“You went too far Malcolm.” Turnbull and the Oz c-ck it up
|
Whichever Treasury or RBA official — or as they’re technically called in the media, boffin – came up with the idea of charging depositors for a guarantee of very large bank deposits, well done. They avoided making bad policy even worse. Charging for a premium should be extended across all deposits. People with brains enough to know that Australia’s banking oligopoly is safe could save some money. Anyway, enough about that. This heart won’t bleed too much for foreign banks and mortgage trusts. The real story is about how to bugger up a Parliamentary attack. With the first substantive issue of his leadership yesterday, Turnbull did well for the most part. It was pretty thin stuff — the logical consequence is that either politicians are supposed to slavishly follow the advice of the unelected Reserve Bank Governor, or the latter, despite being independent, is supposed to sit in Cabinet and its sub-committees — but Turnbull sustained the attack for most of Question Time. He hogged the questions — Julie Bishop was the only other person to get one – but he was focussed and on-target sufficiently to visibly annoy Rudd. It was a strong performance. Toward the end, though, Turnbull badly overplayed his hand. The first hint that they were scratching a bit for where to take the attack came in Turnbull’s fifth question, which amounted to a particularly clumsy attempt to verbal Lindsay Tanner, a case not so much of taking him out of context as transporting him to an entirely different planet. Eventually, frustrated that Rudd was relying on Ken Henry’s assurance as to the views of the Reserve Bank, Turnbull challenged Rudd to sack Henry if the story offered by Rudd didn’t stack up. This turned what was looking like an honourable draw — a rare thing for the Opposition these days — into an attack on the Secretary of the Treasury, and Rudd gleefully exploited it, demanding Turnbull back Henry during these dark days of economic crisis. Nor did he forget to mention that John Howard had punished Henry for daring to suggest early last year that Treasury needed to be watchful about bad policy — a story that circulated around Canberra for months before being confirmed by Henry earlier this year. Turnbull has his own problems with Henry. In March, Turnbull claimed Treasury had advised the Government to nominate a dollar figure in its minimum wages submission to the Fair Pay Commission. In a very rare move, Henry issued a succinct press release, without mentioning Turnbull by name, saying “these claims are false”. Asked about the disparity between Turnbull’s and Henry’s version of events, Brendan Nelson happily backed Ken Henry. Reckon Turnbull is a big fan of Henry? “You went too far, Malcolm,” called a Labor backbencher, and whoever it was was dead right. You could tell from both Turnbull’s body language and that of his frontbenchers as first Rudd and then Anthony Albanese invited him to publicly back Henry. Only Phil Coorey and Christian Kerr conveyed what a blunder Turnbull’s question was. It showed that Turnbull’s Parliamentary skills are still a work in progress, and that his frontbench lacks either the experience or forthrightness to rein him in. Turnbull was developing his questions on the fly, turning to consult with Bishop, Robb, Truss and Hockey, with Christopher Pyne leaning in to offer his two bobs’ worth. There’s a reasonable balance of governmental experience in that group, but obviously very little in the ways of effective opposition tactics. Elsewhere at The Australian, it was crowing all round as the RBA and the Treasury’s work on improving the guarantee was held aloft as a “backflip”, “backdown” and “first big mistake”. It’s only a week since Shanahan was talking about how the crisis had brought out the best in Government. Paul Kelly made the effort to show up to Wayne Swan’s press conference with a visiting Chinese official before Question Time yesterday to attempt to catch him out, but only got in one question after the various translating and yelling by journalists was over. The Oz also skipped the bit about how yesterday’s story that the RBA warned the Government against a blanket guarantee turned out to be wrong. Ken Henry demolished the story this morning at Estimates, going out of his way to describe the report as wrong, “unfortunate and falacious” in fact. This followed on from Glenn Stevens’s statement yesterday that the RBA supported the package. Still, we shouldn’t let either the facts or Turnbull’s stuff-up should get in the way of a good gotcha. |
|
|
|
17 Comments
You sure got the nutters out today Bernard.
All the hype, no sense no logic, just nutters. Thanks to “Blood on the track” a little bit of sense has come out - most of the other commentary ignores the real issues of economic logic, which I have to say, on re-reading what you wrote Bernard - pity the Doctors (of what) and the others did not study your text to understand your thrust. The trouble is that you spice your good lines with too much inherent bias.
Turnbull leads Her Majesty’s Disloyal Opposition.
Malcom, be yourself. Stop trying to play silly big d…k games and make a real contribution. Do you really want to be like the little expletive, or do you weant to really make a difference. You have brains. Use them!
A pathetic opposition in bi-partisanship. Bothering with the concept only because they are partly aware that times are tough, dangerous, Australia has a special chance, any government would need all the help it can get, Australians may not be as stupid as they would like them to be and so any government would wake up and say don’t kill me with your pathetic bi-partisanship, kill yourself with it. Come back and give us any other opposition shit as its bound to be healthier.
So Graeme Lewis, you also calling Mr Henry a liar? What wonderful company you are in, Senators Coonan and Abetz as bed mates, you are welcome to them. The smell is too high from where I am.
Enough already. Turn-bull is a great name for a leader of the opposition. Trouble is the present leader is Malcolm Fig Jam. (Figure it out..)
Is Turnbull trying to cause a run on the banks and other financial institutions? Why is he undermining confidence in our regulators and markets and businesses? Why is he speaking for people with $1 million on deposit and CEO’s and yet endagering their money at the same time? Many of them live in Wentworth.
Blood on the tracks, or is it water on the brain? Do you know what day it is? duh it is Wednesday goofy. You referring to Tuesday activites I presume, lot of water under the bridge (now we know where it flowed to), since then. Keep up lad ,keep up. By all means spew forth your anti Rudd/Swan poison, its expected of you Libs, cant get used to being in Opposition huh? Get hold of todays senate hearing and you may learn something.
These events of the last week or so justify the question being repeated - what if any advice are Rudd and Swan receiving, or asking for before they charge on with their “solutions” to the financial issues. Their $10.4billion of gifts to the welfare sector, and this unwarranted unlimited guarantee over (some) bank deposits do smack of big-time politiicans with L Plates, and it would really be nice to know that the “boffins” who will have to fix the mess that might be created really did give advice re these so-called solutions. Let’s work past all this poli-speak and get to the nub of the issue.
And that goes for you too Bernard!
Methinks they did not!!!
I find that on most occasions the most bilious, strident commenators on Crikey are those who will not identify themselves e.g. Rudd on the Tracks.
Even if such comments provide substance to the debate, what does it say of the authors? Commentator cowards? …..or maybe it’s Frank Lowy, Jamie Packer & Cardinal Pell et al don’t want to be identified…or maybe Glennn Stevens or Ken Henry…….or FuManchu
Now we know who applies graffiti to the back of toilet doors.
At least we now know the height and depth of Mr Turnbulls standards. Sack an honest, competent man because he told the truth? He’s obviously spent to much time in John Howards company. Unbelievable!!!
Bernard, what a load of cobblers. You either did not watch question time or Rudd media advisers have taken a baseball bat to you already ( or you are gun shy). It was obvious to anybody who watched that Rudd did not want to answer the question as to what the RBA advised. Under continued questioning, in between the ALP dorothy dixes to Tanner and Crean, Rudd brought Henry into the equation and what was shamefully obvious was Henry was going to be a scapegoat if one was required. Rudd stated to Parliament that Henry informed him the RBA and the other advisory group including ASIC, for God’s sake how did they get a guernsey, agreed with his decision.
He continued to duck and weave, got red faced and frothed hyperboles when asked what the RBA had advised. It reached a point where I felt sorry for him and even advised him via the TV to simply say that he made his decision. That’s what he is elected to do. If it was wrong adjust it. Don’t hide !
What was sad about Rudd was after question time Swan fronted the media and immediately started to inform journalists that the Govt was intending to change parts of the decision as it had always intended.
After this the media cut away to old smarmy himself, Stephens from the RBA who addressing a gathering said he agreed with the Prime Minister’s decision but refused to say what advice the RBA gave. This from a bloke that absolutely gutted the economy four months ago and was feeling very pleased with himself. He needed to avoid answering the direct questions after his performance when the decision was his to make. Blind freddy could see the state of the economy here and in the USA. To this end Stephens still hasn’t addressed to train wreck coming into Australia via the credit default swaps (CDS), $40billion, and none of it booked or brought to account by Banks. No wonder he supports the Govts decision. It’s coming mate and on your watch. Lehman’s CDS’s have just started to be claimed.
Turnbull had Rudd & Swan on toast.
There’s a hole in the bucket but it’s not dear Henry’s.
The opposition is led by a vasectomy kid.
He’s firing blanks.
Tax, levy, excise, fee?
John Howard and Peter Costello used to quibble about the difference.
Why are the Liberals coalescing them all again?
Could it be the fact that they are now in opposition rather than government?
Graham Lewis yet another Liberal know it all, a refugee from the Akerman chronicles. Of course you are a superior being and far too knowledgeable for us plebs, no doubt you walk on water as well.
While I am yet to be convinced about Turnbull’s communication and political skills, I must say his business acumen and economic background has shown in the past few months. He has continualy made the point that Swan et al were talking up inflation , that the past 2 (probably 3) interest rate rises were unneccessary ( the RBA promptly cuts interest rates by 100 basis points ), that pensioners needed a hand,( the goverment promises them a package of assistance ), that the government’s initial bank guarantee was inadequate( the goverment promptly raises the ceiling, albeit too high! ) and that the government needed to release the advice on which it decided to pump 10.4 billion dollars into the economy. He has put the government under alot of pressure. What is the point of Rudd meeting business leaders if he will not give a full and frank assessment of where the economy is headed?
Rudd has been ducking and weaving. He wont release advice from Treasury on growth and employment projections, and now refuses to release RBA advice.
Finally, Swan refuses to discuss the possibilty of a budget deficit. Oh well, Labor preserving a surplus was just too much to expect. I should have realised that living, as I do, in Sydney. Is there any State Labor goverment with an operating surplus? The socialists spending big and borrowing big is almost an axiom of politics. Its that Keynesian thing, I think, about spending your way into, sorry, out of of trouble or, “eat, drink and be merry” for tomorrow…who knows, its not my money. Thats why when Obama says he wants to ” spread the wealth around”, I get that chill feeling.
For all the hype about Malcolm Turnbull; surely with his financial genius (?)- contacts, he could have worked to persuade the investing public that all was not well on the financial front. Why did people like him just sit there when their contacts would have advised that all was not well? I think Malcolm Turnbull and the Liberal Party have no interest in the Australian investors’ money-or lack of it-at all. It’s fine to stand up in Parliament and ask touchy questions, but why didn’t people like Turnbull advice and coerce the market to see the truth: why did it take America to collapse when (albeit with hindsight) we surely could have done something ourselves. Please forgive my idiot naîviety.