Politics Super Thread - keep it all in here

[Yossarian]

Tanner is probably the best candidate. He's gone after August so it's not like he's got anything to lose by doing it. He was close to Rudd as well.

I reckon the ALP will implode after the election, regardless of whether they win or lose. Everyone will be scurrying to get their place at the trough, especially with the Finance portfolio up for grabs. Federal Labor is becoming to look more like NSW Labor every passing day.

Wonder if the ALP do continue to hold government will Gillard give Ruddy a place in the front bench?

Federal Labor and NSW state Labor are totally different. NSW Labor is what happens when none of your advisers have ever lived in the real world or have decent qualifications.

Finance could go to Stephen Smith with Rudd taking foreign affairs if he wants it. If not someone like Chris Bowen will get it. There may be some jostling but nothing too major - happens with all parties. Indeed in nearly all places of work if there is a chance for promotion it can get competitive.

NSW Labor is a boys' club, but you would have to think that the federal arm is starting to parallel the NSW ALP a little as well though. i.e: Iemma/Rees and Rudd knifed in the back and replaced with a personable woman in Gillard and Keneally an attempt to boost their election chances.

Thats just my opinion though.

Key difference being that most of the post-Carr premiers (Rees especially, Iemma not so much) have cleary been stooges and lacked gravitas. Gillard has been a key player for a long time and apart from Tanner was the pre-eminent Victorian ALP member in Canberra. In other words Rees and Kenneally were pushed into power by other forces, Gillard used outside forces to gain power.

I think it would be naive to suggest Gillard is a puppet of the NSW right and she has a much stronger power base than Rudd.

The other key difference I would suggest is that Gillard was the logical successor to Rudd whereas Kenneally, Kirner, and Lawrence seemed to be chosen for the female factor in order to lessen the severity of a defeat.

 

[Gary_Bakerloo]

Most peoples concerns arose around the waste from the bad implementation, structure and maintenance that the proposals had. Anyone can form some basic ideas into broad policy by talking to the right people, but seeing it though is another thing.

Interesting point and depends on your definition of "waste." With any government expenditure you will find a small amount of waste. Always has, always will occur. You can argue a proportion of the the insulation bats expenditure were a waste, but on the whole, there probably has been an overall improvement in energy efficiency. You could make the same claim on the Howard government with the baby bonus not being means tested. Is giving a lump sum payment of $5,000 to a couple earning in excess of $500,000 pa an efficient means of government expenditure? No, but for those on less than $100,000, it is an efficient expenditure.

These small levels of waste are unimportant (except for the lives lost). A greater waste would have been for the surplus not to spend, for the government not to borrow and allow the economy to slip in recession. In this instance, the economy's output would be well short of its capacity, and THAT would be the greatest waste.

But I think most people should have more confidence in the administration and qualifications of the Liberals than Gillards team.

Why?

 

[Yossarian]

But I think most people should have more confidence in the administration and qualifications of the Liberals than Gillards team.

Are you referring to education qualifications?

 

[hammertime]

Interesting point and depends on your definition of "waste." With any government expenditure you will find a small amount of waste. Always has, always will occur. You can argue a proportion of the the insulation bats expenditure were a waste, but on the whole, there probably has been an overall improvement in energy efficiency. You could make the same claim on the Howard government with the baby bonus not being means tested. Is giving a lump sum payment of $5,000 to a couple earning in excess of $500,000 pa an efficient means of government expenditure? No, but for those on less than $100,000, it is an efficient expenditure.

These small levels of waste are unimportant (except for the lives lost). A greater waste would have been for the surplus not to spend, for the government not to borrow and allow the economy to slip in recession. In this instance, the economy's output would be well short of its capacity, and THAT would be the greatest waste.

Waste for me is when money isn't used effectively. So e.g. for the batts, $1bn is to be used to double check dodgy installations and refit. I think because such large figures have been banded about in recent years, we have lost track of how significant $1bn is.

I don't think means testing is a good thing, especially when talking the baby bonus. Restricting the main tax payers of this country from receiving the benefits that should be universal is just wrong. You have to keep in mind that the top 5% of taxpayers pay around 60% of the tax. We have one of the highest top marginal tax rates in the world. You don't want these guys heading overseas to pay tax elsewhere… no matter how PC taxing the rich is.

Removing this current sense of entitlement in Australia and promoting success will only help the country.

But I think most people should have more confidence in the administration and qualifications of the Liberals than Gillards team.

\

Why?

Track record and academic credentials. When I worked on the budget, the Howard government tested every policy thoroughly, through developing multiple options or having trial periods. How many schemes can you think of that they didn't manage properly? how successful was their implementation of employment policy through Abbots reign?

Much better than what I've seen from Labor.

 

[hammertime]

But I think most people should have more confidence in the administration and qualifications of the Liberals than Gillards team.

Are you referring to education qualifications?

I am Yoss, I think we have had this debate before. But I think if you line up the current ministry against the shadow ministers, you will find the Liberals stack up much better.

I'm sorry, but Wayne Swan has no clue what so ever. There is a reason why he isn't part of the election campaign and Joe Hockey is.

 

[Gary_Bakerloo]

Track record and academic credentials. When I worked on the budget, the Howard government tested every policy thoroughly, through developing multiple options or having trial periods. How many schemes can you think of that they didn't manage properly? how successful was their implementation of employment policy through Abbots reign?

Much better than what I've seen from Labor.

Fair enough given your experience in that role, however I would have thought the decisions made by the current government were most likely a little hasty due to circumstances as financial markets froze. It would look pretty ordinary if we were spiralling into recession as we awaited the outcome of a trial by the government. In any case, I would have thought that the impact of the stimulus would have been tested by Treasury, not the government itself.

It is interesting your work experience. I work with quite a few people who used to work in Treasury and they look back on the Howard/Costello years with dread from boredom relative to the Hawke/Keating years.

 

[Yossarian]

But I think most people should have more confidence in the administration and qualifications of the Liberals than Gillards team.

Are you referring to education qualifications?

I am Yoss, I think we have had this debate before. But I think if you line up the current ministry against the shadow ministers, you will find the Liberals stack up much better.

I'm sorry, but Wayne Swan has no clue what so ever. There is a reason why he isn't part of the election campaign and Joe Hockey is.

I believe we have. You seemed to think having a Law degree is some qualification to be Treasurer or at least trumps a Public Administration degree.

Oh well maybe Gillard can make David Bradbury Treasurer…

 

[hammertime]

Track record and academic credentials. When I worked on the budget, the Howard government tested every policy thoroughly, through developing multiple options or having trial periods. How many schemes can you think of that they didn't manage properly? how successful was their implementation of employment policy through Abbots reign?

Much better than what I've seen from Labor.

Fair enough given your experience in that role, however I would have thought the decisions made by the current government were most likely a little hasty due to circumstances as financial markets froze. It would look pretty ordinary if we were spiralling into recession as we awaited the outcome of a trial by the government. In any case, I would have thought that the impact of the stimulus would have been tested by Treasury, not the government itself.

It is interesting your work experience. I work with quite a few people who used to work in Treasury and they look back on the Howard/Costello years with dread from boredom relative to the Hawke/Keating years.

True mate. They were needed to be made quickly, which could cause some oversight, but they just needed to be able to fix the problems when they arose. That said, they weren't complex policies. Garratt did have reports on the risk of foil insulation within the decision time-frame.

I actually worked for Finance mate. They do the spending, Treasury does the collecting. Finance does the majority of the Budget papers which a lot of people don't know. I never worked around Hawke/Keating, so that could be very much true! The end of the Howard era was mainly tweaks to existing policy, or finding savings, so it did get boring.

I don't know any better than anyone though after being in that role. It's all opinion at the end of the day. I do think this is the worst political race we have seen in a while. Abbott has become incredibly fake lately, just like Labor. I have no idea why Costello isn't running. He would romp it in.

 

[hammertime]

I believe we have. You seemed to think having a Law degree is some qualification to be Treasurer or at least trumps a Public Administration degree.

Oh well maybe Gillard can make David Bradbury Treasurer…

Yeah, well particularly I would prefer Hockey in Treasury than Swan. There is so much technically Swan could have done in terms of Finance regs after the GFC (such as creating a derivatives clearing house, like the SFE). Some of my Investment Bank colleagues have told me how poor he was on phone conferences they had with him around the time of the GFC. He really has little clue about the whole industry… and his education/resume backs that up.

David Bradbury would be a much better option!

 

[citizen_cub]

4.Reckless Spending, they've turned a 20 billion dollar surplus into an 80 billion dollar deficit and are still borrowing millions everyday, future generations will have to pay off all this debt.

$100 000 000 per day to be exact.

They are far too reckless with our money.

I wouldn't say they have been reckless.

Sure they have handed out a lot of money, but when you look at it, the hand outs prevented recession and it created/maintained jobs at a difficult time, the Govt managed to keep the economy flowing because of these handouts, without them, businesses would of gone broke and there would be a lot more unemployed people right now.

Also, with the Govt helping first home buyers, that is helping the future. Most people know that one of the best forms of investment is through property. With an aging population, and more strain being placed on the pension, property investment becomes an effective form of superannuation. With property, the earlier you invest, the better off you are in the long run. With people being less reliant on the pension, more money can be spent elsewhere.

The Howard Govt also wasn't faced with a Global financial crisis, in fact the last 2 Global recessions have been when Labor was in power which obviously gives some people (Im not saying its you guys) the ammo to say Labor can't handle the economy and they always put us into debt. Its very difficult to maintain surplus and keep unemployment down in a recession.
The Howard Govt wasn't faced with these issues, add to that they introduced GST which helped bring them to surplus but at the same time it effectively put prices on everything up, and therefore the price of living went up.
Also by introducing tax cuts towards the end of their term, that caused an increase in inflation which caused interest rates to rise when the Labor Govt first came into power.

The main reason why I will go with Gillard is I dont see any policy at all from Liberal. All Liberal seem intent on is blocking Labor policies and then throwing it back at them by saying they haven't introduced anything.

Yes, but all these programs cost lots of money and are all funded by the taxpayer. One of their attempts to pay off the debt, is to tax big mining companies who have built up one of the most successful industries in Australia. Soon, these big mining firms will mine elsewhere and they will go down the same path as the orange industry, car manufacturing industry and soon the apple industry (BTW YOUR federal government are importing 80,000 CHINESE apples in November). And how are people going to benefit with having shares in these mining companies, when all they're doing is paying their tax?

 

[alien]

<big>Rudd is unmanly, like a snake: Latham</big>

Former prime minister Kevin Rudd is unmanly and like a snake for leaking a damaging story about his successor Julia Gillard, a former Labor leader says.

Mark Latham also said Ms Gillard would have been better off giving Mr Rudd the foreign affairs portfolio to prevent him from being a loose cannon in Brisbane.

Ms Gillard lost traction in the election campaign after Nine Network journalist Laurie Oakes revealed that she questioned the wisdom of parental leave and a pension increase.

While Mr Rudd subsequently released a statement denying he was the source of the leak, Mr Latham is still convinced that he backgrounded Mr Oakes.

"It's the coward's way to get on the blower with Laurie Oakes and say, `I'll tell you this but you're not allowed to identify me'," Mr Latham told Sky News.

"It's the snake's way.

"So I challenge Kevin Rudd to be a man, to be honest, to have some honour and actually, if he feels this strongly about it, put his name to his words.

"I think it's unmanly and beneath a decent Aussie bloke to act this way, let alone an ex prime minister."

In his book The Latham Diaries, Mr Latham said Mr Rudd was a serial leaker.

He repeated that assertion.

"You don't have to have a wire tap on the conversation between Kevin Rudd and Laurie Oakes to know it was Kevin Rudd," Mr Latham said.

"It too, is one of the laws of nature, that Kevin is a serial leaker, this is what he does and the Labor Party is having to live with the consequences."

Mr Latham said Ms Gillard could have avoided political difficulties if she had given Mr Rudd the foreign ministry after she took the top job on June 24.

"They should have made him the minister for foreign affairs or the minister for defence over in Afghanistan … you're looking at a much better option than having him there as the loose cannon on the southside of Brisbane," he said.

"I think he was insulted and probably felt very insulted when having lost the prime ministership, andwanting to go on the frontbench and be a minister, he wasn't accommodated."
\
\
http://au.news.yahoo.com/election/a/-/article/7672346/rudd-is-unmanly-like-a-snake-latham/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

 

[Gary_Bakerloo]

Soon, these big mining firms will mine elsewhere and they will go down the same path as the orange industry, car manufacturing industry and soon the apple industry.

No chance and if they do, there is no shortage of other mining companies stinging to get a lease off our government to mine. Australia has close to the highest quality raw materials in the world with a rather good infrastructure in place (particularly in WA). There is not a chance in hell a Rio or a BHP will leave.

The important thing to remember with the RSPT is that Australia is one of the first economies to introduce this form of taxation. This form of taxation has been argued for quite a few years now, but no one introduced it. Governments and mining companies around the world are watching with interest as this is effectively the front line in the introduction of a more efficient tax that recognises the finite resources. The protests have been strong because if Australia introduces this tax, then other nations will get on board and soon the global mining industry will be forced to pay a higher, but more efficient, tax that is reflective of the finite nature of resources. This protest by the mining companies is not confined to our borders and the argument that this is a money grab by the government to pay back debt is irrelevant.

With regard the car industry, well there is probably a reason why that industry has slowly left our shores. It is not exactly competitive to produce cars here.

 

[westTAHger]

don't trust any politician, never have, never will.

off topic a little, shame Peter Costello is not there with Tony Abbott.
could you imagine if they got into power.
australia is run by Abbott & Costello.

 

[hammertime]

Soon, these big mining firms will mine elsewhere and they will go down the same path as the orange industry, car manufacturing industry and soon the apple industry.

No chance and if they do, there is no shortage of other mining companies stinging to get a lease off our government to mine. Australia has close to the highest quality raw materials in the world with a rather good infrastructure in place (particularly in WA). There is not a chance in hell a Rio or a BHP will leave.

The important thing to remember with the RSPT is that Australia is one of the first economies to introduce this form of taxation. This form of taxation has been argued for quite a few years now, but no one introduced it. Governments and mining companies around the world are watching with interest as this is effectively the front line in the introduction of a more efficient tax that recognises the finite resources. The protests have been strong because if Australia introduces this tax, then other nations will get on board and soon the global mining industry will be forced to pay a higher, but more efficient, tax that is reflective of the finite nature of resources. This protest by the mining companies is not confined to our borders and the argument that this is a money grab by the government to pay back debt is irrelevant.

With regard the car industry, well there is probably a reason why that industry has slowly left our shores. It is not exactly competitive to produce cars here.

There is actually some competition concerns Gary. Africa has a tonne of Ore that is the same, if not higher grade than Australia. It's simply the shipping costs/time and infrastructure that is holding it back… and the infrastructure is getting built.

The namblam project where the guys from SDL sadly crashed in the plane recently is massive (check it out on the ASx). But they have to actually build the train-line from the border of Congo to the ocean. In that case, the government is helping them fund the infrastructure rather than trying to drag them down. Because they know how much they would thrive with a decent mining sector.

Soon, you will see the Chinese buy a company like that and tell Australia to knick off. Especially if these taxes translate to higher prices for Ore/Steel. The states already charge a 7% resources tax on the mines!

So, if we are punishing successful companies. Why don't we start lifting the tax rate on banks?

 

[hammertime]

Check out this BER project… you can't honestly tell me this is worth $250k.

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/nsw-act/whose-bright-idea-was-this/story-e6freuzi-1225898696882" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

 

[Yossarian]

Soon, these big mining firms will mine elsewhere and they will go down the same path as the orange industry, car manufacturing industry and soon the apple industry.

No chance and if they do, there is no shortage of other mining companies stinging to get a lease off our government to mine. Australia has close to the highest quality raw materials in the world with a rather good infrastructure in place (particularly in WA). There is not a chance in hell a Rio or a BHP will leave.

The important thing to remember with the RSPT is that Australia is one of the first economies to introduce this form of taxation. This form of taxation has been argued for quite a few years now, but no one introduced it. Governments and mining companies around the world are watching with interest as this is effectively the front line in the introduction of a more efficient tax that recognises the finite resources. The protests have been strong because if Australia introduces this tax, then other nations will get on board and soon the global mining industry will be forced to pay a higher, but more efficient, tax that is reflective of the finite nature of resources. This protest by the mining companies is not confined to our borders and the argument that this is a money grab by the government to pay back debt is irrelevant.

With regard the car industry, well there is probably a reason why that industry has slowly left our shores. It is not exactly competitive to produce cars here.

There is actually some competition concerns Gary. Africa has a tonne of Ore that is the same, if not higher grade than Australia. It's simply the shipping costs/time and infrastructure that is holding it back… and the infrastructure is getting built.

The namblam project where the guys from SDL sadly crashed in the plane recently is massive (check it out on the ASx). But they have to actually build the train-line from the border of Congo to the ocean. In that case, the government is helping them fund the infrastructure rather than trying to drag them down. Because they know how much they would thrive with a decent mining sector.

Soon, you will see the Chinese buy a company like that and tell Australia to knick off. Especially if these taxes translate to higher prices for Ore/Steel. The states already charge a 7% resources tax on the mines!

So, if we are punishing successful companies. Why don't we start lifting the tax rate on banks?

Because banks aren't profiting from selling finite resources the country owns.

It's already cheaper to mine stuff in Africa but somewhere like the Congo is always going to have problems with a well educated and secure workforce, corruption, and security.

 

[Yossarian]

Check out this BER project… you can't honestly tell me this is worth $250k.

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/nsw-act/whose-bright-idea-was-this/story-e6freuzi-1225898696882" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Oddly enough the Tele's main gripe in this case seems to be the brightness of the lights - they didn't even baulk at the price!!

 

[Yossarian]

<big>Rudd is unmanly, like a snake: Latham</big>

Former prime minister Kevin Rudd is unmanly and like a snake for leaking a damaging story about his successor Julia Gillard, a former Labor leader says.

Mark Latham also said Ms Gillard would have been better off giving Mr Rudd the foreign affairs portfolio to prevent him from being a loose cannon in Brisbane.

Ms Gillard lost traction in the election campaign after Nine Network journalist Laurie Oakes revealed that she questioned the wisdom of parental leave and a pension increase.

While Mr Rudd subsequently released a statement denying he was the source of the leak, Mr Latham is still convinced that he backgrounded Mr Oakes.

"It's the coward's way to get on the blower with Laurie Oakes and say, `I'll tell you this but you're not allowed to identify me'," Mr Latham told Sky News.

"It's the snake's way.

"So I challenge Kevin Rudd to be a man, to be honest, to have some honour and actually, if he feels this strongly about it, put his name to his words.

"I think it's unmanly and beneath a decent Aussie bloke to act this way, let alone an ex prime minister."

In his book The Latham Diaries, Mr Latham said Mr Rudd was a serial leaker.

He repeated that assertion.

"You don't have to have a wire tap on the conversation between Kevin Rudd and Laurie Oakes to know it was Kevin Rudd," Mr Latham said.

"It too, is one of the laws of nature, that Kevin is a serial leaker, this is what he does and the Labor Party is having to live with the consequences."

Mr Latham said Ms Gillard could have avoided political difficulties if she had given Mr Rudd the foreign ministry after she took the top job on June 24.

"They should have made him the minister for foreign affairs or the minister for defence over in Afghanistan … you're looking at a much better option than having him there as the loose cannon on the southside of Brisbane," he said.

"I think he was insulted and probably felt very insulted when having lost the prime ministership, andwanting to go on the frontbench and be a minister, he wasn't accommodated."
\
\
http://au.news.yahoo.com/election/a/-/article/7672346/rudd-is-unmanly-like-a-snake-latham/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Seriously if you are using Mark Lathem to strengthen your argument you can't be doing too well… Go ask Malcolm Fraser or Andrew Peacock what they think of Abbott. Or John Hewson or Brendan Nelson for that matter.

Latham was a complete waste of time. If only Joel Fitzgibbon had skipped his shower that morning.

 

[BeanStew55]

I believe that Julia Gillard has what it takes to move Australia forward. Why would you vote for a man who cuts 1 billion dollars out of health care and who doesn't believe in abortions. I believe it is time for change maybe Australia is ready for a female prime minister.

 

[hammertime]

I believe that Julia Gillard has what it takes to move Australia forward. Why would you vote for a man who cuts 1 billion dollars out of health care and who doesn't believe in abortions. I believe it is time for change maybe Australia is ready for a female prime minister.

Wow. 'Move Australia forward', '$1 billion in health cut', 'time for change'. You sound just like the labor ad's mate.

Because streamlining health care is needed Jono. It's easy to do whats popular and throw around cash. What isn't popular is to set up the country for the future when not many people understand why.

Have a read of this mate. You'll see why Abbott was starting to cut the fat from health when he was minister.

http://www.treasury.gov.au/igr/igr2010/report/html/05_Chapter_4_Ageing_pressures_and_spending.asp" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;