Top StoriesMay’s sharp fall in jobless numbers added to the greenness of the ‘recovery’ (or less bad) thesis; overnight June’s unemployment figures were so awful that they could have stunted at least, the wavering shoots.
2020’s finest: the greatest hits of 1995
|
Kevin Rudd got two very useful things out of the 2020 Summit. One was the photo of him sitting on the floor, earnestly listening: a priceless portrait of the relaxed but focused leader open to ideas. The second was non-government imprimatur for a slate of progressive ideas from which he can pick and choose. Because if he wanted a feast of ideas, a lot of summiteers thawed out the frozen leftovers from the Keating era and served them up, declaring they tasted as good as ever. Republic. Bill of rights. Treaty. More money for the Yarts.
And when it didn’t feel like 1995, it was exactly what you’d expect from gathering a group of experts in their specific fields – the same old stuff, albeit with even more motherhood than the most cynical of us had anticipated. The indigenous and sustainability streams, in particular, seemed to produce plenty of rhetoric – much of it about how urgent things were – but few concrete ideas, and the health stream’s proposals seemed like a combination of existing programs – more fruit and less junk food for kids – and the eccentric (a bionic eye – no Steve Austin noises please). And yes, just about everyone wanted to fundamentally review federalism, or even abolish the states. Judging by the summit, Australia’s great tradition of clinging to the skirts of government lives on. This was an unmistakeable triumph for right-on progressives, who regard government as the answer to pretty much any question you care to put. Lots of streams wanted national strategic plans. And while there were plenty of calls for streamlining or reviewing the allocation of powers between governments, not one single initiative from any of the groups was predicated on reducing the role of government. In fact 14 new centres, institutes or commission were proposed, including 5 from the foreign policy hardheads in the security stream. Only a couple of genuinely new, or at least hitherto-underexplored, ideas rose to the surface. Automatic electoral enrolment at 18. A HECS-based Community Corps. Micro-financing for those excluded from mainstream financial services. Then again, perhaps old ideas is sort of what the Prime Minister wanted. The great benefit of the summit is that Rudd can pick and choose from a suite of ideas that have some faint non-governmental origin and legitimacy. The rest he doesn’t have to touch. Dennis Shanahan today argues that the ones Rudd doesn’t want might grow legs and create difficulties for him. But given the bulk of the unwanted or untimely ideas are from the Left, and will lack any concerted political force behind them, it’s hard to see how Rudd can lose. If he doesn’t want a treaty, he can say he’s too busy dealing with real priorities for working families. He doesn’t have to worry about Brendan Nelson demanding to know when he’ll be putting up a bill of rights. Not that he has to worry about Brendan Nelson at all, really. Nelson spent the weekend with an immensely pained smile. It might have been because he realised he’d overdressed for the event, but more likely it was the look of someone simultaneously marginalised and skewered. Rudd has the Leader of the Opposition right where he wants him, and it doesn’t look like changing any time soon. |
|
|
22 Comments
At least people are talking to each other again instead of simply taking ugly potshots at each other. Much of the talk back I have heard have been reminders of Howard’s mob’s reaction to anything approaching thought - like the 1 million who marched against invading Iraq and were demonised as losers, unpatriotic and all the other bullshit.
Yet we were right. Just as reconciliation, the republic, treatment of refugees and others have been right. Just because the far right hijacked the nation for a time doesn’t mean we have to let that continue.
But the outcomes on climate change action seem to be equivocal at best - with the Greenhouse mafia dominating that stream. No moratorium on building new coal fired power stations, and the high levels of government funding for coal research and development (badged with the oymoron of “clean coal”) retained. It seems that real action on climate change still eludes us, and community voices were not heard on this topic, which is a pity.
PLEASE! Will someone tell this sycophantic populist pseudo hipster dufus that he is the Prime Minister of Australia and to stop acting like some Jimmy Carter wannabe - Carter did this at Camp David in 1979 - on the floor taking notes just like Rudd has copied - doesn’t he know that with today’s resources all fakes and copiers are unmasked in an instant? I am all for new ideas but Rudd it seems is devoid of any ideas of his own. This is tragic and like Carter I predict that he will be a one term PM - providing the Opposition gets its act together - or unless the Labor Party disposes of him in a factional fight and then it will be Julia’s turn. Will anyone pick Rudd up on what he actually says? I have listened intently and can’t find any substance in his generalised motherhood statements. I have no problem with Labor being in power or Rudd being the PM, provided he acts like a PM, but I was looking forward to a change for the better and not what we are getting. What next Rudd the Hip Hop
i fink dat everyone dat was invited to dis shindig was carefully chosen for what they would n’t say rarther den what they shoulda say da real issues always are da casualty in fink tanks like these being seen to be doing rather den doing is always da best poilitical fing
Jimmy Carter thinks Rudd will be a one-term PM?
Sorry, got distracted for a minute by the Kid from Bondi. Anyway, where was I? Oh yes: I too noticed the strongly paternalistic quality of many of the ideas, particularly where obesity is concerned. FORCING KIDS TO EAT FRUIT and FORCING PEOPLE TO TAKE THE STAIRS and the like. What was the fatness quotient at the Summit? I bet it wasn’t high. I did like the idea of the HECS corps, though, although far as I’m concerned if your uni debt is being paid off as you do community service, volunteering it ain’t.
Essentially The Kid And Mr Keane are right. It was as suspected a forum to showcase old Labor ideas and policy. It was undemocratic but I’m confident that the australian voters will see for what it was the centre left chattering classes believing they are representative again.
The biggest revelation from the 20/20 summit I believe is just how cynical just about every facet of our media has become.
It seems that we are knee deep in pessimism, doubt and critical commentary about a forum and opportunity of a kind that has never occurred in our country before.
If Rudd does not take up a single idea that has been put forward at the 20/20 summit I believe it will still be
a success. Business and the community have had a rare opportunity to come together and put forward ideas.
Groups who may never talk to each other or have had a chance to discuss important issues isn’t this alone a good thing?
The media seems determined to hone in on Rudd looking for a chink in his armor like this whole affair has some devious propaganda like purpose.
All I can say is DER…. stop feeding us the obvious.
Howard could of never initiated something like this…he didn’t have the stomach for listening to people.
Come on media…be positive!
Gee!, I don’t know which media you have reading or watching Tim but certainly it could not have been The Age, the ABC nor even indeed The Australian and the Herald Sun all of which, I would have characterised as cautiously optimistic or positively enthusiastic. Mr. Keane was cautiously suspicious having attended as an observer rather than as both a media commentator and participator. There are many grave causes for concern with respect to this ideas summit. No harm for some of the few untainted journalists left to say so or at least in the case of Mr. Keane: to suggest so!
Rudd took the brand out for a parade. All the dependents duly tugged their forelock. Some in big media. Some in interest groups. Some in business. The maddies were surely all in the 7,000 rejects. But it’s the maddies who really do “shake the tree”. What I observed was a shameful bunch of SHEEP. Led by the nose by frighteningly manipulative ALP Inc machine. From Bob Carr on $500K retainer wth McBank, to Morris Iemma’s people who got Rudd his numbers to trash rival Beazley. I thought it was a horror to be honest. How could anyone take “a governance” group led by a News Ltd clone seriously? Get real. I watched Rollerball and Cannonball Run and even being from the 70ies both seemed more fresh and insightful than the tame happy clappers and evangelists. Unlike fraudulent Rudd I say the future is NOT bright, the country is not safe in his hands, he is as censorious and weak in the face of special interests as ever both majors have been for 2 decades. Such an inconvenient truth, still true.
It must be hard for lefty media having to bite their lips over the farcical ideas summit. I bet they wish it was Howard’s idea so they could give it the public whipping it deserves. Hard to see a single idea that cannot be traced back through the history of our commies since WW2. A waste of money to create a theatre for egos while endorsing the resuscitation of the failed socialist agenda for Labor’s benefit. Rudd will be very lucky to last a year into the next term. Notice the alternatives like Bill Shorten are not seen much around Kevin.
The “gabfest” was exactly as I predicted some time ago in Crikey or the Herald Sun. However, it had a side effect which was admirable. It got the attention of the whole of Australia. Whether trumpeting a long lost cause or discussing some unlikely idea for the future, the delegates cared passionately about Australia. It is years since people felt deeply about their own country. Under the Howard Coalition the land of Oz had been allowed to crumble. Criket lovers, ballet dancers, Anzacs, couch potatoes, medicos, farmers, students, immigrants, etc. were channeled into separate splinter groups and encouraged to whinge about each other. The politics of divide and rule so assiduously applied by the vomitous John Howard and his band of merry thugs. Doesn’t anyone remember how Tony Abbott, Alexander Downer, Joe Hockey, Philip Ruddock and Peter Costello and others drew flack away from important issues? Leaving people drained and beyond thought. We actually thought about “us” last weekend.
Tom Mac you lost me at Rollerball and Cannonball Run. FIne movies both, but I couldn’t connect them with what you were saying. Perhaps you were thinking of Smokey and the Bandit Part 3?
Marilyn: Belatedly, I read your comment and am delighted to find I’m not alone with my thoughts. Under the present government we may find the David Flint’s, the Tony Papafilis’ and the Jesuit John James’ of this once proud land vanishing into the gutter of mediocrity from whence they came.
When I articles like this by Bernard Keane or Richard Farmer I wonder why I ever renewed my crikey membership…. so negative and so very uninspiring. I wish I’d never wasted my money.
”..given the bulk of the unwanted or untimely ideas are from the Left…” Does the Left produce any other sort of ideas? Ever?
Rudd is confronting many difficulties of his own making and if he is to act he has to take Australia with him. The last thing he needs is being saddled with the imbecilty of the Left.
I am a summit reject but a labour party donour at the last election. Am I able to accept I was not one of the 1002 brightest and smartest. Probably not. I wonder how the 7000 + rejects will react.Would we have delivered better ideas.It would not be difficult but this could be sour grapes. Will we now support Get Up or the Greens. Is Labour likely to be successful in fundraising from the many but only invite ideas from the chosen few. I doubt it. There may even be an opportunity for the Liberals to reach out to the slightly less smart and bright for support!!!!
Cathartic. Someone has already said it. Crikey. Yep, now you’re talking says I nicknamed Harvey (psychology, psychology, psychology is everything) Tarvydas. It was a fabulous way to engage everyone in all the things they have called it, described it as etc AND only good can come of all that and the ideas. But ‘good’ flows from the process in other ways that benefits the instigator (the new government) and the targets (the governed) the most important entity in the equation that ‘is’ the nation. What better way to give recognition to the latter, that most important entity, while drawing a spectacular line in the sand to let us know it and to feel it, that was the past and now the future is new and yours so be inspired to don a new attitude and march forward on together in action, a behaviour experience needed to cement a new national psychology. I don’t think the sceptics were smart enough to know what really inspired their attitude.
I think we had enough “reduction in the role of government” by the previous lot. We can achieve more by acting as a nation with the government as our tool. President Bush reduced the role of government so that it could not help the victims of the hurricane in New Orleans. We have reduced it at both state and federal level so that education and health services for the poor are substandard. Our reluctance to train people and build infra structure is detrimental to our economy. The neocon ideal of an inactive government should be rejected once and for all. Let us get on and do the necessary.
Dear John James have you heard of the march to oblivion. It goes like this ….. Left Right Left Right Left Right Left Right Left Right Left Right Left Right Left Right Left Right Left Right Left Right Left Right Left Right Left Right ……..
Reading through a host of unread Crikeys, I’m becoming a bit disenchanted with the half-smart, oh-so-worldly-wise (in retrospect) commentary in the editorials and some of the articles. Particularly this glib nonesense on the summit. Do some real research for goodness sake.
I’ll see what my impressions are by the end of my read and maybe consider ending my subscription
Reading through a host of unread Crikeys, I’m becoming a bit disenchanted with the half-smart, oh-so-worldly-wise (in retrospect) commentary in the editorials and some of the articles. Particularly this glib nonesense on the summit. Do some real research for goodness sake.
I’ll see what my impressions are by the end of my read and maybe consider ending my subscription