to form government with, they have already been elected under this ridiculous hung parliament situation and need the information to make a decision for the future of Australia as a whole.
Posted by: Arnost

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 27/08/2010 13:07

Quote:
...they have already been elected ... and need the information to make a decision for the future of Australia as a whole.


Well thank the almighty for that - finally we only have three people making decissions for all of us. Progress at last! [/Sarc]

Seriously - The Treasury under Henry has become a joke... more suited to counting wombats than managing revenues. Sinclair Davidson makes a good case that Treasury are both partisan and reckless with figures. linky

Think about it - this is nothing but an attempt at wedge politics by the indies to gain advantage in negotiations (i.e. extract more pork from the Libs)... And the Libs are holding firm. As they should. They know that if the indies support Labor that means probably the end of their parliamentary carrers. And they will only be too happy to go to the polls straight away!

My take is - the ones making the most noise in the media have the weakest hands... and that's the indies (who are now well and trully wedged) and Labor.

Wilkie is by far the smartest player in this game at the moment. Watch this man to see where we go from here - I think he has all the cards at the moment.
Posted by: Arnost

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 27/08/2010 13:39

Abbott chickened out. He agreed to change the conventions so as to allow the indies access to the costings. Loser of a move I reckon.

Besides: there is no way that rules should be allowed to change in a caretaker period... once it's done and dusted, fine - but allowing a change at a time where everyoone is ready to do anything and everything for power is a recipe for downstream problems.
Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 27/08/2010 13:49

Originally Posted By: Arnost
Quote:
...they have already been elected ... and need the information to make a decision for the future of Australia as a whole.



Sarc duly noted and finally we agree on something. The situation is a sham. I was listening to ABC radio an hour back and the NZ system seems to have merit. They haven't had a majority government since they changed their system (which as Ituned in late ,am guessing was the same as ours) since its change they have only ever gone back to the polls once and as many as 4 parties form government. As it keeps everyone on its toes they claim it works well.

Also they spoke to an independent in Victoria (sorry name eludes me) that went against the wishes of his electorate and wayed to labor with the mindset that he believed labor was better suited to run government but that his support was political suicide at the next election. He increased his majority at the next poll and said that people very quickly forgave him for his choice as he served his electorate and the state well. So there is some food for thought there for these independents who at the end of the day fled the national party for a reason.


Abbott's stance appears to be a move to force the Australian public back to the polls and given 65% of people polled believe he should support the independents gaining access to treasury (if it's legal) his stance may prove to be damaging. Time will answer that one. Not many people are convinced by his reasoning.
Posted by: Vinnie

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 27/08/2010 15:56

On the topic of NZ...

http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2010/08/tvnz_gets_australias_electoral_system_and_ballot_paper_wrong.html
Posted by: Arnost

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 27/08/2010 16:08

Have you heard about the independent that promised support and at the first opportunity supported a (baseless) no-confidence motion against a Liberal Premier.

Now, what was his name... Oh I remember - Tony Windsor!
Posted by: Dale Small

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 27/08/2010 16:32

I still cant make heads or tails of the kiwi system of government, its all a mystery to me even after nearly 3 years back here.. then again im used to over 30 years of aussie governing & the federal/state system.
Posted by: Arnost

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 27/08/2010 18:40

Quote:
Abbott chickened out. He agreed to change the conventions so as to allow the indies access to the costings. Loser of a move I reckon.


Double loser of a move! (thinking about it a bit more)

Julia had no right in acceding to the indies request to release the costings - the fact that Abbott has now agreed to the conventions change has saved her bacon big time... If I was Abbott I would have let her roast! And had a crackling of a good time watching the fat sizzle under her! LOL.
Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 27/08/2010 20:41

He had no choice. If he wants to form government he has to go through this process. So he either has a chance of forming government (I'd say a better chance than labor) through co-operating with the indies or he has no chance at all when the majority of people feel he is hiding something. His hand was forced but not by Gillard.

Julia was in the process of gaining legal advice so she hadn't really acceded to anone yet. She merely said she wanted to co-operate.
Posted by: Dawgggg

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 27/08/2010 21:09

this is [censored]. I voted for someone but now the people of australia dont even get a say. Im never wasting my time driving to vote for these idiots ever again.
Posted by: Arnost

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 30/08/2010 16:02

The Two Party Preferred is narrowing.

http://vtr.aec.gov.au/

Labor is now ahead by less than 10,000 with the gap narrowing very fast.

(And they have not yet done a full preferrence allocation - and so all those who voted Liberal first and preferrenced Labor ahead of the Greens in seats where the Greens got more primary votes than the Libs are counted as giving their vote to Labor)
Posted by: Helen

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 30/08/2010 17:25

Originally Posted By: Arnost
Labor is now ahead by less than 10,000 with the gap narrowing very fast.


Less than 4,000 now, with the two party preferred count 80.2% complete.
Posted by: adam17

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 30/08/2010 18:09

Wow. that figure was about 120,000 last week. Down to 4000? I think if this trend continues, then the postal votes point towards Liberal. This would have to be a close election. Reminds me of the movie Swing Vote.
Posted by: Arnost

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 30/08/2010 20:57

Libs in front by 2000 now! But I would nor get too excited over this as they are taking out the results where Libs came 3 rd. Grayndler, Dennison etc - they still have to take out the results where Labor came other than top two, and then reconcile them back which apparently will not be done until after the primary counts are finished.
Posted by: Arnost

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 31/08/2010 17:13

ANOTHER $60 BILLION WASTED?

I am a network architect for one of Australia ‘s largest Telco’s – so I
Speak with some authority on this issue.

Here are the technical reasons this will fail :
1) fibre optic cable has a maximum theoretical Lifespan of 25 years when
Installed in conduit. Over time, the glass actually degrades (long story),
And eventually it cant do it`s bouncing of light thing any more. But when
You install fibre outside on overhead wiring (as will be done for much of
Australia ‘s houses, except newer suburbs with underground wiring), then the
Fibre degrades much quicker due to wind, temperature variation and
Solar/cosmic radiation. The glass in this case will last no more than 15
Years. So after 15 years, you will have to replace it. Whereas the copper
Network will last for many decades to come. Fibre is not the best
Technology for the last mile. That`S why no other country has done this.

2) You can not give every house 100Mbps. If you give several million
Households 100Mbps bandwidth, then you have exceeded the entire bandwidth of
The whole Internet. In reality, there is a thing called contention. Today,
Every ADSL service with 20Mbps has a contention ratio of around 20:1 (or
More for some carriers). That means, you share that 20Mbps with 20 other
People. It`S a long story why, but there will NEVER be the case of people
Getting 100Mbps of actual bandwidth. Not for several decades at current
Carrier equipment rates of evolution. The “Core” can not and will not be
Able to handle that sort of bandwidth. The 100Mbps or 1Gbps is only the
Speed from your house to the exchange. From there to the Internet, you will
Get the same speeds you get now. The “Core” of Australia ‘s network is
Already fibre (many times over). And even so, we still have high contention
Ratios. Providing fibre to the home just means those contention ratios go
Up. You will not get better download speeds.

3) new DSL technologies will emerge. 15 years ago we had 56k dial-up. Then
12 years ago we got 256k ADSL, then 8 years ago 1.5Mbps ADSL2, then 5 years
Ago 20Mbps ADSL2+. There are already new DSL technologies being
Experimented on that will deliver over 50Mbps on the same copper we have
Now. $zero cost to the tax payer

4) 4G wireless is being standardised now. The current 3G wireless was
Developed for voice and not for data, and even so it can deliver up to
21Mbps in Australia . There are problems with it, but remember that it was
Developed for voice. The 4G standard is specifically being developed for
Data, and will deliver 100Mbps bandwidth with much higher reliability (yes,
The same contention issues apply mentioned earlier). $zero cost to the tax
Payer

5) The “NBN” will be one of the largest single networks ever built on earth.
There are only a few companies who could do it – Japan ‘s Nippon NTT, BT,
AT&T;, Deutsche Telekom etc. Even Telstra would struggle to built something
On this scale. Yet we are led to believe that the same people who cant
Build school halls or install insulation without being ripped off are going
To to do it ??? Here at Telstra, we are laughing our heads off !! Because
When it all comes crumbling down, after they have spent $60+ billion and the
Network is no more than 1/2 complete, it will be up to Telstra to pick up
The pieces ! (shhhh don’t tell anyone, it`s our secret)


from a post here: linky
Posted by: !SCHUMMY!

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 31/08/2010 17:32

Originally Posted By: Arnost
Libs in front by 2000 now!


yeah you were right it wont last long, now labor is ahead by 4500 but the libs have caught up which is good news, this really is close and ive just given up, this will drag on soo long that we wont need a PM anymore haha
Posted by: Vinnie

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 31/08/2010 18:26

Malcom Fraser on Q and A last night made a good point. 98 percent of those school halls program went well, about 2.5 percent didn’t and it was in the disaster led state of you guessed it run by the state gov of NSW.
Posted by: Vinnie

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 31/08/2010 18:28

Remember Labor won the 2 party preferred vote in 1998 but couldn't form government due to not having enough seats.
Posted by: !SCHUMMY!

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 31/08/2010 18:39

nah i wouldnt remember that far haha i think i was like 7 then, this is my first election smile
Posted by: Arnost

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 31/08/2010 18:47

Craig Emerson spruiking why the independents should go with Labor:
Quote:
Labor and the Coalition are trying to convince the independents that they will be able to offer stable government.

Labor frontbencher Craig Emerson says his party can give that guarantee because its rules prevent MPs from crossing the floor, while Liberals are free to dissent.


So let me get this straight: Labor will be better for the independents because it does not allow independents. :ROFL:
Posted by: Flooding rains

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 31/08/2010 19:05

Abbott is showing so much arrogance it isn't funny. Would like nothing more than for his smirk to be wiped off his face.
Posted by: Arnost

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 31/08/2010 19:05

Back on the NBN:

Quote:
{Telstra} yesterday launched a 42 megabits per second (Mbps) USB wireless modem


I reckon the Libs solution is looking better and better! The NBN if implemented would have made us wish that it was only as wastefull as the BER! LOL! Bullet dodged me-thinks...
Posted by: Arnost

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 31/08/2010 21:14

And more on the NBN - an open letter from industry suggesting the technology blend solution:

linky

Sort of a pushback to the quips going around is the NBN is like replacing the horse & buggy with high speed rail ... When airlpanes and satelites are just around the corner.
Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 31/08/2010 23:11

Should read "the Alliance for the LNP". The IT world is as divided on the NBN as the electorate is on who should lead. I'll take that report with the grain of salt it deserves. It is only one side's view as usual.

There might be a cure for cancer just around the corner. So let's not operate on anyone until it arrives. Hmmmm. It's a good thing the world doesn't work like that.
Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 31/08/2010 23:36

...and the Libs's solution supports a continued monopoly by telstra which is prehistoric in itself. Telstra has failed dismally to read the trends in telecommunications so let's reward them by forcing all the other telcos who are "more willing to advance technology" by making them run through yet another telstra monopolised system and a continuance of delays in connections and faults because telstra's cut to the bone technical team can't get there for another 6 weeks because we are understaffed due to the need to pay a dividend to shareholders after our share value tumbled through our own incompetence.

Yeah that's advancing the country. NOT. Abbott's plan is rot. It runs on the framework of what was once one of this country's best businesses but is now in dire straits. Performance of a company's shares is usually a fair indication of the public's confidence in said company.
Posted by: Helen

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 01/09/2010 06:46

I like this piece from that link:
Quote:
...we see the greatest priority is giving broadband to those who don't have any, not faster broadband to those that have.

But as long as it can be delivered by all the companies out there, not just Tel$tra... and hopefully the 4G network will deliver the capability for bigger and cheaper data plans for those of us in the country... not the max 14Gb offered by Optus or the max 10Gb offered by Hellstra.
Posted by: DNO

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 01/09/2010 08:26

Originally Posted By: Helen
But as long as it can be delivered by all the companies out there, not just Tel$tra...

I think this is the difference between the 2 proposals for us in the 'other x%'.
With the ALP's proposal, the NBN Co becomes the wholesaler, upgrades the network and offers access to all ISPs at a fixed wholesale price whether the delivery method is fibre, wireless or satelite.

From what I can see, the Coalition will upgrade core parts of the network and offer ISPs incentives to upgrade their technology. So we will still only have Telstra and maybe Optus and the satelite ISPs providing the upgraded service on their terms and prices.

I know which one I'd prefer, but it comes with a huge pricetag.
Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 01/09/2010 11:17

The NBN won't be happening anyway. Abbott announced yesterday his party is no longer in opposition so I am guessing they will be forming government in coming days with the independents and the telstra shareholders will breath a sigh of relief for investing in a company hellbent on screwing its opposition rather than advancing itself.

Hooray for democracy bounce
Posted by: Vinnie

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 01/09/2010 11:28

Abbot announced that he was no longer an opposition but a gov in waiting. This is true . However, It does not necessarily mean that he will form gov in the next few days.

Regarding what I said about Labor in 1998, yeah I was 11, but the point was I was watching Lateline the other day and that is what they said to Julie Bishop who went on about how Labor had lost it's legitmicacy as it was banging on about 2 party preferred vote. Then the host Leigh Sales said that Labor won the 2 party preffered in 1998 election yet didn't have enough seats to form government.

On ABC News 24 this morning, the Greens have signed to Labor so it is now 73 seats Labor 73 Seats Coalition.
Posted by: Vinnie

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 01/09/2010 11:29

I wonder what things would have been like if Julia Gillard had run against John Howard, won the election and then was running in 2010 again ? What Labor have won a majority outright ?
Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 01/09/2010 12:14

Originally Posted By: vinny06
Julie Bishop who went on about how Labor had lost it's legitmicacy as it was banging on about 2 party preferred vote


Bishop has a history of opening her mouth prematurely. Hence why she was completely removed from Abbott's elecetion campiagn. Considering she is his deputy that is kind of scary. Just like her death stare.
Posted by: Arnoldnut

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 01/09/2010 12:27

I never found her as scarey as Avanda Manstone eek
Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 01/09/2010 12:39

I think they're both scary. Thanks for putting an unwanted image in my mind again smile
Posted by: Vinnie

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 02/09/2010 01:02

I was just watching Lateline and Tony Windsor was on the phone talking and he has just heard back from treasury...

He said The Labor party costings are pretty much what they said they were... but

the coalition has 6-11 billion dollars that can't be accounted for including 3 billion in cuts that they didn't tell at the election campaign to the voters what they were. He said he expects to find out from Hockey etc to explain why the figures don't add up.



Doesn't look good .

Posted by: Arnoldnut

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 02/09/2010 06:32

maybe we should adopt this practice of 'testing' the promises with the ATO before each and every election.

Keep them honest somehow ....just a damn shame that we need to check up on our own leaders.
If I had my way any liars would be put to the back of the queue each time they stray from the truth.

if they ran a car yard you'd never go back ....but their supporter will find reasons why they weren't actually lies ....and go on like nothing happened.

Pathological Lying: big question, is it a symptom or disease? wink
Posted by: Arnost

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 02/09/2010 06:51

Only 6 - 11 billion? Well that's less than Ken Henry found between the RSPT and the MRRT! Just depends on what assumptions you make. LOL
Posted by: Andy Double U

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 02/09/2010 07:41

Originally Posted By: Arnost
Only 6 - 11 billion? Well that's less than Ken Henry found between the RSPT and the MRRT! Just depends on what assumptions you make. LOL


I'm so 'meh' on the whole thing to be honest. As Andrew Robb said, it comes down to assumptions and as you alluded to Arnost, treasury hasn't been that great with it's assumptions either...

I wouldn't want to be an independent now, that's for sure! I don't know what they are going to make of this information. Side with Labor/Green coalition and possibly alienate their electorates, side with the LNP and you can guarantee they'll be ridiculed for ignoring a possible black hole... Then if they decide that neither party is decent enough we are back to the polls where the only consolation that the newly signed agreement between the ALP and Greens might mean that traditional ALP seats might actually swing to the LNP based on voters wanting to steer clear of MRRT and carbon tax...

I must congratulate Gillard, on the face of it it seems the about face has alienated core segments of the electorate, a bit like Bligh... Again, the question needs to be asked, how many more balls ups can the ALP make?! I am absolutely staggered. That's the cost of power though!
Posted by: Arnost

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 02/09/2010 08:16

The Libs should have never NEVER NEVER allowed Treasury access to the coatings. I said that it was inevitable that some embarrasing hole would be found - and this has allowed Windsor to wedge the Libs... They now can't tell him to get effed as they should, coz they can't go to an early ellection.

As usual it's not about what's best for the people but about staying in power ...
Posted by: Andy Double U

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 02/09/2010 08:39

The bit that I just love is that apparently there is an apparent need for an independent costings committee to be established to ensure proper objectivity... Isn't that what Treasury is for? Shouldn't they be apolitical?! It's the public service butt covering because they know if the LNP gains government the broom will be a coming!
Posted by: ant

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 02/09/2010 09:20

Amazing how in 2.something years, the Treasury has become some evil Labor arm, I wonder how that happened, after how many years of Howard government? Did all the staff who were there since 96 suddenly leave when Labor got in and new pro-Labor people flooded the place? The Liberals never seemed to have a problem with Treasury..... until they were in opposition.
Posted by: Arnoldnut

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 02/09/2010 09:28

wasn't Godwin with the treasury?
Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 02/09/2010 12:02

Originally Posted By: ant
Amazing how in 2.something years, the Treasury has become some evil Labor arm, I wonder how that happened, after how many years of Howard government? Did all the staff who were there since 96 suddenly leave when Labor got in and new pro-Labor people flooded the place? The Liberals never seemed to have a problem with Treasury..... until they were in opposition.


Yep.

I find it truly staggering that people are trying to defend this MASSIVE black hole. There are numerous LNP voters in the news.com website slamming Abbott. Let's go back to the polls. It is so obvious this man hoped to slide into government and then say "Hey we inherited more debt than we thought so guess what, we are cutting spending and killing our election promises". Sound familiar?
Posted by: ant

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 02/09/2010 12:43

I always feel that the LNP feels the need to hide a lot of its agendas. If it knows that people won't like them, why do they continue to try and implement them?

That aside, I guess we now know why Abbott was so reluctant to expose his budget to independant scrutiny. Fiscal rectitude? Well if it is so fiscally responsible, why wasn't it all annouced in teh usual way?

And I wonder what spending they planned to cut, or in fact if they'd got as far as planning at all. Imagine that, needing to find how many billions in savings at short notice? I guess they could cut all teh middle class welfare to working families OH YEAH like that would happen!

But where would it happen?

Let Labor form a coalition with all or some of the independants. I'd like to see a situation where all teh non-aligned agree to support legislation they feel that they can. That way, everything Labor wish to do, they have to get X number of those guys to agree to support it. Government by negotiation and consensus.
Posted by: Andy Double U

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 02/09/2010 12:59

Originally Posted By: ColdFront
It is so obvious this man hoped to slide into government and then say "Hey we inherited more debt than we thought so guess what, we are cutting spending and killing our election promises". Sound familiar?


Yep, and Labor was STUPID enough to let them use it as an excuse.

Just to put it in perspective, the purpoted $7 billion dollar black hole is in savings estimates. Even if they don't deliver all of those savings, the Coalition still puts more money into the bank then the ALP. Then we've got the $12 billion dollar difference in the estimates between the RSPT and MRRT. $6 billion wasted of $13 billion on the failure of a BER scheme. What was it? the $1 billion (??? I think the figure was around this) insulation rollout that is going to cost at least another $1 billion to fix...

Seriously, if ALP supporters want to point at a $7 billion dollar black hole, they'd better keep in mind there are three fingers pointing back at them at least as much mismanaged, poorly estimated costings and expenditure that these turkeys have already cost us.
Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 02/09/2010 13:45

Trying to turn a massive negative into a positive. How predictable. They have been caught lying red handed and had these costings been released several weeks ago we all know where Abbott would have ended up. Bring Turnball back. At least he was honest. That suspicion that I couldn't trust this clown all along has now been justified. They don't trust treasury (who their government largely employed) but can put costings into the hands of a private firm despite Abbott suggesting treasury figures shouldn't be in the public eye. Hmmmmm. Hypocrit.

Despite those shortcomings of Labor's that you keep recycling the LNP still failed to form a majority government. Why is that? because people rightfully do not trust them. Oh and I'm not a staunch labor supporter. They are just the better of two crook options . Sadly by a considerable margin.
Posted by: ant

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 02/09/2010 13:46

You don't have to be an "ALP Supporter" or LNP supporter to be concerned about issues. If a person isn't concerned about issues like this because the issue is affecting their favourite party, that's one-eyed support indeed.

Fact is, one party's numbers add up, the other party's numbers do not.
Posted by: Flooding rains

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 02/09/2010 15:03

Here we go again, all about money in the bank and surplus. Yes I agree that labor go too far in the other direction but what did all that money in the 'bank' do for us in the Howard years. Certainly didnt sure up better hospitals and education. It left the Bruce Highway up here degrade to such a poor state its known as the Bruce Holeway. yay lets get surplus but do nothing with it! Brilliant!
Posted by: Andy Double U

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 02/09/2010 15:04

Have either of you guys ever sat down and done a budget forecast for a business? Now complicate it further by bringing other people to the table to have their input. The best bit, you really don't know how close you were to the mark until after the forecast period has passed.

Fact is, your attempts at painting the LNP into a corner by using the analysis of one group of people is really like executing someone using heresay as evidence. I will reserve my opinion and give it honestly as more facts come to light. Right now, your defense of an incompetent government that has chronically blundered time and time again could be called hypocritical. I do know however that there is a BIG between forecasting and saying the right things and actually delivering on it. So right now, the Labor/Greens have zilch confidence from me, especially whilst Swan is at the helm. The FACT is that the LNP bottom line still looks better than the ALP's right now and that has been verified by treasury.

Originally Posted By: ALP Treasury Costings
The Departments' assessment is that the ALP's policies would result in a cumulative
improvement in the underlying cash balance of $106 million over the four years to 2013-14.


And

Originally Posted By: Coalition Treasury Costings
The Departments' assessment is that the Coalition's policies would result in a cumulative
improvement in the underlying cash balance of $4.5 billion over the four years to 2013-14 if
the investment expenditures can be accommodated within the existing forward estimates and
$0.9 billion if they are not.


So the Coalition be at least $800 million dollars ahead of the ALP in a bad scenario and $4.4 billion if they pulled everything off that treasury says they can... Not to mention they may actually be able to improve on those figures again.

So tell me, would you be happier with $100 million in the bank or $900 million? If treasury say they can do it, what's to gripe about? smile
Posted by: Andy Double U

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 02/09/2010 15:13

Originally Posted By: Flooding rains
... what did all that money in the 'bank' do for us in the Howard years.


Ummmm, it gave Rudd, Swan and Gillard the money to squander whilst trying to save us from the GFC. Whilst we are still in debt now, it's not as big as what it would have been had there been no money in the kitty! So in hindsight, it's a darn good thing that Howard didn't spend all of the money because otherwise we'd be eyeing off Greece and thinking how good they've got it!

As for education... seriously? It's getting money thrown at it like never before and it is still failing the younger generations. So why keep throwing money at it? It's not making it any better at the moment! As for health, that is a state matter, to that end, look no further than your friendly state government for it's failings. Actually education is state run as well... Failing health and education systems run by the states, pure coincidence or symptomatic of poor governance?
Posted by: Vinnie

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 02/09/2010 16:19

Well according to the news on ABC News 24, Andrew Wilkie has signed onto Labor. So only 2 seats short now.

Very interesting indeed.
Posted by: Vinnie

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 02/09/2010 16:33

If it had been Gillard vs Howard would the ALP still have won ? and would the leader have changed ?

I don't understand why Gillard wasn't the leader 3 years back .
Posted by: Flooding rains

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 02/09/2010 16:46

Heath and Education projects requires funds from both federal and state level. State run maybe, but definite federal involvement. So money in the bank is only there to protect for a recession? When will we learn that all this build up of money etc and blowing up bubbles is what causes them to finally burst. Effective use of money in key areas and infrastructure will do more than anything else. So we will keep doing the same, just keep on barely getting by, barely keeping up with population growth and let the next financial crisis occur.
Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 02/09/2010 20:47

Wow. It keeps getting better. $1 billion tp a hospital to woo an independent. So based on that I am guessing each independent would have been offered the same. Afterall, it wouldn't be nice to offer one more than the others.

This little snippet fell in my lap today.
http://dailybludge.com.au/2010/08/tony-abbott-the-man-behind-the-mask/
Posted by: lookin

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 02/09/2010 21:06

Mr Abbott has lost a whole load of credibility now.(not that he had alot anyway)I think twice Isaid that he was buying votes at any cost, and it appears now the evidence is clear. Quite right CF he would have ,if elected ,said that some promises could not be kept because of something labor had done. He was a fraud and has now been found out.I find it hard to argue this any other way.
Posted by: ant

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 02/09/2010 21:12

It was amateur hour with Abbott and Hockey. They just don't have the talent to run the country, they're children.
Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 03/09/2010 10:41

So now they are smearing Wilkie also because they don't like the guy's decision. This is rather reckless behavior by the LNP. Get used to these kiddy antics because come Tuesday they are most likely to form government.

The 3 remaining independents wish to form a block and Katter won't support the mining tax so it's pretty much a done deal. . Bob Katter wants a giant cross on top of Queensland's highest mountain and is a much better chance of getting it under Abbott grin
Posted by: ant

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 03/09/2010 10:54

I dunno. I'm going to wait and see. I think the 2 non-katter independants are leaning towards Labor, for various reasons. And this is only to support one or the other to form government. On legislation, they'll vote their own way each time.
Posted by: Dave-Wx

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 03/09/2010 11:27

They might be a bit cranky at Wilkie because Liberal preferences got him over the line (not to mention the fact that Wilkie and the Liberal candidate were old mates at Duntroon)
Posted by: ant

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 03/09/2010 11:41

...or maybe the liberal candidate was in a year above Wilkie at Duntroon, which might explain a few things!

Wilkie's a progressive. It would have been very hard for him to go with an Abbott gov't. Turnbull, maybe, Abbot, never.
Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 03/09/2010 12:05

Yeah Ant I agree. It all comes back to Abbott. There must be some in the LNP that regret they put him there knowing he squeaked home by one vote over Turnball. I would have had a much more difficult decision on how my vote went had he been their leader. Various threads I have read have numerous LNP supporters calling for Turnball to get back in the leadership chair. Particularly after this costings issue. The change in his attitude between election night and this week must be ringing alarm bells for some of his members.

Sometimes politicians vote out of fear that the new leader may shove them to the backbench. Had they known it was that close I think it would have been a different outcome and a much better one for the party.

This is an interesting comment from Katter regarding K Rudd.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/09/03/3001586.htm
Posted by: ant

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 03/09/2010 12:14

Turnbull is such a huge step above the other LNP people in terms of ability. He's no politician, which is one of the things I like about him. But the man is so damn competant! I do wish he'd consent to be NSW premier for a while, before returning to federal politics.

I would never, ever vote Liberal. But if Mr Turnbull was there, I just might. Maybe.
Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 03/09/2010 12:15

Abbott has pretty much announced that the LNP will form a minority government.

http://www.cairns.com.au/article/2010/09/01/124991_election.html

Posted by: Mick10

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 03/09/2010 12:25

tony abbott actually said that in his cabinet meeting a few days ago too.
the independents, including katter have only just handed over their so called 'wish lists' and no decisions are expected until monday.
Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 03/09/2010 19:23

I think they know who they will be joining and have done since winning their seats. They just want to see how much they can milk out of Abbott before joining him.
Posted by: lookin

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 03/09/2010 23:13

So are these three actually going to be independents in their own right or are they going to form the "independent party" . Seems one cant go anywhere without the other .Wonder if they will need three weeks to make up their minds whenever they have to vote on legistlation or whether one of them can actually think independently of the other. Why have they been a party of three anyway? ,seems strange to me
Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 03/09/2010 23:24

I think they are the only people truly happy with the current hung parliament LATS. So they don't want to balls up the process and force us back to the polls. If two were to support the coalition and one the ALP we would have two parties with 75 votes a piece and it's back to the polls. So they are making sure that doesn't happen so that they become the most powerful people in politics for the next 3 years.

In effect they have as much power as any PM if they can hold it together. If they can't and we go back to the polls and one party forms a majority the independents will be pretty much nobodies again.
Posted by: Mick10

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 03/09/2010 23:26

one of the 3 in a media scrum i was listening in on this morning said, that "he hopes they will all agree together". so going by that statement, i would say its not guaranteed that they will. i think it will be highly likely they will all make the same decision though.
Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 06/09/2010 20:00

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/09/06/3004121.htm

I think it is becoming more likely the 3 amigos as they have come to be know will support the LNP. Particularly as they are now asking about Mr Crook's loyalty to the LNP.
Posted by: Farm Weather

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 06/09/2010 21:08

Totally agree CF ask me yesterday would have said Labour for sure.

Regardless of which they end up supporting apparently its been stated that "no child shall go without a ten gallon hat".....
Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 06/09/2010 21:51

The only possible reason they would want to know is that when they form a minority government with the LNP, if Crook crossed the floor it would be back to 74 seats a side and they would lose any power they now hold.

I haven't felt they would support labor from the outset to be honest. This whole process has been about making sure they get what they want from Abbott wthout the need for a fresh election and they then run the risk of being forced back to independence as stand alone members with no clout. Kind of ironic considering that is how they were elected.

The country will now be run by independents regardless of who forms government. They made sure of that when the reforms were signed off today. People are crying out for a fresh election but the question remains. Who would change the way they voted? So a minority government it is. it will be an interesting 12 months ahead that's for sure.
Posted by: ant

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 06/09/2010 21:53

Have a watch of Q and A on the ABC now. Katter (giving audience idiots a good serve!), Milne, Minchin, Beattie, it's not bad.
Posted by: Arnost

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 06/09/2010 22:20

Quote:
This whole process has been about making sure they get what they want from Abbott wthout the need for a fresh election and they then run the risk of being forced back to independence as stand alone members with no clout.


I would have agreed until the weekend when Oakshott insisted that the Speaker's role be independent and be paired - now aside from costitutional issues, this would indicate that he wants the speakers role and wants to retain the casting vote. This suggests that he wants to support Labor as it is likely that certainly Katter, and maybe Windsor are leaning Liberal.
Posted by: Arnost

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 06/09/2010 22:28

I'm watching Q&A - and you know as mad as Bob K is he does make some interesting points - and maybe not as illiterate as he's happy to throw around DeToqueville and Mill ... He's playing a character me thinks.
Posted by: ant

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 06/09/2010 23:19

Katter did well. He is well read and intelligent, even people who don't like him admit that. And it's about time someone did something about the economic rationalist view that has our bloody efficient farmers being run to the breadline while we ship in food grown in very dodgey ways and under very dodgey circumstances. Nice to hear this stuff getting a national airing, finally.
Posted by: !SCHUMMY!

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 06/09/2010 23:28

how long does it really take for those independents to decide, i think we're fine without a proper PM!! haha fingers crossed tomorrow
Posted by: Arnost

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 06/09/2010 23:45

Quote:
40. Questions arising in the House of Representatives shall be determined by a majority of votes other than that of the Speaker. The Speaker shall not vote unless the numbers are equal, and then he shall have a casting vote.


This is what I meant that pairing may be unconstitutional. The above is section 40 from the Constitution. The interpretation so far has been that the speaker would not have a vote, unless the vote was tied on the floor in which case s/he would have a casting or deciding vote.

By "pairing" the speaker, this will mean that the opposition or at least the opposed vote will be lost. So if hypothetically the count is 75 all, then if Oakeshott is speaker and consequently he does not vote, then in the past the opposition position will be carried 74 - 75. Under the new arrangement given the speaker is paired this means that the vote will be 74 - 74 and Oakeshott as speaker will have a casting vote. This is as far as I'm concerned completely against the spirit of section 40.

The fact that the coallition agreed and caved is disgusting. They may have been screwed over royally - by that snake Windsor in demanding and releasing Treasury coatings, by Wilkies billion dollar sting and now this Oakeshott stunt. Oh. At next ellection the speaker is uncontested - good luck Rob... Can't see you around after the next election.
Posted by: lookin

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 07/09/2010 00:27

This whole independent power play has become to scary now.Example , have been in enterprise bargaining discussions at work for 6 weeks last Fri the club i work at pulled out of negotiations and have said in clear terms that there will be redundancies and a complete restructure of the business .Why? Wilkies gaming reforms and the all to rushed signing of the document by Miss Gillard.Whilst I dont want to bring up aloton gaming regulations some 100000 people are employed across Aust in the club / pub industry most of these WILL go as a result of his request. Funny enough casinos and internet gaming are not included in this . The document I saw today also says that if the states do not tow the line god help them in the 2012 budget as the same will happen as in the health reforms .ie do it or you will suffer.If this is what the major parties are doing with these so called independents god help us. I never thought id say it but our hope for job security now is with the Lib / Nats as they havent signed up this idiot from Tasmania
Posted by: Arnost

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 07/09/2010 01:06

If Labor gets up, you are just about guaranteed three years of this. With the Libs there is a good chance that they'll get a double disolution trigger once the Greens get balance of power in the senate.
Posted by: Arnost

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 07/09/2010 01:33

Hah! This is why you don't trust this Treasury:
Linky

Game on ... The Lib option to tell the independents to get effed is in play again! WooHoo!
Posted by: bigwilly

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 07/09/2010 08:07

It's quite amazing how quickly and decisively people move into 'attack mode' towards the independents, not just in here but in the media as well. I'm thinking it's in unusual and perhaps uncomfortable position that people find themselves in, and instead of going about discussions rationally and with a balanced view, they revert to a lower level and just attack, attack, attack. A similar mindset that has led to such things as Apartheid and slavery: I don't understand it so I'll attack it.

I mean take the comments in the media about how long it is taking; would you prefer they do a rushed job and not commit the time the responsibility of their position demands? Or perhaps you would prefer it if they just succumbed to the first bit of bait that was dropped in the pond?

As far as I'm concerned this has been a blurdy good wake-up call to tweedle dumb and tweedle dee; Australia is not happy with the two extremely poor (and quite similar) choices we have been presented with to form Government. IMO there should be more of it to keep the mongrels honest. And as a resident of regional Australia it's nice to finally see a bit of attention on the oh so important regions of Australia that feed you lot in the cities.

Mind you the city-centric elitism that has emerged from opinion pieces and letters to the editor have really high-lighted the city-country divide and just how expansive that divide has become. And this is a real shame because we have bureaucrats in the city making decisions that directly affected us out here and the way we live, the way we are/were able to grow food and provide infrastructure. Certainly I don't think we should be overstating our representation, but I'm happy as a pig in mud that the three 'king-makers' - as they've been coined - are regional and rural based independents.
Posted by: Arnoldnut

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 07/09/2010 08:21

and a big part of the Independents deals have been to be heard in parliament.
Question time etc has been tidied as the Speaker will have control and no interjections any more ....was crap.

Running of the house will change if nothing else does wink

Of course if Abbott gets up we'd all better head for hobart as it gunna get real busy down here heheheheeeeee
Posted by: ant

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 07/09/2010 08:56

Last night on Q and A, Katter used a brilliant analogy that pulled together a few of his themes. He said that having Labor and Liberal as the two only real forces in government was "the woolies and coles of a government". So well said.

And yes, our governments are way too city-centric. Sydney and Melbourne and to a lesser extent Brisbane are where the decisions are made, and teh attitudes of people in cities to country people is gob-smacking. There was an idiot on Whirlpool last night snarling about why should he pay more for food just because our farmers were not as efficient as the ones we're importing from. Where do you start with people like that?
Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 07/09/2010 09:13

Originally Posted By: ant
Katter did well. He is well read and intelligent, even people who don't like him admit that. And it's about time someone did something about the economic rationalist view that has our bloody efficient farmers being run to the breadline while we ship in food grown in very dodgey ways and under very dodgey circumstances. Nice to hear this stuff getting a national airing, finally.


I don't know that he is what I'd call intelligent. I believe he is intelligent in certain areas and not so in others and this is in many ways a good thing. He sticks to his guns and is focusing on basic commonsense issues. I am not always supportive of the farmer's lobby but importing bananas is plain madness. So is the way they are getting screwed by the two big chains. Both the ALP and LNP are guilty there.

On other issues he isn't fit to have power but fortunately he won't be the only one with a say.


Originally Posted By: ant
There was an idiot on Whirlpool last night snarling about why should he pay more for food just because our farmers were not as efficient as the ones we're importing from. Where do you start with people like that?


They make good fertilizer. smile
Posted by: Helen

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 07/09/2010 09:23

Originally Posted By: ColdFront

Originally Posted By: ant
There was an idiot on Whirlpool last night snarling about why should he pay more for food just because our farmers were not as efficient as the ones we're importing from. Where do you start with people like that?

They make good fertilizer. smile

Hehehe, I'll pay that. grin
Posted by: Arnost

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 07/09/2010 09:41

Why I think the current Treasury is too politicized and why I think Windsor is a snake (amongst other reasons)

Linky
Posted by: Andy Double U

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 07/09/2010 10:08

If the information contained in that link is accurate, then treasury really needs to be put under the microscope. I mean, dismissing the mismanagement/overspending of the BER scheme as not being an important factor in calculating the conservative bias allowance... really? What planet are these bureauprats on?! Yet there will be people who still think that the sun's golden rays shine from the buttocks of those who have repeatedly screwed up... I just don't get it... confused

The clincher though is that three men are expected to sort their way through the mess of opinions, facts and figures and come up with a decision that is going to steer this country's course for the next three years. How can they be expected to do that? There is no way these guys can comprehend the sheer bulk of information required that goes into running this country let alone figure a course of action for the future. These guys should take a good hard look at which preferences got them to the point they are in this position in the first place and follow that. There is the Steve Fielding experiment that Andrew Wilke looks set to repeat though.
Posted by: Andy Double U

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 07/09/2010 10:42

An opinion piece looking at now and into the future:

Link
Posted by: Arnost

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 07/09/2010 10:46

Quote:
It's quite amazing how quickly and decisively people move into 'attack mode' towards the independents


Coz they are spolied pratts, mostly loonies who have slunk under the public radar as they have been, and frankly still are irrelevant.

I say this because they have had more than their fair share of govt investment into their electorates:



And if Oakeshott seems "light" just think about how many billions are currently being pumped through his electorate upgrading the Pacific Highway.

They are grandstanding at best and at worst disadvantaging all the other people of Australia by demanding really stupid, mostly retrogressive and usually very expensive conditions for their support on to p of the pork they have already scammed above and beyond. This is a tyrany of the minority that any politician should not abide - and it is a discredit to both leaders that they are prostituting themselves to this rabble. Like I said - I would tell them to get effed: "This is the policy I went to the election with and if you don't like it - support the other mob and face the consequences in your electorate next time."

The biggest lesson I am drumming into my kids: Never compromise your principles - for therein lies the road to perdition.


Posted by: Greg Sorenson

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 07/09/2010 12:07

I haven't been able to read the 20 conditions - have they been made public? This aside, some good can also come out of
having negotiations that may identity issues that both major parties haven't had the fortitude to tackle over the past
20 years.

Parliamentary reform will be excellent IMO, at least question time will allow for parties outside the big 2 to
have issues heard and voted on the floor in the coming 3 years. Another plus is that the minor parties such as the greens
will now be held accountable for their policies, which might make them sharpen their pencils before submitting private
members bills. We'll have to wait and see.

The point is, the house will be a place for legislation that actually is considered and reflective of a broader range
of constituents, and hopefully implemented efficiently. Maybe it's over-zealously idealistic to think that people can work together
at the highest level from different backgrounds, but i say lets see where the chips fall and make a judgement call when all is
said and done. 3 years will come and go very quickly and before you know it we can dictate as a populous how we want our
country to governed. Other countries have performed well for years in a minority government, so are we so different? Time will
tell.
Posted by: ant

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 07/09/2010 12:15

It's illustrative that both the majors are enthusiastic about the reforms to parliament, yet none of these would have got up under either being the majority government, which both acknowledge.

These various independants and Greens seem to be operating as a needed clean-up service.
Posted by: Arnost

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 07/09/2010 13:08

How pale is the art of sorcerers, witches, and conjurors when compared with that of the government’s Treasury Department!
— Ludwig von Mises
Posted by: Flooding rains

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 07/09/2010 13:42

Katter has gone for the libs. From what it sounds, Abbott just kissed ass more on Katters list of wishes.

And he also says he wishes Rudd was still in.
Posted by: lookin

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 07/09/2010 13:45

you know this how?
Posted by: Flooding rains

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 07/09/2010 13:46

Watch the news lol poke
Posted by: lookin

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 07/09/2010 13:47

was told 3pm fof the big announcement .he must be on his own then maybe????
Posted by: Flooding rains

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 07/09/2010 13:49

Yeah it interesting that he has broken out of the agreement and announcing early. Might be a division there.
Posted by: lookin

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 07/09/2010 13:50

certainly looks like it.Not surprising tho
Posted by: Flooding rains

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 07/09/2010 13:51

He is very clear on the fact that he liked Rudd and Swan on many different aspects.
Posted by: Shayne

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 07/09/2010 13:56

he reminds me of Sir Joh in so many ways young Katter does..
Posted by: Flooding rains

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 07/09/2010 13:57

Wow he is dragging this out, saying the same things 10 times over.....
Posted by: Cheers

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 07/09/2010 14:01

Yep,katter has six fingers.
Posted by: Dave-Wx

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 07/09/2010 14:02

Young Katter eh poke he is 65!
Posted by: ant

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 07/09/2010 14:17

I had a feeling that the other two would opt for Labor, but Katter would opt for LNP. And being independant, he can still vote for whatever he likes.

Very suspenseful, what will 3pm bring?!
Posted by: Keith

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 07/09/2010 14:39

It's all about these people keeping their power. That's the way it's always been throughout world political history. I've just been reading a historical article on how Britain carved up Africa in the late 1800s-early 1900s. It was individual prestige and ego trips. Nothing's different with our election. Windsor (I think..Port Macquarie) will side with Labor just to get his broadband for his electorate, which is traditionally conservative. He wouldn't likely have much to do with Labor otherwise. All just for his own power. Or so it seems to me.
Posted by: Greg Sorenson

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 07/09/2010 14:41

suspenseful.... 20 mins to go. man, i can't work under these conditions!!!!
Posted by: Flooding rains

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 07/09/2010 14:46

Nick Minchin seems awfully happy.......
Posted by: Seabreeze

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 07/09/2010 14:46

Originally Posted By: Keith
Windsor (I think..Port Macquarie)

Windsor is ours (New England). Oakeshott is Lyne (with Port Macquarie being the name of the state electorate). smile
Posted by: Keith

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 07/09/2010 14:51

A boring comment from your truly, but there's even been a musical component to all this. Yesterday the ABC had Schubert's Unfinished Symphony (now there's an apt description if ever there was one) at the back of its commentary. And it was Beethoven who, on his death bed, said 'Plaudite, amici, comedia finita est' (Applause, friends, the comedy is ended).

Almost. One way or another.
Posted by: Flooding rains

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 07/09/2010 15:09

Let the other bloke speak! lol
Posted by: Flooding rains

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 07/09/2010 15:18

BLAH BLAH BLAH
Posted by: Arnoldnut

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 07/09/2010 15:25

I want to see this 'regional australia package'.
Regional education seems to be a big part of that! ....outstanding!
Posted by: Flooding rains

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 07/09/2010 15:25

Obvious who he going for, might help if he tells us.
Posted by: Keith

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 07/09/2010 15:34

Gosh what filibustering!

Labor gets the gong.
Posted by: rain gauge

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 07/09/2010 15:35

Great news
Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 07/09/2010 15:37

Well that's that. Now let's get this great country going in the right direction.
Posted by: Seabreeze

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 07/09/2010 15:38

Tony Windsor is dead to me. mad mad mad
Posted by: ant

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 07/09/2010 15:43

Good outcome. I had a feeling it would go this way. It's going to be great for everyone in this country, not just the greedy swinging voters.

Now every bit of legislation will have to be negotiated and justified. And not just the government will be putting legislation up, excellent.

And vested interests and lobby groups are going to have a much harder time of it.
Posted by: strontium dog

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 07/09/2010 15:46

Lets see how good it is. I give it twelve months before it turns to custard.I had actually come to think a new poll would have been the best way to go.
Posted by: Xavo

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 07/09/2010 15:48

Moving on...
Posted by: Arnoldnut

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 07/09/2010 15:52

Have to wonder which portfolio Rob Oakeshott has been offered.

I'll also be intrigued to see who takes the speaker of the houses job.
Posted by: Andy Double U

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 07/09/2010 15:53

Hmmmm, so the ALP has the unenviable job of trying to pursue policy reform whilst negotiating every step of the way with the independents. Then somehow it's got to get past a senate with the balance of power... I think Oakshott is correct in his prediction of seeing some sparks flying in parliament, but whether anything will be achieved of great significance... I don't know. I think these guys are dreaming if they think this will last 3 years. If it does, please feel free to tell me I'm wrong!
Posted by: ant

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 07/09/2010 15:58

I think it's worth a go. This is what the country voted for. No strong feeling for one or the other of the majors, which means both of them had lost the support and confidence of many people. Every election, more people vote independant or green or even democrat. That means they don't want to vote for the majors.

I've been voting that way for years, and ensuring my vote exhausts at Labor rather than LNP (as it has to exhaust at one of them).

So now it's about policy with merit, not driven by interest groups. And yeah, if it gets to a stalemate, then we'll have another election.
Posted by: Shayne

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 07/09/2010 16:04

whos ear do i wisper into to get rid of half the F35 JSF's we have on order, have 20 of the remaining order converted to the STOL version for those new flat tops the navy ordered we have on order and get us some F22s?

hmmm....and yeah...BOHICA!
Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 07/09/2010 17:29

Originally Posted By: Arnoldnut

I'll also be intrigued to see who takes the speaker of the houses job.


Crook?
Posted by: Dawgggg

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 07/09/2010 18:43

Never ever wasting my time voting again smile they kick each other out, they vote themselves in. Screw them.
Posted by: Rime

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 07/09/2010 19:15

Wow! Oakeshott is an A grade fruitcake. He backs Labor because he wants stability yet he virtually trashes the Westminister system of government by calling upon the pollies to vote outside of their respective party "philosphies". This bloke is full of contradictions and I get the feeling he does not understand that there will be undesirable consequences if he peddles this belief that the government can work without parties.

Both Windsor and Oakeshott have admitted that they have backed the party that did not have the majority backing of the electorate, yet they try and spin this crap they are supporting stability. Backing a minority government that does not have the majority support of the electorate is going to be hostile no matter what. If they truly believed in stability, they would have forced us back to the polls.
Posted by: strontium dog

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 07/09/2010 19:21

Well Bad Shayne, when the US congress allows the F22 to be sold we could look at it but till then there is no point trying.
Posted by: Arnost

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 07/09/2010 19:43

The interesting thing is that Abbott (and Bishop) by Liberal rules have to spill and declare the leadership positions vacant (they can of course re-nominate). It will be interesting if Turnbull nominates as well - I'm guessing that he won't, but this government may fold in a matter of months... And I'm guessing that Labor will have even a harder time next time and if Abbott wins that - that will be it for Turnbull's Prime Ministerial ambitions. Interesting times. I'm hearing it's on Thursday.

And even the Indies think that the Libs would win if the election were held right now - which leads me to the best quote I've seen so far:

Quote:
When asked by a journalist why he didn’t back the Coalition, Tony Windsor admitted with a grin, “because they’d be more likely to win if they did go back to the polls”.

When asked how he could back a government that’s less likely to win, Windsor stated that they’d “be more likely to be here a longer time if they can’t go to the polls and win in a hurry”, with Oakeshot interjecting, “They’ve got more to lose”.


Oh he's a snake and everyone hates him with just reason... (My bet is that he will not run again)

And we find out that the way to bribe someone to vote for them is not offer them $1 billion - but $10 billion and make them a minister will do the trick. Now that's the way to do it! (My bet is that Oakeshott's gone next election - and that even if there is a massive swing to Labor! LOL)

Oh well - well done - played strong and we'll do ya nextime etc... Bring on the beers! :Cheers:

Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 07/09/2010 19:56

It's funny how certain politicians and certain sectors of the community can't count. Firstly the ALP had the majority vote, followed by Liberal, then the Nationals and then the Greens. As the LNP are two parties in coalition with 74 seats (if you count Crook) between them (7 or more were national seats) that means the count was made up by "TWO" parties. As a single party the ALP won the most seats. if you factor in the One Million plus votes that went to the nationals the ALP also had the most votes. So it comes down to fiddling the numbers to suit the spin. A lot like the costings debacle.

This afternoon Abbott said the coalition had the most seats. Which coalition does he refer to? I'm assuming that he means the LNP but then a new coalition was formed today that created a 76 seat majority to form government. Oddly enough this arrangement is no different to the Liberal / national one in that it was used to increase the number of seats. How do they differ?

It also appears to be lost on people that these independents were once a part of the LNP and left due to an obvious distaste for the party. Now the tears are flowing because they don't wish to support the party they left. They are INDEPENDENTS. Now they don't wish to support them they are dogs. Hmmmm.

The suggestion that the LNP would win government in its own right at a fresh poll is highly debatable. Two thirds of voters that swung away from labor did so to the greens despite knowing the risk. They simply couldn't bring themsleves to vote for Abbott and even the majority of the 700,000 informals were protest votes. Given Abbott's antics with the costings I doubt he would gain a majority vote. There was a thread in News.com after his costings debacle that was full of LNP voters who wanted another vote. They felt ripped off. Then there are those green voters that protested but didn't really want Abbott in.

When the ABC asked Katter's electorate if he had made the right choice they weren't convinced he had. Several commented that as he had sided with opposition the electorate would miss out again and others were levelled directly at Abbott and their distaste for the man and Kennedy is about as conservative as you can get. It is entirely farm based. Despite month upon month of media spin against the current government Abbott did not form a majority government.

Listening to the ABC radio tonight the vast majority of voters are for this arrangement. Remembering of course that Queensland recorded the biggest swing to the LNP. So I am not sure that Abbott is a safe bet in a fresh poll.

My guess is that he will do whatever he can in the short term to force an early poll. Because "IF" this new coalition works the longer it goes on the lesser his chances of getting into government. Watch for Steve Fielding to cause as much disruption as possible in the senate between now and June next year despite Abbott's refusal to endorse him. Of course Abbott made those comments whilst trying to form a minority government. Perhaps his stance will change now.

I also find it amusing that Bishop was allowed to speak now the horse has bolted. For 5 weeks during the election campaign she was gagged.

Posted by: Rime

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 07/09/2010 20:29

Originally Posted By: Arnost
The interesting thing is that Abbott (and Bishop) by Liberal rules have to spill and declare the leadership positions vacant (they can of course re-nominate). It will be interesting if Turnbull nominates as well - I'm guessing that he won't, but this government may fold in a matter of months... And I'm guessing that Labor will have even a harder time next time and if Abbott wins that - that will be it for Turnbull's Prime Ministerial ambitions. Interesting times. I'm hearing it's on Thursday.


The Libs would be absolutely stupid if they contemplate putting Turnbull back in as leader. Turnbull would never win over the conservative minded, which is a huge chunk of the Liberal base. Abbott's convictions and discipline brought the Libs back from the dead despite all the negative press and predictions about him. He has gained huge amount of respect because of it. I am with you and expect that the Labor government will fold within months or at least before the senate change over in July next year.
Posted by: Shayne

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 07/09/2010 21:03

Originally Posted By: strontium dog
Well Bad Shayne, when the US congress allows the F22 to be sold we could look at it but till then there is no point trying.


are the Japanese not getting a less sophisticated version of the F22...eh..maybe im wrong..if the Japs ind Israeli's get them..we should too..

still....im freaked out enough with the election result...
Posted by: Arnost

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 07/09/2010 21:09

Yes Rime, the Libs WOULD be that stupid .

The fact is if Turnbull would have retained the leadership in November last year, we would have had an ETS and Rudd would be PM with an increased majority. But so what? Diddn't happen and Abbott lost the election.

And the pundits ARE right that if all things being equal and the election was between Gillard and Turnbull, Malcolm would have been PM for two weeks with seats to spare. That's reality - and an Abbott / Gillard replay may result in a hung parliament.

My gut feel is that the next election will be between Shorten and Turnbull. Sorry Tony - you have done a job that only heroes can only aspire to - but you are destined to be a footnote in history ... Roadkill as you so presciently put it 9 months ago.

I agitated for Turnbulls removal last year. I'll do it again as I think that Abbott is one of the most decent guys in Parliament at the moment... But as the saying goes - expectations modified by reality - i.e. Comprehension creep!
Posted by: Arnost

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 07/09/2010 21:19

CF - you are wrong.

Quote:
Its funny how certain sectors of the community can't count


There is a vast difference between the Lib/Nat coalition and Labor/Greens. The Nats did not run a single candidate in city seats and the Libs did not run a candidate in many rural seats. And even more telling, the Lib/Nats did not run separately, but on the same ticket in the Senate.

The Lib/Nat coalition got most seats. WE'D
Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 07/09/2010 22:10

Originally Posted By: Arnost
Libs did not run a candidate in many rural seats.


The key word being "many" ....and yeah I'm wrong but only from one side but that's hardly surprising. The Liberals couldn't get the numbers to win any elections. Nor could the nationals. Hence the merger. Now that Labor have entered one it is not acceptable. Give me a break.

I can't help but think that Abbott and Co's demanding that the independents support them was part of their downfall. How arrogant and if I was one of those independent I'd protest too.

It's funny that I have heard both Abbott and Howard labelled as heroes by LNP supporters over the past few weeks but as the worst kind of liars by everyone else. Infact even some LNP supporters lost faith in him after the costings blackhole. That kind of dishonesty doesn't warrant a hero tag. Everyone on one side is praising Abbott's efforts yet on the other they are saying "If this guy is so great why isn't he PM?"
Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 07/09/2010 22:33

A picture says a thousand words!



Uploaded with ImageShack.us
Posted by: Arnost

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 07/09/2010 22:40

Oh FFS:
Quote:
KEY Independent Rob Oakeshott has been offered the role of minister for regional development in the Gillard Government.

Talk about a conflict of interest! Don't these people think? In the private sector Directors go to the wall on stuff like this...
Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 07/09/2010 22:41

This isn't the private sector!
Posted by: KevD

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 07/09/2010 22:55

Originally Posted By: Arnost
Oh FFS:
Quote:
KEY Independent Rob Oakeshott has been offered the role of minister for regional development in the Gillard Government.

Talk about a conflict of interest! Don't these people think? In the private sector Directors go to the wall on stuff like this...

What's the problem? He represents consituents in the regions...and would make a great advocate for regional development...Really don't see what the problem is here?
Posted by: Mick10

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 07/09/2010 23:12

the independents have been voted in by the people of their electorate. all 3 of them have made it clear and simple over the past 3 weeks that they will do what they think is best for their seat, and also made it very clean they want more done for regional australia. this hasnt been a secret. if Oakeshott is given a ministerial position for regional development then that is exactly what the independents were fighting for. why wouldnt he take that type of roll? i think they have shown great leadership in being clearcut about all this and i think Rob would do an excelent job as a minister.
Posted by: Arnost

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 07/09/2010 23:24

The man has just been given a blank chequebook - well maybe not blank... It has a 10 billion dollar limit ... And off you go. Spend as you want. So what is the problem? (1) This has been given as a payment/bribe in return for support, and (2) the disbursement is into areas where the recipient has personal interest. The money is "public" and so there is a fiduciary duty to manage as best as can - and this is a clear case where there is a conflict of interest so leading to fiduciary breach.
Posted by: davidg

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 07/09/2010 23:53

Um, so hes been offered a ministerial position in which he has been alotted funding for regional developement? In what way is that a conflict of interest? As far as i can tell it works in much the same way as most of the other sectors i.e. education, agriculture, health. The party will still have to approve his use of the funds for sure. I dont think hes gonna head out and buy everyone in his electorate a new car.

And yes i agree with Mick, he signed with Labour because they offered him the chance to provide some much needed infrastucture upgrades and place more impotance on regional areas which up until this point have been thoroughly neglected. As far as i can tell its not a payment or bribe, but a promise to support the issues that oakeshott sees as important. Why is the libs offering wilkie $1b just for his electorate any different? In fact i see that as far more of a conflict of interest. At least if oakeshott accepts the position the money will be spent to benefit the whole country.
Posted by: Cheers

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 08/09/2010 07:06

It's great to have a PM who is not a god fearing wally.
All the prays didn't help abbort.
Abbort is & always will be a low life.
Now back to the weather
Posted by: Arnoldnut

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 08/09/2010 07:14

hear hear! wink

the election may have been a mess but the outcomes for the bush are more than either party would have offered under any circumstances.
the citicentrics will scream their heads off even though all the best advise says the bush has been ignored and underfunded for too long.
The way parliament runs with this mix will be interesting to see. I believe this is a whole new deal of cooperation which has been foreign to these guys in the past.
I for one think the outcomes have been good for australia.
We may just see a new era of cooperation with all pushing in the same direction.
.....needless to say some will never get used to it ...be them voters or polies.
Posted by: bigwilly

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 08/09/2010 07:46

Haha talk about an over-reaction!!!

Heaven forbid that a Minister be assigned a portfolio about which he actually has good knowledge!!!

The State Gov had that philosphy when they set up the Firearms Registry; they thought if any of the bureaucrats had an interest in firearms then they would automatically have a conflict of interest - you know the typical knee-jerk reaction: "it kinda sounds like one might exist, therefore it must". As a result there is a total lack of knowledge and the registry is a laughing stock in the shooting/hunting world.

Oakshott is from a regional seat, he should know what needs to be done and maybe even the best way to go about it for regional areas; does that it not then make sense that he be offered the portfolio?
Posted by: Cheers

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 08/09/2010 08:17

I see barny joyce has been let off his leash
Posted by: Dazza_XL

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 08/09/2010 08:36

Originally Posted By: Cheers
It's great to have a PM who is not a god fearing wally.
All the prays didn't help abbort.
Abbort is & always will be a low life.
Now back to the weather .


For what it's worth, I don't "Support/Follow/Worship" any of the major parties.
But resorting to childish name-calling is just that, very childish IMO.

Same goes for all the "Mad Katter" comments in the media. Sure, he might come across as being a bit over the top. And he does have some out-there opinions on some issues. But when you receive over 46.7% of the Primary Vote and 68.4% After preferences, he must be doing something right.
Posted by: Andy Double U

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 08/09/2010 08:41

I dunno, Oakshott is compromised. In return for his support of the ALP he has been given $10 billion and a ministerial position. What the ALP giveth, they can also taketh. I'd say he will have to tow the party line, so much for being an independent. He would have been far better off negotiating a wish list straight off the bat and remaining apolitical. The difference between Abbott's offer to Wilkie and the ALP's one to Oakshott is that Abbott's offer was specific and directed, it was for a ground up rebuild of Hobart hospital, Oakshott on the other hand, how is it being spent in regional areas? There are no specifics.

I'll hand it to Katter, from what I can see, his 20 point wish list was the best objective method to assess the intentions of the two parties. He negotiated from a position of strength and I have to respect that, no matter how scatter brained some of the things he says seem to be!

Tony Windsor... well ahhhh, I think one of his reasons said it all. He put his vote to the less popular party because he felt it gave him a bigger/longer bite at the cherry. The feeling I get from these independents is that they know this is a unique opportunity as far as leverage goes and he voted the way that will provide him with greatest amount of time to use it. In short, he has gone against the wishes of what he feels the majority of Australians want for his own personal gain. I've heard a few things about the dealings with Windsor and from what I hear, he is a uses people/parties to gain a toe hold and flicks them to the curb. Good luck to him though and it will be interesting to see what his electorate makes of his decision.

In effect though, what the Greens and the independents have given Labor is a pledge that they won't vote with frivolous no confidence motions and that they will ensure supply. Beyond that it is anyone's ball game and I predict a massive talk fest with next to no action. Legislation will not be passed in either house untouched and may exit out the other end not even vaguely representing what went in.

I don't envy Gillard in the slightest, she will definitely be herding cats for however long the next term is, I can't see it being a long lasting truce and I certainly can't see anything worthwhile being achieved! They'll fiddle and dilly dally around trying not to ruffle feathers, trying to prolong their hold on power... This is the last thing Australia needed. At this time we need some decent leadership, we need to set a course and get on with things. Anyone who thinks we are all set now is totally naive in my opinion. If you thought the rhetoric and BS was tough to handle over the last term, get ready for more of it in spades!!!

BW, I'm not sure you need to be an expert or be overly familiar in a particular ministerial role to do a good job. Some times you just end up with more of the same because there is no fresh perspective. The most important thing for a minister charged with a particular responsibility is that they have a natural interest in the area. One person full of hope and aspirations is usually not enough, just look at Kevin Rudd. Oakshott's ultimate success hinges on him being able to surround himself with people who also have affinity and understanding on rural and regional issues and his ability to ignore or act on advice. His rate of success will be up for scrutiny after he has been in the job. It was quite ironic watching the man who wants short questions and answers rabbit on for what seemed like hours before finally announcing his decision. One final tip I've got for Oakshott is don't give up your day job, comedy just doesn't suit... even if it was nervousness, he should've taken a leaf out of Abbott's book and just shutup!
Posted by: looselipslou

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 08/09/2010 08:42

For me, in a nut shell, is that while I did not vote for Labor (in my area), I am satisfied with the outcome. I did not 'lose' becuase I didn't vote Labor, I made my vote count. If anyone were to say there was a victory, I guess it would go to the farmers and rural folk which often work their guts out and receive very little in return.

Oakeshott and his portfolio - Yes, he understands what's needed and it's obviously what he's aimed for. I think he's the perfect bloke for that job.

One thing that still lingers in my head is will Bill Shorten make his move or does he even have an intention to? I am sure back in the Beaconsville Mine coverage he said he wasn't, when asked, interested in going into politics.

I have been entertained reading various forums where the participants range from 'opinionated-educated', opinionated-uneducated' and 'opinionated-thinks they're educated' lol. I think I am getting popcorn and beer for tonight's entertainment. (I think I just fall in the opinionated category rofl).
Posted by: Cheers

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 08/09/2010 08:51

Originally Posted By: Dazza_XL
Originally Posted By: Cheers
It's great to have a PM who is not a god fearing wally.
All the prays didn't help abbort.
Abbort is & always will be a low life.
Now back to the weather .


For what it's worth, I don't "Support/Follow/Worship" any of the major parties.
But resorting to childish name-calling is just that, very childish IMO.

Same goes for all the "Mad Katter" comments in the media. Sure, he might come across as being a bit over the top. And he does have some out-there opinions on some issues. But when you receive over 46.7% of the Primary Vote and 68.4% After preferences, he must be doing something right.


It's not childish name calling.
It's a fact mate.LOL
Posted by: Andy Double U

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 08/09/2010 08:53

Originally Posted By: looselipslou
One thing that still lingers in my head is will Bill Shorten make his move or does he even have an intention to?


I think it would take someone incredibly brave, or massively stupid to take down Gillard during the next term. I do not think they would risk upsetting the incredibly fragile stability unless things were going very bad, very quickly. It would be interesting to see what would happen if Rudd got offered a full time position on the UN... Would he ditch his own party and probably cost them government for his own personal gain? He might be selfish enough to do just that.
Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 08/09/2010 08:53

Originally Posted By: davidg
Um, so hes been offered a ministerial position in which he has been alotted funding for regional developement? In what way is that a conflict of interest? As far as i can tell it works in much the same way as most of the other sectors i.e. education, agriculture, health. The party will still have to approve his use of the funds for sure. I dont think hes gonna head out and buy everyone in his electorate a new car.

And yes i agree with Mick, he signed with Labour because they offered him the chance to provide some much needed infrastucture upgrades and place more impotance on regional areas which up until this point have been thoroughly neglected. As far as i can tell its not a payment or bribe, but a promise to support the issues that oakeshott sees as important. Why is the libs offering wilkie $1b just for his electorate any different? In fact i see that as far more of a conflict of interest. At least if oakeshott accepts the position the money will be spent to benefit the whole country.


Yeah ,not just one hospital in Tasmania like Abbott offered Wilkie.

So who knows what else he offered? I guess we'll never find out now but for at least one independent it was offensive enough to break his silence.
Posted by: Andy Double U

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 08/09/2010 08:58

Originally Posted By: Cheers
Originally Posted By: Dazza_XL
Originally Posted By: Cheers
It's great to have a PM who is not a god fearing wally.
All the prays didn't help abbort.
Abbort is & always will be a low life.
Now back to the weather .


For what it's worth, I don't "Support/Follow/Worship" any of the major parties.
But resorting to childish name-calling is just that, very childish IMO.

Same goes for all the "Mad Katter" comments in the media. Sure, he might come across as being a bit over the top. And he does have some out-there opinions on some issues. But when you receive over 46.7% of the Primary Vote and 68.4% After preferences, he must be doing something right.


It's not childish name calling.
It's a fact mate.LOL


In that case, it's prayers, not prays. Not that I think you have difficulties with grammar... I know you do smirk
Posted by: looselipslou

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 08/09/2010 09:01

Originally Posted By: Andy Double U
Originally Posted By: looselipslou
One thing that still lingers in my head is will Bill Shorten make his move or does he even have an intention to?


I think it would take someone incredibly brave, or massively stupid to take down Gillard during the next term. I do not think they would risk upsetting the incredibly fragile stability unless things were going very bad, very quickly. It would be interesting to see what would happen if Rudd got offered a full time position on the UN... Would he ditch his own party and probably cost them government for his own personal gain? He might be selfish enough to do just that.


So many possibilities and seems that people are not too happy with Shorten once they worked it out that it wasn't Gillard but the 'powerbrokers' that pulled all the strings. What has happened to Mark Arbib, he's awfully quiet?
Posted by: ant

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 08/09/2010 09:05

Originally Posted By: Arnost
Oh FFS:
Quote:
KEY Independent Rob Oakeshott has been offered the role of minister for regional development in the Gillard Government.

Talk about a conflict of interest! Don't these people think? In the private sector Directors go to the wall on stuff like this...


Quite right. Which is why people with children should never be allowed to be in charge of anything to do with families, or education, and people with cars must be quarantined from transport roles, and anyone who has any kind of medical condition is quite morally unfit to administer medical expenditure. And I cannot BELIEVE that they will appoint lawyers to be attorney general, my god.
Posted by: Shayne

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 08/09/2010 09:14

i just hope someone with experience in Defense gets that portfolio...sticking a pure bureaucrat in there is like putting a problem gambler in as Treasurer..

as for election promises, well..they mas as well have been made by the tooth fairy and underwritten by satanclaws...everything will end up going to hell in a hand basket as soon as the collective media finds something new to squeel about...all aboard the Knee-jerk Express!

call me cynical...politicians are all like cuckoo's..they feather their own nests, while they crap in everyone else's..
Posted by: Greg Sorenson

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 08/09/2010 09:26

Originally Posted By: ant


Quite right. Which is why people with children should never be allowed to be in charge of anything to do with families, or education, and people with cars must be quarantined from transport roles, and anyone who has any kind of medical condition is quite morally unfit to administer medical expenditure. And I cannot BELIEVE that they will appoint lawyers to be attorney general, my god.


Do i detect a little sarcasm there? LOL. We can speculate all we want on whether the new government will work or not, lets see how the cards fall. I would suggest that for the first time, perhaps in a long time, the general public are absorbing a level of interest in politics which is provoking robust discussions. Household dinner parties and backyard BBQ for the short term at least will be like walking on hot coals. Should be fun:)
Posted by: looselipslou

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 08/09/2010 09:30

I think you're right there, Greg and about bloody time. I think now, many have finally worked out that they did not vote for Abbott or Gillard unless they were in that electorate and had the choice.
Posted by: ant

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 08/09/2010 10:21

Heck, I wasn't in any of the electorates that returned greens or independants, but I still feel like my vote got up, because there they are.

Maybe this increased engagement with politics will get more people taking an interest, not just going "they are all crooks and I hate them", and maybe noticing that most politicians actually work bloody hard, and most of them start out as decent people, and many stay that way. Most of them are pretty impressive too, if you actually look at what they have to do, how many issues they have to be across, the stuff that's expected of them.
Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 08/09/2010 10:26

Originally Posted By: Greg Sorenson

Do i detect a little sarcasm there? LOL. We can speculate all we want on whether the new government will work or not, lets see how the cards fall. I would suggest that for the first time, perhaps in a long time, the general public are absorbing a level of interest in politics which is provoking robust discussions. Household dinner parties and backyard BBQ for the short term at least will be like walking on hot coals. Should be fun:)


Agreed. Some may not like the outcome but we all got to witness something that may not be seen for generations to come. Personally I will be surprised if it goes the full term but you never know.

Gillard will need to make sure every member stays healthy that's for sure. But of course that applies to both parties. Meanwhile the clock has started ticking on Abbott's leadership. The longer he remains in opposition the less chance he has of being leader. The knives are already out.



....and ANT it is the green element of this election that is being almost totally ignored. They recorded the biggest swing yet that has been completely overlooked by the LNP and its supporters.
Posted by: looselipslou

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 08/09/2010 10:32

I think you know what I mean by voting 'Gillard or Abbott' as I was amused at the amount of people saying they didn't vote for Gillard when Rudd was booted and they actually believed that "Rudd" was on their ballot paper. They would argue that they actually ticked the box next to Rudd but clearly, in Darwin, Rudd's name was never there (that the point I was making) but now, becuase of all this, those are now a little wiser to the process.

I didn't vote ALP but still feel that my vote counted, becuase I did put a lot of thought into it. Mind you, Soloman's ballot paper didn't have a billion names on it.

While I have always had an interest in politics, I find I am gathering more and more understanding, especially behind the scenes.
Posted by: Andy Double U

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 08/09/2010 11:01

Originally Posted By: ColdFront
....and ANT it is the green element of this election that is being almost totally ignored. They recorded the biggest swing yet that has been completely overlooked by the LNP and its supporters.


That's because it wasn't the LNP that bled votes to the Greens, it was the ALP! Secondly, the Greens announcing a preference deal with Labor during the campaign discounts them straight away as far as doing deals with the LNP goes. It certainly wouldn't be considered smart chasing the Greens for deals when it has already been done and dusted.

So yeah, my Greens care factor is zero. It was the ALP who went grovelling cap in hand to try and regain some of their slumping support!
Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 08/09/2010 11:22

You still managed to totally sidestep the reality that the vote reflects a distaste for the LNP. The vast majority of voters that voted green knew exactly where their preferences would end up. Never before have the greens seen such a swing despite Australians knowing the risk. That speaks volumes about Abbott and the past 2 weeks have confirmed people's suspicions.

Despite a massive media driven campaign against the ALP in the past 6 months he still hasn't formed government and when 3 former national members vote him down also it speaks even louder.

How many of those green voters would change their vote to the coalition in a new poll? Answer = 0. You should care about the greens. They cost the LNP a majority. ...and of course Abbott hasn't done much grovelling in recent days? Apparently Wilkie was offended by the level of grovelling by the LNP.
Posted by: Arnost

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 08/09/2010 12:53

"Oh and Gillard has put the ETS back on the table" ... I noticed that too. I thought she went to the polls with the 150 koombayah assembly thingy - and then a undertaking to review in 2012 with view to a possible implementation in 2013 (i.e. after the next ellection)?

Here's the policy speech

There is nothing in there committing to implementing this thing in this parliament: The very thing that brought down Trunbull and indirectly Rudd, the critical reason that the Libs went from being projected to losing 20 seats in Nov 2009 to just missing out 9 months later... was a commitment not to implement an ETS or a tax on carbon.

By the way, the fact that Gillard in effect committed to not implementing an ETS during the election was an attempt to stop the leak to the Libs on this issue. Labor as a rule didn't care about any leaks to the Greens on this issue - the leakers to the left would never vote for a "conservative" party anyway so they get the votes back as preferences.

But!

Here is Third Deputy Prime Minister# Bob Brown yesterday:
Quote:
LEIGH SALES: Before we're out of time, I just want to ask one question on climate change. As we know, the Citizens' Assembly idea was roundly derided on both the left and the right. Do you accept though that there is work to be done to persuade the public of the reality of human-induced climate change before policy can be introduced?

BOB BROWN: No. That argument is over. There is a small section who will never be satisfied on that. We're moving on to a carbon price. Julia Gillard went to the election on that; the Greens went to the election on that. We have now a way forward for not only getting a carbon price, but giving business the certainty it wants in an age of dangerous climate change.

LEIGH SALES: And how soon before you would anticipate seeing a carbon price?

BOB BROWN: Leigh, we're committed in that agreement to working on that this month and announcing the details about how that committee will work and how - what the view is to report dates and so on by the end of this month


linky

That does not sound to me like a very consultative process with an intent to put the solution to the people next election... Broken promise 1 less than 12 hours after the melding of the rainbow coalition. She did not go to the election pledging to introduce a Carbon price immediately!

.....

Tony Windsor thought he had an agreement yesterday... Today however, he has already learnt the standard Labor lesson:
Quote:
The new Labor Government has been accused of trying to back out of a deal to hold a comprehensive tax summit, just one day after clinging to power with the support of two key independent MPs.

Under its deal with independent MP Tony Windsor Labor has agreed to hold a tax summit by 2011 to discuss all options put forward by the Henry Tax Review earlier this year.

Mr Windsor says he wants the controversial mining tax to be part of the talks, but Labor says that will not happen.

He has indicated he is not happy about its exclusion and will be speaking with Treasurer Wayne Swan.


Broken promise 2 within 24 hours?

And both on the most critical issues of the election! Oh well - whilst it's good to see the arch shafter get shafted... it is a pitty to stuff up a perfectly good economy - becoming like the basket cases that is most of Europe and what increasingly the US is becoming is not something we should be aspiring to.

A final comment:

And as last election the Laborites were confident that "once we get in we'll just change it all":
linky

Nothing's changed.


Oh yes: # The Second Deputy PM's Mark Arbib and the Fourth is Oakeshott. LOL.
Posted by: Andy Double U

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 08/09/2010 12:56

Originally Posted By: ColdFront
The vast majority of voters that voted green knew exactly where their preferences would end up. Never before have the greens seen such a swing despite Australians knowing the risk.


I think you over estimate the amount of thought some people put into their votes. Don't believe me? What about high percentage of donkey votes? Even if you are correct, there are plenty of ALP voters that are feeling pretty disillusioned about the ALP jumping into bed with the Greens!

But anyway, that is spilt milk, speaking of which, looks like ignorant/arrogant Swanny is back and is playing sneaky sneaky with the independents!

Windsor Disillusioned

So the 'landmark' regional deal that has been negotiated is to come out of the mining tax AND will be trickled out over the next decade... Now correct me if I am wrong here... Where are most mining operations? Outback Australia... And how much money do these mines bring to country towns? The simple answer would be LOTS. So now the ALP is going to slug the miners, to collect the money to spin it back to these regional areas?! Yep... Oakshott, Windsor have been hoodwinked and are now compromised, don't support the mining tax, forget about your regional grants, support the mining tax, miners will examine their bottom lines more closely and could very realistically begin laying off workers meaning less money for country towns... but Aunty Julia the evil stepmother will make up for it... yeah right!!!
Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 08/09/2010 13:00

Broken promise two? Now you're scraping the bottom of the barrel Arnost. I personally heard Gillard say that through any negotiations that she would not back down from the mining tax and that was over a week ago. I find it a little odd that Oakeshott didn't or perhaps he is simply confused.

Here's the LINKY

...and Andy so what you're saying is that the huge increase in green votes was a fluke? Please tell me you're joking. So your vote was legitimate and well placed but anyone who opposes you must have got it wrong?


As for the suggestion that the miners are about to lay off workers, even they have stated that was a scare campaign. I also think you fail to realise that much of the money goes offshore due to foreign ownership that was signed off under the Howard government and bypasses those local communities.

You also fail to realise they are cintracted to supply.
Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 08/09/2010 13:13

You also fail to acknowledge that those that donkey voted didn't want to vote for either party. Not just labor as your post seems to imply.
Posted by: Flooding rains

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 08/09/2010 13:25

Wow some of you talk crap. Honestly build a bridge and get over it. If Abbott got in yesterday I wouldnt have been happy but also wouldn't try to find every tiny speck of info to make petty comments out of.
Posted by: Arnoldnut

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 08/09/2010 14:07

I dunno I reckon the linky to Leigh Sales was kewl.

She's hot hey? smile
Posted by: SBT

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 08/09/2010 15:48

I'm a so called Donkey Voter. I couldn't in all good faith give any party in the lower house my vote because they are all a bunch of losers with no polices, no leadership and no bloody idea about how to run a country. FR before you start leaping from high horses bear with me.

I first became interested in politics in 1972 when as a school student I followed the Labour party with some interest. Back in those days we had hard nosed leaders who didn't apologies for making hard decisions about what was best for the country. Sure lots of people complained about all levels of government but they expected a party leader with the balls to stand by his commitments and toe the party line. Not like todays bunch of politically correct all things to all people bull [censored] wimps who will only do what the power brokers and apologists want them to do.

My mate Richard is of the opinion we need another benevolent dictator like Ming the Merciless (Menzies)or maybe some one with a bit more vision like Joh and for once I think he is right.

The country needs strong leadership - something both Gillard and Abbot are lacking. They both have the combined back bone of a jelly fish.
Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 08/09/2010 16:11

For Arnost to ponder.

Linky........
Posted by: Arnost

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 08/09/2010 16:20

"The country needs strong leadership - something both Gillard and Abbot are lacking. They both have the combined back bone of a jelly fish."

Yup. We need the leader to tell the MBAs, Media Massagers and such that today run the show for each party to go and get. Leadership typically is not about consensus and fluffy fairy stuff that both parties parrot. Leadership is about vision, the ability to articulate it and paint the future state, and then bull through the obstacles to get there.

For example, Rudd's failing was that he may have had the vision - but the articulation was lost in his "bureaucratese" where people lost focus on content and laughed at the delivery, and he certainly did not bull things through - he just referred them to a slow death in committee...

There are in history leaders that did the three things above well - and we typically tag them as "great"... there are leaders that did two of these well, (and if they were able to bull the vision through, they still may be considered exemplary). But even if they had the vision and could articulate it - but if they could not make it happen... these leaders will usually be consigned to being a footnote in history.
Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 08/09/2010 17:01

That was quick. This guy has his eye on the top job.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/09/08/3006352.htm
Posted by: Arnost

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 08/09/2010 17:05

For Arnost to ponder. Sure... Abbott probably was just matching what Gillard offered, or at least agreeing to what he asked for.

But you know how I feel about this. That Abbott rolled over on stuff like the pairing of the Speaker is frankly disgusting! I personally would have told them to go and get effed if they wanted pork like this. And especially knowing that Oakeshott has porkbarrelled his Labor mates from wayback - see this from 2008:

Oakeshott "caught out supporting his Labor mates"

Bottom line, it is corruption in no uncertain terms - people go to (and should go to) jail for stuff like this in the business world.

Consider the AWB scandal where in return for Iraq buying Aust wheat AWB agreed to transport it in Saddam's trucks. The entire board resigned and faced criminal charges. And there were calls for the government to resign as well!

So tell me - which case do you think is worse, the one where neither the AWB board or the govt of the day stood to make any gain - with the only winners being the farmers selling the wheat, (and of course Saddam); or the one where the govt (whichever one) gains power, the blackmailer wins as he gets to get an open cheque book of $10bio and and office, staff and the Hon. honorific for life, but where the taxpayers of Australia lose as they have to repay the additional pork + interest... or at the very least go without as the available resources are channeled not by need but by decree?

The only reason that the police aren't involved is that there is some transparency about this. If the discussions between Gillard and Oakeshott remain private, then its a prima facie case of corruption. So he's opening this up so that a future criminal investigation finds enough transparency for corruption to be difficult to prove. And remember Oakeshott has not said that Abbott offered him all this - he has only intimated it. Quote: "I have been clear about the government making an offer (of a ministry) but it is up to others to disclose if they also made an offer..."

And also remember he's got Bruce Hawker micro-managing all this for him... and Bruce would not let any opportunity to embarass Abbott (rightly or wrongly) slide...

It is no wonder that the Nats thing that Oakeshott is a slime.



Posted by: Arnost

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 08/09/2010 17:08

"That was quick. This guy has his eye on the top job."

Nope - not him... But Malcolm has been rather quiet eh? Tomorrow Abbott has to resign and re-nominate. That is what is going to be interesting.
Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 08/09/2010 17:59

I don't think Malcolm will move yet.
Posted by: bigwilly

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 08/09/2010 18:56

That's one thing that I think we can all agree on: the electorate is crying out for some proper leadership and is reluctant to settle for a manager as PM.

I concur with SBT, we need a leader with vision, with the courage of his convictions to bulldoze the backroom makers and breakers and to actually lead this country to realise its full potential.

IMO Gillard is the lesser of two evils (not in the literal sense) and I just hope that we don't suffer too much while we wait for the aforementioned leader.
Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 08/09/2010 19:23

Originally Posted By: bigwilly
courage of his convictions
....or hers?
Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 08/09/2010 19:48

Originally Posted By: ColdFront
That was quick. This guy has his eye on the top job.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/09/08/3006352.htm


...and that was even quicker.. poke

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/09/08/3006442.htm

I'm hardly surprised by this . I'm no fan of Bishop but she presents a brighter individual than this guy.
Posted by: !SCHUMMY!

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 08/09/2010 21:11

so when do you think we'll go back to the polls???? before then end of the year maybe or this time next year????
Posted by: Dave-Wx

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 08/09/2010 21:11

Originally Posted By: Arnost
It is no wonder that the Nats thing that Oakeshott is a slime.


My mail is that he is not exactly the honest, well intentioned, funny guy that he appears to be.

In my own personal opinion, he comes across as someone that really loves himself (that speech yesterday was annoying to watch), and is very interested in furthering his own interests and his own career at the expense of other things.

And as for both leaders not standing for anything, I thought one of the key things in the rapid change of the political landscape in the past year was that Abbott actually stands for something. He took a bold stance against the Carbon tax, then when the Mining tax popped up he clearly stated that they would not implement it, he reshaped the Opposition as a true opposition (ie: a clear alternative to the government on a number of issues), and made a clear stance on border protection etc etc (not that I think border protection is a major issue but it was one of the ones he hammered home in the campaign).

That was the whole point of the 'real action' mantra...because they wanted to show the people of Australia that they saw a government who stood for a number of things when elected at the 2007 election, and then just sat on their hands on many things (what happened to 'the greatest moral challenge of our time'?), with us all wondering why we voted them in for if they are just going to refer everything to a committee or a citizen's assembly!
Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 08/09/2010 21:42

I agree he dragged it out and got some high out of it. I also agree with your comment on him furthering his own career but mostly because that applies to EVERY SINGLE POLITICIAN. They are all there for the same thing. Providing for their electorate is second to self promotion. It goes with the turf and they all used the same brush to tar themselves with. I have witnessed that in every single politician that has ever opened his or her mouth.

Politicians are people that are dedicated to being heard. Oakeshott is no different to the rest of them. I have heard similar over the top rants from the lot on every side of politics. Introverts don't go into politics.
Posted by: Dave-Wx

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 08/09/2010 22:35

Of course the vast majority of politicians are ambitious individuals, but I thought everyone knew that poke so was just emphasising Oakeshott over and above the others.
Posted by: Andy Double U

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 10/09/2010 08:00

I couldn't resist quoting the below from this article: Link

Quote:
By and large, people do not have few skills because they live in country areas; rather, they live in those areas because they have fewer skills. Were their skill levels higher, many would not remain where they are; rather, they would move to the main centres.


I think the above quote is a fair point although it does downplay the level of persistence, resourcefulness and innovation that country people exude, especially when things aren't going their way. However, I do think that there is a link between the quote above and the following (my bold):

Quote:
Surveys show people in regional areas are likelier to believe government cannot be trusted and that politicians are just in it for the money. They also score more poorly on survey questions about openness to different types of people and ways of life, and are likelier to follow local, rather than national or international, news. These attitudes engender a politics that is more local, oriented to immediate benefits and volatile.


Now that doesn't sound familiar does it? cool Something to reflect upon perhaps?

Anyway, more NBN opinion: Deal turns NBN into shameless pork barrel
Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 10/09/2010 08:56

Really Andy? I think there are pleny in the cites that KNOW they can't be trusted.

...and it's also no secret that the Australian is a biased LNP supporter. Afterall its biggest audience are business men and women on their way to the office with an eye on the share market. The rest of it is a poor excuse for a newspaper.
Posted by: Andy Double U

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 10/09/2010 09:35

laugh CF... at least I didn't attempt to paint an opinion as fact, something that the left is VERY good at. Having said that, I still believe that parts of that opinion piece do have merit.

If The Australian is a biased LNP supporter, how come they endorsed the voting for Kevin Rudd in 2007? It's like you keep saying, you've voted for different political parties in the past, therefore, you are a swing voter, no bias there?
Posted by: bigwilly

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 10/09/2010 12:59

I'd be interested to see what research has led to the above quotes! Talk about gross generalisations!!!

And given most regional centres receive local news and a capital city news, I'd suggest that most regional people are actually across more news topics than city-folk who often are oblivious to life outside of the major capitals!
Posted by: Helen

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 10/09/2010 13:22

Indeed, Will. We live in the backblocks and I'd hardly call my hubby lacking in skills!!! It's more like there's less opportunity to utilise those skills. Good thing then that the civil industry is going great guns around here... or god forbid, we might have to move closer to the big smoke. frown
Posted by: ant

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 10/09/2010 15:27

The Murdoch Press is well known as a conservative pro-LNP organ. They don't try to conceal it, it's no secret.

There was an interesting article in Crikey this week about how the new government can expect an avalanche of negative opinion-shaping from the Murdoch stable of media.

http://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollytics/2010/09/08/let-the-great-unhinging-begin/

Sometimes people (here, for instance) come out with quite bizarre opinions, expressed as though they're widely-held facts, and unfortunately it seems that much of it comes from the Murdoch media, which I mostly don't read.
Posted by: Andy Double U

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 10/09/2010 15:53

I know where you are coming from guys, and my quotes were there to challenge what I feel is a firmly entrenched, prejudiced and also very generalised view. Statistics would tell us that there'll be a few pollies there for the money, some for self gain, some both. I've also spoken to a few elected members in local, state and federal politics and I came away feeling that these people genuinely care for their electorates. Actually, I think few could really argue that Bob Katter is there purely for personal gain, I think he genuinely cares about his electorate which shows in the way he approached the hung parliament scenario. Oakshott, well that's another matter, certainly some articles today reflect that he aspires to greater things so whether his decision was the best for his electorate or himself is a matter for debate.

I've read the story a few times now and every time I read it, something different sticks out which I end up nodding my head to. At first when I read the story I really thought it was giving the country people a really hiding, but now I'm of the opinion that in a backhanded kind of way, it is really trying to push a message that I myself have picked up after going out west many times. People out in the country don't want hand outs, you can see that in the way they stare down adversity, they just want a fair go. I think few would disagree with the following quote from the same article:

Quote:
Land use regulation, such as that associated with native vegetation, is the most onerous. The risk is that the government, pandering to the Greens, will make those regulations even more burdensome and then, to appease the independents, will throw yet more handouts the bush's way.

Those handouts are a poisoned chalice. Locking the bush into a culture of welfare dependency, and transforming country towns into economic ghettos without sustainable sources of wealth, will merely ensure large parts of regional and remote Australia die, leaving only pockets of economic and social viability.

Whether that is in the bush's interest is questionable; it is demeaning to a history that shows enormous capacity to innovate and adapt. And it is not in the best interests of the nation as a whole.


Whilst the article isn't exactly pretty in its content, upon reflection I think it is reasonably fair and even handed. I know people in city, regional and rural areas that exhibit the traits eluded to in the story. We've been active in our local rural area for over 20 years now and I would only say that it is in the last five years we've finally been able to break down some barriers and gain a little respect. Actually, if you want to scare them, tell them you are selling, nothing makes them cringe more than making them think they could be getting new city slicker neighbours!
Posted by: Helen

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 10/09/2010 16:25

It's all cool Andy. Didn't think for a single moment that you were having a go at anyone. smile

This piece from The Age had me giggling down to my tippy-toes: Conroy's Net Filter Still Alive and Kicking.

Talk about flogging a dead horse!!!
Posted by: Andy Double U

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 10/09/2010 16:42

Really?! I thought that filter was dead and buried? They'd have to be nuts to resurrect it, especially after saying it was gone prior to the election. Even that data retention program sounds a bit sus where every single website address visited by a user on an ISP will be recorded. I can see ISPs with a room full of hard drives just logging user activity... Wonder how long they'd have to maintain the records for? And what use is an address unless it has some cached data to go with it?

It's getting a bit beyond the joke really... cry
Posted by: bigwilly

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 11/09/2010 06:19

So the news of Okshott's decision to decline the ministry hasn't really seemed to have raised its head here, interesting!

Might challenge quite a few strongly held beliefs about the man, not that that would stymie discussion, would it? wink
Posted by: ant

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 11/09/2010 08:31

Heh. Well it's put a stop to some of those pronouncements, not sure you'd call it discussion.

You know, it does say a lot. A Minister gets much higher pay, plus a much bigger office, more staff, amazing super, they get power, a place in the history books.

And yet, Oakshott has refused it, I figure because then he would be an independant, and an independant is what his electorate voted for. Good on him.
Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 12/09/2010 14:32

I agree. Good on him. It had a fair amount to do with family commitments as well as sentiment in his electorate. The emotions in his electorate will blow away with time if he performs well. Several politicians in the past have done the same at state level and found that after initial resentment from their supporters they eventually come around.
Posted by: ant

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 13/09/2010 14:20

I reckon Peter Fitzsimmons has said it perfectly in a big piece in the SMH today:

http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/bitter-whine-a-case-of-sour-grapes-20100911-155vo.html?skin=text-only

Starts with:
"MEMO to the Coalition and their carpet-biting-mad supporters: get a grip! We had an election. On a two-party preferred basis it was close – 50-50 close. In the horse-trading that followed, Julia Gillard appears to have traded a tad better and was able to form a government with the support of the Greens and independents. This was not: corrupt; an abrogation of the duty of the independents to support the choices of the denizens of talkback; a gaping wound on the otherwise pristine face of democracy. It is simply the way of the Westminster system. As to the carry-on over who got more votes, Kim Beazley won 51 per cent of the popular vote in 1998 and still didn't form a government. Were the same people screaming now, screaming then?"
Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 13/09/2010 14:23

Nice find Ant and yes an interesting point on Beazley.

I still can't get over the transformation in Abbott since election night. He was certain he would get into power despite the closeness of the polls.
Posted by: StormTiggy

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 13/09/2010 15:45

Good old Julia!
Posted by: Arnost

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 15/09/2010 17:06

Originally Posted By: bigwilly
So the news of Okshott's decision to decline the ministry hasn't really seemed to have raised its head here, interesting!



oakeshott-makes-play-for-speakers-job

I suspected that Oakeshott really wanted the Speaker's job. And hence why he was so intent on pushing pairings etc (see my previous post here)

As speaker he gets' more than a Minister, and I suspect that (from what he mentioned in one of his interviews) there will be a push to make the position of speaker more like that in thr UK where his seat is uncontsted - so he gets a free ride into the next parliament. Be interesting to see if this does happen.

And if one of the independets decides to support the coallition, then as a consequence of the new agreement WRT pairings, the Speaker WILL have the casting vote. And if it's Oakeshott, I will bet he will not pay any heed to the standing convention where the speakers casting vote will be to maintain status quo...

I suggest that there may be a challenge to this under section 40 of the Constitution. Or at least there should be!
Posted by: ant

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 16/09/2010 15:52

I think what Oakshott wants to do is overly ambitious, it changes things too much.

Rather funny, when he and Windsor were doing their announcement the other week, and Oakshott was raving on for hours, Fitzsimmons reckons Tracey Grimshaw was tweeting rude and surprisingly funny things... "Dear PM, Please don't make Rob Oakeshott Speaker. He may take it literally." She followed it up a few minutes later with "Just ducked out to read War and Peace. Has Oakeshott announced yet?".

Not bad! And somewhat prescient, too.
Posted by: Keith

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 16/09/2010 16:53

The PM thinks Oakeshott has all the qualifications necessary. Subject to the outcome of legal clarification I wouldn't be surprised if he gets the job. Presumably he's familiar with Standing Orders given his relatively short time in the House.
Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 17/09/2010 16:30

I wonder if Bishop has anything else to add?

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/09/17/3015006.htm

....and this appears to be little more than sour grapes to me.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/09/17/3014682.htm
Posted by: Arnost

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 17/09/2010 22:56

Quote:
I wonder if Bishop has anything else to add?


Well if you insist... I do. On two party preferred seat by seat distribution, the Coallition won 76 seats to Labor's 74.

Results in Lyne: Coalition 61.94% / Labor 38.06%
Results in Kennedy: Coalition 62.45% / Labor 37.55%
Results in New England: Coalition 66.8% / Labor 33.2%

And in case there was any doubt, Results in O'Connor: Coalition 73.0% / Labor 23.0%

And as to "little more that sour grapes": I will give you the benefit of the doubt and trust that you are basing that opinion on ignorance rather than intentional disrespect for the Contitution. Eh? So I'll try again...

Section 40 of the constitution says:
Quote:
Questions arising in the House of Representatives shall be determined by a majority of votes other than that of the Speaker. The Speaker shall not vote unless the numbers are equal, and then he shall have a casting vote.


It has long been the practice under all Westminster systms that confidence in the impartiality of the Speaker is an indispensable condition of the successful working of procedure, and many conventions exist which have as their object not only to ensure the impartiality of the Speaker, but also to ensure that his impartiality is generally recognised. He takes no part in debate either in the House or in committee. He votes only when the voices are equal, and then only in accordance with rules which preclude an expression of opinion upon the merits of a question. House or Representatives Practice, 3rd edition, p.179, quoting May’s Parliamentary Practice (21st edition, 1996), p.181 (May's, first published in 1844, is the standard reference for practice in the House of Commons in the UK)

And this is exactly the way in practice that this woks here... and further why is the impartiality of the Speaker so ABSOLUTELY critical?

The speaker has enormous power. he/she can kick a member out just before an important division. Think about the ramifications of this where the speaker is believed to be partisan!

These are the long standing conventions that enable trust in the parliamentary systems. And ultimately, the convention for Speakers in Westminster systems when having a "casting" vote, is to vote in accord with Denison's Rule where when exercising his/her "casting vote", the Speaker should vote in favour of the status quo - i.e. always defeating any motions for change...

What Oakeshott wants is so in conflict with the spirit of the Wesminster concept of the Speaker, that it's frankly, well, I'm lost for polite words - just unbelievable.

Here he is with Waleed Ali yesterday: Audio and Transctript on this blog site

Look... The Libs have said that as per "the agreement" they are happy (in the interest of a stabler parliament) to pair out speakers provided that they come from them main parties - for example see here: linky. Indulging the whims and giving a double vote to a spoiled brat like Oakeshott is, I suspect, not the intent under which anyone entered the agreement.

Posted by: ColdFront

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 17/09/2010 23:16

Originally Posted By: Arnost
[Quote] And as to "little more that sour grapes": I will give you the benefit of the doubt and trust that you are basing that opinion on ignorance rather than intentional disrespect for the Contitution.


Actually it refers to the way Abbott has transformed since election night and showed his former self. His beaming attitude on the campaign trail is nowhere to be seen. It's pretty obvious to more than just me.

Abbott's attitiude to Oakeshott as speaker would be totally different had he been on hos side come selection time and we both know it.

Quote from news article incase it was missed.

The Australian Electoral Commission says after preferences Labor has 50.12 per cent of the vote compared to the Coalition's 49.88 per cent.

Labor has a lead of 30,490 votes.

Posted by: Arnost

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 17/09/2010 23:53

Abbott tried everything to get the indies support. So what...? So did Gillard. The indies know that Gillard's more desperate to stay for the duration. Coz I would suggest that if the Coallition had Treasury, the a few holes in Labor' coatings would be found. LOL.

But I hark back to what I was saying from the outset. Windsor and Oakshott are poison for the Coallition and they were on a guaranteed hiding to nothing by playing their games. By not compromisinh his principles is how Abbott got to where he did. By compromising them, he lost government. There's a good lesson there by the way.

Let me elaborate, if Abbott was firm and simply told the indies, these are my policies
so chose between them and Labor's, then Gillard would likely not needed to have been as generous to top any offer. A low offer would result in underdelivery of pork to their electorates and thus a prbable electoral loss next time round. A good reason to go with Abbott. A bidding war as actually eventuates means that there will be a massive overdelivery of Pork assuming promisses are honoured.

So Abbott has changed since election night. He compromised his principles. And I have criticized him for that.

Rorscach said... Even in the race of Armageddon - never compromise.
Posted by: Arnost

Re: Australian Federal Election 2010 - 17/09/2010 23:59

I can' edit from the phone properly... It is of course Rorschach wink and face not race