Reasons not to vote LABOR.

[Neferti]

I wonder whether Gough is still maintaining the rage?

[Rorschach]

I think he's trying to maintain breathing...

[Rorschach]

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/o ... 6668058889" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Black Orchid]

Deputy Prime Minister Wayne Swan has accused Tony Abbott of being drunk when crucial votes were being taken over stimulus measures during the height of the 2008-2009 global financial crisis.

While the opposition supported the Labor government's first GFC stimulus package in 2008, it opposed the second that was debated in early 2009.

"The leader of the opposition slept right through the critical vote, he was drunk and didn't come in the house," Mr Swan told parliament.

The Speaker of the house, Anna Burke, asked the treasurer to withdraw the remark, describing it as a "very outrageous" comment.

Mr Swan did withdraw, and went on to say how the opposition voted against the stimulus that saved Australia,

"The leader of the opposition wasn't here, he was around in the house earlier in the evening and was witnessed by many people on this side of the house for his activities on that evening," Mr Swan said.

The Speaker then warned the treasurer.

http://au.news.yahoo.com/latest/a/-/lat ... vote-swan/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

YAWN, more drivel. It's like watching kindergarten kids finger painting.

[Rorschach]

How desperate and frightened is Swan?

[Neferti]

How desperate and frightened is Swan?

I think IQs description of Swan is apt.

[Rorschach]

CANBERRA OBSERVED:
Labor in worse shape today than in 1975
by national correspondent
News Weekly, July 6, 2013

When historians eventually look back on the 2007-2013 Labor Government experiment, the Rudd and Gillard administrations will likely always be seen as two broken and separate governments without continuity and with barely a discernable thread of policy continuity between them.

Rudd Labor and Gillard Labor will likely be forever remembered as the period the Labor Party tore itself apart — not over ideology or policy, but personality.

For Labor it will be a watershed moment, because it will be either a turning point — as it was after 1975 — or the beginning of the end of the party.

The Rudd government will be remembered almost entirely by its response to the global financial crisis (GFC) and its subsequent rash and chaotic decision-making and profligacy, but also as being a period in which an individual, who was not of the Labor Party, usurped it and managed to make it bow to his will.

For over 100 years, all Labor frontbenchers were chosen by the Caucus — or, more often than not, factions within the Caucus — a democratic rule that kept Labor leaders in check and gave ministers the confidence to stand up to Labor leaders without fear of being sacked.

But Mr Rudd, a former bureaucrat, managed to quash this rule in the name of reform and thereby gained unbridled power inside the Labor Party. Julia Gillard has resisted efforts to reverse it.

It is difficult to underestimate the disastrous effects this singular rule change has had on the current Labor period.

For Rudd, who had a natural propensity toward being autocratic, it resulted in a shambolic one-man government.

And for Julia Gillard — who, as it turned out, lacked sound political judgment and seldom heeded counsel — it led to catastrophic political blunders.

Prime Minister Gillard’s single worst mistake was not the enacting of the carbon tax she had previously promised not to introduce, but her decision to enter into a coalition with the Greens. And it was a decision she made single-handedly without consultation with her Cabinet or Caucus colleagues.

Moreover, there were many subsequent decisions she made in presidential style that would have been tempered had she consulted more widely.

The lessons for Labor after 1975 were that Labor had to be much better at government and at being competent economic managers.

It was a lesson that Bill Hayden and Bob Hawke drilled into the party in the painful march back to government in 1983.

That lesson seems to have been forgotten by the current crop of Labor politicians. If we put aside for a moment the actual policy blunders, one of the hallmarks of the current Labor period has been its dysfunctional running of government.

But the problem afflicting the Labor Party now is much worse than in 1975.

While the Whitlam period was characterised by immaturity, lack of experience and incompetence, at least the Whitlam-led Labor Party had a cohesive set of beliefs and policies. And those polices had been discussed and debated by Labor long before it came to power.

Labor goes to this election with two policies it has cobbled together in the current period — a new federal welfare body to take care of people with disabilities and their carers, and a schools funding policy that it has absurdly been allowed to be called “Gonski”.

The National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS) remains an open cheque-book — the taking over of responsibility a myriad of state responsibilities without any real idea of where the cut-off point for disabilities will be.

There is enormous expectation about the scheme, but it is likely many people will be disappointed.

Nevertheless, the scheme has bipartisan and voter support, but it is far from a developed policy and will take a decade to implement properly.

“Gonski” is worse. The Gonski reforms are simply a promise to all sectors of the education system that none will be worse off.

While the idea behind it is to lift and assist poor public and badly resourced private schools, all the other sectors will get more money so there won’t be any complaints.

It is a political fix rather than a proper cohesive policy.

And without looking at actual teaching standards, and tackling the protection of bad teachers, there is simply not the remotest guarantee that the tens of billions of dollars to be poured into the schools sector over the coming years will make any improvement to student “outcomes”.

However, if you ask any Labor backbencher what they believe in as a political party, you are likely to be told they believe in the Gonski reforms.

And that is Labor’s fundamental problem.

It believes only in winning government, and will do anything to achieve that, including dumping prime ministers and installing leaders they know are flawed because they think it will somehow help them to win.

The Gillard government will of course also be remembered for one of those rare terms in Australian politics when the government of the day did not have a working majority in the lower house.

Given the disaster that has followed, it is not an experiment the Australian people will want to repeat for a long time. Funny but the polls seem to be showing that Australians have very short memories indeed...

[Black Orchid]

Labor revives boat people plan ...

Labor has flagged reviving its thwarted "Malaysian Solution" and negotiating agreements with other countries to fly back asylum seekers as part of a fresh effort to shut down the people-smuggling trade.

As the Rudd Government announced it would get tough on boat people who destroyed their identity documents, Home Affairs Minister Jason Clare said flying Iranians, the biggest ethnic group of asylum seekers this year, to Malaysia and other countries would deter them getting on a boat.

He cited the success of an agreement with the Sri Lankan Government, under which 1200 people deemed to be economic migrants were quickly flown back to Colombo in the past year to dissuade others from making the risky voyage.

Mr Clare said the fear of drowning at sea or being flown to Nauru or Manus Island had not stopped people getting on boats.

"But one thing that has had a big effect is flying people back home," he said.

"Iran refuses to take people back unless they voluntarily want to go back to Iran. So what I've said is let's fly them halfway back to Malaysia and that'll remove the incentive to get on to a boat in the first place.

"But we need to do more than just Malaysia. We need to set up that sort of agreement with other countries of the region."

Under the Malaysian agreement announced in May 2011, 800 people would have been sent to Malaysia in return for resettling 4000 certified refugees from there.

But it was overturned by the High Court because Malaysia was not legally bound to protect asylum seekers, and the Opposition and Greens blocked Government efforts to legislate around the ruling.

Since the court's decision, boat arrivals have hit a high, with almost 14,000 this year alone.

http://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/a/-/br ... ople-plan/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Here we go again

[Rorschach]

Dear .....,

Earlier today the Coalition released its policy to Boost Productivity and Reduce Regulation.

Reducing regulation is an essential part of the Coalition’s Real Solutions Plan to grow the economy, get the Budget under control and create one million new jobs within five years.

Our policy will cut $1 billion a year in red and green tape, generate more jobs and strengthen the economy.

Under Labor, 21,000 additional regulations have been added despite Kevin Rudd’s promise in 2007 to cap the growth of regulation. Labor has paid too little regard to the increased costs of regulation to the economy and to our ongoing national prosperity.

Small business, in particular, has carried the cost of Labor’s increasing compliance burden.

Small businesses don’t have compliance departments – and nor should they. We need common sense to prevail again.

Our policy will:

* scrap Labor’s Carbon Tax which is a burden on jobs and households;
* set aside two Parliamentary sitting days for the repeal of legislation each year;
* link the remuneration of senior public servants to proven reductions in red tape;
* create a unit in every department and agency responsible for cutting red tape;
* establish a one-stop-shop for environmental approvals; and
* transfer administration of paid parental leave from business to the Family Assistance Office.


This is a comprehensive policy to strengthen the economy by making government more efficient and businesses more productive.

Our policy is in keeping with the pledge Tony Abbott made in his 2013 Budget Reply: to deliver careful, collegial, consultative, straightforward government that says what it means and does what it says.

Only the Coalition has the Plan to build a stronger Australia and a better future for all Australians.

Policy can be found via the liberal party site like all the rest.

[Black Orchid]

Prime Minister Kevin Rudd may trump Julia Gillard one last time with the emergence of a likely new preselection contender for her seat of Lalor supported by key Rudd backers.

Lisa Clutterham, 29, an Australian diplomat to Papua New Guinea, is a likely entrant to the increasingly crowded contest for the western suburban Lalor, Labor's fifth-safest federal seat despite never having lived in Melbourne and being a party member for less than a month.

Ms Clutterham conceded in an interview on ABC radio on Thursday that she had never lived nor studied in Melbourne, and had only visited the electorate of Lalor.

''I don't have a connection with Melbourne and that's not something I'm shying away from,'' Ms Clutterham said.

Nor did she have a connection with the electorate, south-west of Melbourne, though she said her partner as a child had also visited Werribee, a suburb in Lalor.

"No I don't have a connection. My partner . . . has family there and as a child he visited Werribee on many Christmas holidays.

>snip<

The emergence of Ms Clutterham as a likely contender for Lalor has riled Labor factional warlords in Victoria who derive power from their influence over the allocation of seats in the federal and state Parliaments.

A former Australian Workers Union state secretary turned state upper house MP, Cesar Melhem, said he ''could not stomach'' active party members being overlooked for seats in favour of unknown non-members.

He said in ''exceptional circumstances'' it was acceptable that ''high-flyer'' candidates well known in the community were parachuted into seats. Football and television identity Eddie McGuire would be such an exception, if he chose to run.

Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/federal-politi ... z2Yj35tBTe" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

More lunacy. Who better to represent an electorate than someone who has only 'visited', probably only once?