Abbott and the economy: best of enemies
|
This business about Tony Abbott “running from a debate on the economy” seems to have gotten traction for Labor this week. I thought Julia Gillard caving in and agreeing to attend tonight’s useless RSL-style forum was undignified, but it seems to have focused more attention on Abbott’s curious unwillingness to discuss the economy, especially given he has left the key job of releasing his Budget surplus projection and commitment costings to Joe Hockey and Andrew Robb. But let’s step back a second: just how important is it for Abbott, as an alternative Prime Minister, to be an economic guru? Kevin Rudd — a former diplomat — could claim no expertise when he ran against the long-serving partnership of John Howard and Peter Costello. But his lack of experience, and Wayne Swan’s, didn’t count in their handling of the GFC, which was excellent. For that matter, neither John Howard nor Bob Hawke had a record on economics when they became Prime Minister, except Howard’s dreadful stint as Treasurer under Fraser. And Gillard — like Costello, an IR lawyer before politics — doesn’t come with a strong economics CV either. Admittedly, Abbott is hobbled somewhat by his performance under Howard. As Health Minister he oversaw blowouts in health programs, became notorious among senior colleagues for the poor quality of the submissions he brought to Cabinet — a trait indulged by Howard, who always favoured Abbott in the hope he would see off Costello and had much of his portfolio run from the PMO. His adherence to Howard’s own ideology of big taxing and spending for electoral purposes doesn’t help either, and the Coalition’s raft of new bodies, commissions and officials in its election promises doesn’t bode well on that front. And while Howard had Costello to try to rein in his love of spending, Abbott faces no such obstacle in the lightweight Hockey. But it doesn’t follow that Abbott the Prime Minister would be the same as he was as a minister. Paul Keating, for example, turned from fiscal disciplinarian as Treasurer to running big deficits as Prime Minister, albeit with the burden of a slow recovery from recession. Abbott claims to have altered his approach to government in the intervening period, and there’s no evidence to doubt that. In short, Abbott isn’t any less-qualified economically to be Prime Minister than any other recent occupant of the position. What is in question, however, is Abbott’s temperament. This is a man who, by his own admissions, gets rattled under questioning and resorts to lying to get out of trouble. His reluctance to actually debate the economy seems to confirm his own fear that he may say something stupid under pressure in debate with the Prime Minister. And one of the key differences between being Opposition leader and Prime Minister is that everything you say as Prime Minister matters economically. Every statement is pored over and parsed by financial markets and foreign investors, and by commentators and analysts. You can’t stick an asterisk next to every statement as Prime Minister with a “to be confirmed” caveat. And when Abbott says repeatedly — as he has done over the past 24 hours — that Australia is now less safe for investment than tinpot African dictatorships, it’s exactly the sort of statement that has economic ramifications, because markets know he is just a few thousand votes from being Prime Minister next week. There is little difference between such statements and Barnaby Joyce’s claims that Australia was in danger of defaulting on its borrowings. Both are nonsensical, and both damage Australia’s economic interests. There are several grounds for questioning Tony Abbott’s fitness for office. The fact that he is not merely a global warming sceptic, but an actual advocate of global cooling, and of inaction on climate change, is one. His insistence that economic stimulus was unnecessary and wasteful is another, although that could be dismissed as mere partisanship and unreflective of what action he himself would have taken during the GFC. That Abbott readily makes such economically damaging statements in his quest for power is a third. |
|
|
|
80 Comments
Abbott is not the smartest when it comes to finance and neither is Swan.
But Abbott is honest and keeps his promises and admits his faults.
What more can you expect?
Gillard is a very smart sneaky backstabber that has lurched to the right for this election.
@ Astro
Gillard is a very smart sneaky backstabber that has lurched to the right for this election.
And The Mad Monk rode into the leadership on a winged horse?
Abbott’s campaign is quite odd overall. He runs away from journalists, constantly cutting ‘doorstops’ very short. He prefers ‘town hall’ meetings because he knows that the average punter lacks the skills and verbal dexterity to hold his cheap sloganeering up to the light. And he runs away from his own dud policies by not even attending their launches.
Australians are voting for a man who is a political tactician and very little more. Abbott used to say a few weeks ago that this “is the supreme challenge of my life”. Well, this election is a supreme challenge for the Australian polity: is it capable of seeing through, and rejecting, a political charlatan?
The man is a fool…by making that statement that Australia is now less safe for investment than tinpot African dictatorships…should have international markets reeling and economists and business people Australia wide berating him from the roof tops…and Astro…Abbott is honest??? He has lied about he mining tax effect…relying on some right wing think tank from Canada to perpetuate his fear mongering about the RST; he was thinks climate change is crap and then says he has the best climate change policy; he said PPL would happen over his dead body - now he thinks he is the saviour (in more ways than one); the man is a fool and only a fool would vote for him….
Astro writes “But Abbott is honest…”
Yeah, honest about not being honest.
I’m so disgusted by the stupidity I’m reading and hearing from idiotic “conservatives” this campaign.
The “conservative” view is whatever the Liberal party or News Ltd happened to say that day or the day before.
IT Communications is my area of expertise. I have been stunned at the comments from the Liberals (backed by the majority of the right wing media and idiotic internet commenter’s) regarding the NBN. The icing on the cake was Abbot’s comment that just because wireless is slower than fibre today that it will not necessarily always be the case. YES IT DOES!!!!! Fibre will always, ALWAYS, be faster than wireless. ALWAYS!
And yet the right wing media (i.e. pretty much all media in Aus) try to say that there is an argument for both sides. NO THERE ISN’T! Fibre will always be faster than wireless! There is no debate.
It’s the same with global warming. Tony Abbot actually believes that the world is cooling. How on earth has he not been laughed at by everyone? I can perhaps understand why someone may not be sure if Humans are causing global warming or not, but to actually believe that thousands of independent scientists across the globe are all conspiring to hide the proof that the world isn’t really warming at all is crazy. I mean really “lay down on the couch and tell me all about it” crazy stuff.
Sorry for my rant. I’m just really getting dismayed with quality of political discussion in Aus this election. It’s like trying to argue with someone who says the sky is green, even though everyone can see it’s blue.
And why is everyone so scared of everything? Scared of boat people, scared of deficits, scared of spending, scared of the NBN, scared of Muslims, scared of the Greens. Our lives have never been so good and yet everyone seems so afraid all the time. Geez!
P.s. Conservative is in quotations above because I don’t believe the current crop of Liberals are conservatives. Labor are the new conservatives and the Liberals are just barking mad.
Could someone remind me - how did Abbott vote on the main stimulus package?
Abbott keeps his promises? What like the rolled gold guarantee of not changing the medicare safety net, yet it was changed before he even got the job?
Abbott is a clown without a clue and what Bernard forgets in this is the wealth of economists in the ALP front bench.
Billson made a complete prat of himself last night up against a Dr of economics, Craig Emerson.
Add to Craig - both Fergusons, Anthony Albanese, Simon Crean and compare that to Andrew Robb, the only sort of economist in the lieberal party, and we see how the ALP can be seen to be better managers.
It was marvellous today to hear Bob Brown with vision and ideas though in the Press Gallery, and almost being treated with the respect he deserves by a bored press gallery.
@apeman
which was the main one?
he votes for the first one and not for the second and called for it to be split up and done on case by case basis
@ShepardMarilyn
Craig Emerson, the man who failed to deliver grocery watch and fuel watch, was rolled by Coles and Woolworths and the Oil companies.
The man who had an affair with Julia Gillard - see this months Womens Weekly
Small business minister who has delivered nothing.
The knock on to small business from the mining tax will have a huge impact on small business and every Australian.
The only reason they did it was to fill the deficit hole (“3 years early”) for an election fix
I didn’t and don’t like JH but he always was beside Costello or announced himself any economic statements. He had a doozy idea to sell ie GST.
Astro - Abbott is honest.. Your kidding right? The only thing he is honest about is being ignorant, he even stated it himself on the 7.30 report along with the other shocking blurt that he regularly bends the truth. Thats not the biggest issue however, he is a politician after all. The issue is that he is clearly a first rate moron, the Sarah Palin of Australian politics. I could rattle off statement after statement that he has made that are mind numbingly stupid, but whats the point? Why does he always request town hall style meetings? Because he knows he cant respond to questioning from acredited competant sources without looking like a complete twit. Average jo’s are his forte, they dont really ask anything harder than “are ya gonna stop those boats” I agree with the above, only an idiot would vote for him.
“As Health Minister he oversaw blowouts in health programs, became notorious among senior colleagues for the poor quality of the submissions he brought to Cabinet.”
Crap Health Minister, Not technically minded and not interested in the economy.
I agree with Keeting. A intellectual nobody.
Strenghs: Praying on peoples fears and conning them to think a good situation is actually a bad one.
Philosophical differences in a nutshell: Labor prefers to maintain a balanced budget and the people’s tax to be spent on infrastructure and services. In contrast the Coalition stashes away our money, believes in running large budget surpluses in a ‘deregulated’, ‘privatised’, let the market rip environment combined with a handout mentality before elections. The choice is yours. Over to you!
”..Julia Gillard caving in was…undignified..”
It is a measure of her, and Labor’s, desperation.
That Bernard doesn’t grasp that, nor allude to it, is indicative of much of Crikey’s, in particular, and the Left’s, in general, poor analysis of all that has transpired nationally, in political terms, especially since Abbott assumed the Coalition leadership.
Abbott has singlehandedly transformed, what was once considered a shoe-in result for Labor ( Dave Sanderson is still expecting Rudd to lead Labor again ), into a cliff hanger.
He is the most formidable Conservative.
That Turnbull left him in the outer ministry is testament to Turnbull’s absolute political ineptitude, matched only by Crikey’s, and the usual suspects posting here, who have monumentally underestimated Abbott.
From day 1 he steadily demolished Rudd, to the point that Rudd and Gillard, ably assisted by Swan, panicked, dropping their ETS, introducing their RSPT and then, finally, politically executing Rudd.
Lady Macbeth has nothing on Gillard. Everything, including the hair colour, is artificial.
But Abbott is honest and keeps his promises and admits his faults.
Thats a very generous view of the mad monk Astro. I wonder if you caught Lateline the night Tony Jones caught Abbott out in a blatant lie regarding meetings with cardinal Pell ? It was television magic that one seldom sees. I,m sure someone can correct me but which promise has Abbott kept because I cannot think of one. Well at least a promise of any substance.
How is a miners tax going to have even a minor impact on small business ? The big three might make 16 billion instead of say 20 billion but lets look at the smaller miners. Now as I understand it the tax kicks in at a point where a fifty million profit is obtained after all other costs/imposts have been dealt with. The critics of this tax then somehow make the claim that the tax on big business to pay for a parental leave scheme will not have any affect on every Australian.
This parental scheme which in affect says one child is worth 75 grand but another Australian baby is worth 6 grand is inequitable , uncosted and welfare for those who don,t require it. Am I to accept that a person on 150 grand per is in a job that doesn,t already have a parental leave scheme or that a person on that wage is incapable of paying their way ? Then we are told its a work entitlement not a government service but only some businesses will pay for it even though those same businesses may already have a leave scheme in operation. I wonder if that will affect hiring women who are of child bearing age if a company has a scheme in place but also is big enough to be slugged with the Abbott tax ?
Some may think Abbott admits to his faults whereas I think its his way of excusing his rash statements that he wished he hadn,t disclosed. His statement about Bernie Banton wasn,t rash but coldly and calmly.
@Fitter
If Abbott is the idiot you say he is, why is this election so close, when in a second term labor should be adding seats or maintaining, not losing 80% of them?
The trouble with Abbott is he cant spin as quick as labor and has weak advisors
Dr Harvey M Tarvydas
Excellent, definitive and very informative BK.
Your observations are well described, as indeed many of the commenter’s observations, are confirmed by yours truly and considered seriously disturbing. I commented in Crikey the other day saying that so many discussions of the sort you guys are complaining of are reminiscent of discussions I had to have helping the seriously mentally ill. David Sanderson and D Smith among others have it nailed.
“ …….. that Australia is now less safe for investment than tinpot African dictatorships, it’s exactly the sort of statement that has economic ramifications, because markets know he is just a few thousand votes from being Prime Minister next week” …… is serious stuff and a pointer that this man is careless and incredibly dangerous. If its not a sign of extraordinary and dangerous ignorance then its a sign of something seriously sinister or psychopathic (a very modern brain scan could save us all from this/him.
small point of clarification Astro. Are you honest if you lie and admit to it?
And even given the substantial redoubtable professional advice the APS provides to all governments, Abbotts 2nd and 3rd most senior financial ministers are the sinophobic, agrariansocialist Barny bananas and the loveable but economically unbelievably hopeless Joe Hockey. Joe must be a great guy beacuse he’s been a disaster in every ministerial potrfolio he’s ever held.
@John James
‘Abbott has singlehandedly transformed, what was once considered a shoe-in result for Labor’
Hardly. He has hidden behind the skirts of the media’s biggest shit throwing (at Labor) in history.
Were he ever to be held to account honestly by the media along with the rest of those sad old turkeys that comprise his cabinet, the libs would be wiped out permanently.
A senior union leader has predicted a post-election wave of Labor “bloodletting” in a furious backlash over the issue that has overshadowed its campaign: the dumping of Kevin Rudd.
Electrical Trades Union Victorian state secretary, Dean Mighell, said those involved in the axing of the former prime minister would be “targeted” after Saturday’s vote.
Mr Mighell, a regular critic of the Labor government, said the ”brutal” and ”ugly” disposal of Mr Rudd had turned off some voters.
Dean Mighell, the state secretary of the Victorian Electrical Trades Union.
Dean Mighell, the state secretary of the Victorian Electrical Trades Union. Photo: Paul Rovere
BLOW TO LABOR AS UNION BANKROLLS GREENS
Much of the retribution would focus on the right-wing of the NSW Labor movement, Mr Mighell said.
The faction’s leaders - including Mark Arbib - were widely credited for plotting to oust Mr Rudd in June.
I’m at a loss to work out what Abbott stands for. My greatest fear is that he is a weathervane politician, which frankly is the most surprising aspect of this election. I had always had him down as a person of conviction. What a disappointment.
Dr Harvey M Tarvydas
@ASTRO
Ones assessment of another’s talent and value is a major indicator of ones own talent and value remembering 1. that being popular may not be a statement about talent and value just about popularity 2. It is possible that a large proportion of Aussies are really dodos (like the ones who want to give the mining companies $10+ billion back when those companies are feeling quite right and fair about paying the extra tax) (in real life only the unfortunate mentally ill would make a mistake like that) OR 3. It’s know that highly intelligent psychopath-con men are able to fool the very best people in the world with the most unbelievable scams SO if Aussie’s are as good as the best people in the world then you know who the conman is.
Yeah, he’s gone from a conviction politician of sorts to a politician who ought to be convicted for crimes against political decency. The first piece of evidence would be his claims of a boat people invasion.
Let me get this straight, in Abbott we have a man who by his own admission
1) Doesnt understand technology (NBN)
2) Doesnt understand science, or even believe “its about the science” (Global warming)
3) Isnt interested or understands economics (to be fair I am not sure he has admitted to this one, its just the assessment of the people in his own party)
4) Admits that he lies frequently and that what he says cant be trusted unless it is in writing
And to say he is popular because he isnt good at Spin !!!!!! So why is he popular ?
If Abbott is the idiot you say he is, why is this election so close, when in a second term labor should be adding seats or maintaining, not losing 80% of them?
Howard gained a second term even though the coalition had a lower 2PP vote than Labor. Why do you assume that an government should be adding seats in its second term election. As a general rule governments lose a few rather than gain.
All this proves is that nothing’s changes since someone (Winston Churchill?) said: Democracy is the worst form of government there is - except for all the others…
@ Geomac
Labor is not loosing a few they are loosing a huge percentage
@ Astro,
Who gives a toss about union blood letting? It just reminds me of the Simpsons episode with a footballer tripping over a fresh grave of a union snitch running down the pitch. Funny but irrelevant….and especially irrelevant to the topic at hand….
How far ahead would the ALP be if News Corp newspapers ran the truth about phony Tony and lambasted his lack of interest in the economy and the NBN?
On any rating Abbott is not PM material and if he gets elected along with his rabble of ex Howard shadow ministers it will be a sad day for the nation.
Can anyone explain how this dill received a Rhodes Scholarship to Oxford
Voters should also be reminded of this low blow quote
Abbott campaigned as Minister for Health at the 2007 Election. On October 31, he apologised for saying ‘just because a person is sick doesn’t mean that he is necessarily pure of heart in all things’, after Bernie Banton, (an asbestos campaigner and terminal mesothelioma sufferer) called him ‘gutless’ for not being present to collect a petition.[34]
@ Mook
The Unions run the Labor party = instability with Labor Government
Look at the huge percentage of Union hacks in the Senate and House of Reps.
Have you heard Sen Doug Cameron speak in the Senate, he is no where in the campaign - been told to stay away no doubt, like Rock Star Garrett who is on the nose for the insulation bungle that is cost us, lead to houses been destroyed and 4 deaths (one of which has been confirmed so far by the Coroner).
Hasty wasted spending -
Geo Mac
This election is close not because Abbott has been good at projecting a fake persona and running the classic LNP scare campaign but because of the relentless attacks and misinformation being spewed out by News Corp who have massive control in all mainland capitals except Perth.
It wasnt so long ago that Rudd dared to stand up to the sanctimonious Australian newspaper and where is he now?
Geomac writes: “If Abbott is the idiot you say he is, why is this election so close, when in a second term labor should be adding seats or maintaining, not losing 80% of them?”
Because the right wing media are giving every lunatic comment Abbot makes validity.
Not to mention that, sadly, a lot of people are either idiots or uninformed. I had to explain to a friend the other day how voting preferences work. It really is quite depressing.
@ astro…I presume you have a link to the words you are attributing to Mighell…I prefer to see them from an original source, for obvious reasons.
“Howard’s dreadful stint as Treasurer under Fraser”.
We are talking about the same guy, right?
Bushy eyebrows?
Funny voice?
Federal Treasurer who defied the big end of town and outlawed bottom of the harbour schemes?
Federal Treasurer who enacted retrospective legislation to claw back tax that had been avoided though legal means?
Interesting to compare that performance with the Rudd/Gillard/Swan resources rent tax debacle.
Its only Wednesday and astro-boy is in a state of panic. Bet we don’t hear from him after Aunty Julia moves in to the Lodge. looks like he is on the fiberal payroll or a dole collector , or still in school.
@Harrybelbarry
No panic here. Vote in the most marginal seat in Australia - Robertson (as per 2007 results, now more marginal one after distributions). Never worked or been a member for any party. Never campaigned. Never been on the dole and I left schools decades ago.
So you are wrong on all counts. Any more guess work?
@ david
Go to SMH website, its on main page, also on ABC News 24
You can see the video on SMH site from the houses mouth
This Election race is so close because the Murdock papers are running a scare campaign. .Not one reporter has really asked Tony Abbott hard questions and if they do he just prattles on about what rats the labor party is and the sky is falling. When Labor won the last election the Libs run around yelling out loud, to any-one who would listen, and over the back fence “Labor has relaxed the laws for Boat People, come one ,come all, now he’s talking down the Economy and Investment, like, some-one shoot him before its too late, I actually dread thinking of him having a conversation with the queen or some-body with intelligence over sea’s, can you imagine — -eh eh eh aaaaaa, well, and then suck his lips like he does, I shiver.
Dear BK,
I’ve searched quite a bit to find where Abbott said “Australia is now less safe for investment than tinpot African dictatorships” and I can’t find it. I’d appreciate a pointer to the speech, report or whatever. The thing is, however, it does sound like the kind of hyperbole, if not pure b***sh*t, he and the Libs per se have indulged in during this awful campaign. More so I think than Labor.
What’s galling for me, as journalist as well as a voter, is how much of this baseless and deliberately distracting nonsense is given oxygen by the media. During this campaign, people (though particularly Liberal politicians) appear to be able to say anything and it’s immediately reported without any analysis or balance. But just because Tony Abbott might say Wayne Swan wears his undies inside out doesn’t make it true and doesn’t make it automatically newsworthy for God’s sake.
It is for this reason that the Liberals have been able to gain traction on Labor’s economic credentials. Abbott can make all sorts of outlandish claims (like we’re a tinpot economy thanks to Labor) without challenge. Meanwhile the protests of nobel winning economists and many intellectually respectable others about the robustness of our economy and the soundness of the stimulous package are paid scant attention.
I’m also flabbergasted at the sheer quantity of anti-labor comment masquerading as news reports in The Australian newspaper particularly. This on top of blatantly anti-Labor news report after blatantly anti-Labor news report, which reports are usually accompanied by a blatantly anti-Labor comment piece.
As well, I’ve been stunned at the quantity of “a source said” so-called news reports. One front page anti-government splash in a major newspaper was based on the quotes of an unnamed source allegedly quoting from a confidential report that hadn’t been seen by the journalist. I for one would never base a story on what a source, who didn’t want to be named, said was in a report. I’d be happy not to name the source, but I’d want to see the report.
“Cast iron” (those promises on health) “weathervanes” spinning around and around in the weather - what do you expect? Expose them to the elements and they’ll corode.
From his circumstances and ideas, his pontification of Bernie Banton’s integrity (three years ago, and “health minister”) showed him for what he is.
STIOFAN
Hate to burst your bubble but it was Howard as treasurer that nurtured the bottom of the harbour scheme. Interest rates peaked at 21% and left from memory unemployment at 11% but wouldn,t stake my life on the last figure.
D SMITH
Sorry if I misled you but I was quoting Astro,s statement . It wasn,t mine because I don,t support the mad monk. Murdoch is dirty on Labor because of the NBN and sees it as a threat to his Foxtel operation. The ABC 24 hour news is also perceived by Murdoch as competition to his Skye TV which means free to air bad pay to view good I guess. My view is Murdoch bias equals rubbish journalism.
@ Astro, Ah from the Central Coast. All makes perfect sense now thank you.
@PDaddy
Whats wrong with the Central Coast? Marginal seat that has delivered us nothing in the last 3 years in my area, except a cracked front street brick wall on the local public school has been replaced. Whoopy Doo
Labor gave us Belinda Neal, she was an outstanding example of Labor politicians and he husbands Della Bonka is is a close second.
Where do you live PDaddy, let me guess trendy suburb I bet.
@Astro.
Hang on, surely you aren’t staying that the Federal Government should have been spending money “like a drunken sailor” on Robertson purely because its a marginal seat?!
What about the DEFICIT!!!!! Did you want the Government just pouring money in, don’t you understand that that is just WASTE WASTE WASTE!!!
I love the attitude, you bang on about the WASTE of government spending but really its just a moan because it wasn’t directed at you and the rest of Campbelltown on the coast.
I’m sure you were the first in line to spend the stimulus cheque on to later tut tut about it.
@Pdaddy
They are spending on drinken sailors, we are getting 3 class rooms for $2.1 million. Has not started yet, so hopefully Abbott can get value or Gillard realises she can grab $1.3 million and dump that into East Timor to build offshore processing.
No Cambelltown up here mate. Belinda Neal is from Woy Woy. But I hear that can hear he and Della Bonka shouting in Cambelltown when the wind is from the north east at 30 or more knots.
One of the many things I have learnt from this election is this: The boat people thing is misrepresented. We have to stop them, but not for the reasons I always thought. Everything is about money, and this is no different.
We take 13,500 humanitarian immigrants each year regardless of how they get here. The problem with the boat people is they don’t apply properly from the UNHCR. This means we have to setup this huge expensive bureaucracy and infrastructure to deal with 6,000 people each year. The cost apparently is around $1 Billion per year to deal with it. if we could stop the boat arrivals we would still help asylum seekers but it would be from camps that have been security and ID checked already thus saving us millions of dollars.
These people arriving by boats are really screwing us. For every year it happens we could build one big teaching hospital with the money saved and still do our part for asylum seekers from Africa and other nations needing help.
Astro , as i am in with labor’s office Team , i will make sure the 3 classrooms are bare frames and will save the country from the extra debt. Know a few dodgy contractors to slap up a couple of cheapies for about $60,000 with no insulation , power, water,Fast broadband , furniture etc etc . Tony Smith has upgraded their slow dial-up to include carrier pigeons for peak speed times. Did you see sloppy joe and robb doing phony tonies work for him on the costings by their mates, what a joke, that is game over, ads will be up showing that soon and will try to catch up on ads to the fiberals (2,830 ). Who’s spending like drunken miners ????
Peasant , 6,000 people , What the Fu#k , is that the number that fly in and disappear? Boat people are only about 2,000 , ask Marlynshepherd , she will tell you down to the last one and is on the ball and will chew u out and spit u out redneck.
The boat people issue is a disgusting one.
Australia is bigger than the continental US yet our population is slightly above Mexico City’s.
Joe Hockey (my local member) has been in Parliament for 14 years yet his letters that my taxes have paid for tell me his big ideas for looking after me and my family’s future are:
Spending $500,000 on a historic building
Giving school principals more authority (thought that was a state responsibility)
Indexation of eligibility for Seniors Health Card
Returning to surplus in 2013 (same as Labor) But to me surplus means the government takes more taxes off us than it hands back - so a growing pile of money just accumulates in Canberra - all money being taken out of the economy reducing economic activity - so doesn’t do me any good. I don’t want the government to have a big surplus.
Cutting company tax (Same or less than Labor)
Reusing Storm water (WTF?)
Having 15,000 Green Army to plant 20 million trees (1,300 trees each)
$30mil for a park at the old submarine base
Reducing carbon emissions by 5% 2020 (probably 5% below 2019 levels - but who knows cause he doesn’t say)
All in all a completely pissweak list of vague ideas that a Friday lunch meeting at the pub would produce. The company I work for does more planning for how many paperclips & stationary they are going to order in next quarter.
So after being in parliament all this time - to provide us voters with the intellectual equivalent of watery gruel and moldy bread - Abbott & Hockey are completely unqualified to be running the show.
The article misses one rather glaring point: Tony Abbott has a Bachelor of Economics. One would’ve thought that would mean something - and raise the interesting question of why someone who is allegedly educated in such matters, isn’t willing to front a debate on the economy. It’d be a bit like someone with a degree in climate science not being willing to debate their views on climate change.
Whatever happens come Saturday though, one thing is for certain: This will be remembered as the election where Labor lost touch with their base and delivered power to the Greens.
To those who are still carrying on (above) about the disposal of Rudd, a couple of points.
Some union leaders played a role. So what. The Labor Party is the political wing of the labour movement. That’s as it should be.
The decision to dump Rudd was made directly by the people who had to work most closely with him - the parliamentary Labor Party. It was their call. It was a tough call, but the right people made it.
Rudd was not voted in by the Australian People as Prime Minister.
You don’t need a degree in political science to understand that you are not voting for a Prime Minister. You only have to be able to read the names on your ballot paper. No voter last election was given a ballot paper that asked for a choice between Mr Rudd and Mr Howard.
The position of ‘Prime Minister’ is not mentioned in our constitution. Any voter with a degree in political science should know that.
PS - Abbott has been brilliant in this campaign. He has kept the straightjacket firmly buckled. He has weaved around his weaknesses, which are many. He has had a lot of help from the media, especially News Ltd, who are cheats and crooks. He has performed extremely well, notwithstanding his stilted umming and aahing.
Gillard has campaigned brilliantly. She has had by far the tougher task, and has performed wonderfully in the circumstances. She will win this election, that Rudd might have lost.
Bob Brown looks and sounds like a Country Party leader, until you listen to his words, which are wiser than those of any agrarian socialist.
The result - a Labor Govt beholden to the Greens - the best possible outcome for the country.
Another feature - population has become a genuine talking point for the first time, and only half a generation too late! It is now possible to hear discussions about what might be a sustainable population without racist undertones. Weirdly, the QandA after Dick Smith’s doco featured racist slurs only from the big population booster John Elliot. But he’s a boofhead, and no-one pays him any attention now anyway.
Peasant,
The factor you miss is that most of these people arriving by boat CANNOT “apply properly [to] the UNHCR”. There is simply no queue to jump.
Would you, in a similar situation, wait patiently while you and your wife go crazy, while your children grow old (and go crazy), while your enemies hunt you down, while your crops wither and you starve?
Or would you do our damndest to get on a boat to a rich country with a relatively tiny population where you have at least chance of putting your doctorate to good use cleaning toilets for a populace who would rather collect the dole than do that themselves?
Please, use your imagination. Engage both your heart and your brain and try to empathise with these people. So few of them make it here, and we owe them compassion on moral AND legal grounds.
The fact that the libs refused to submit their policies for treasury costings rings huge alarm bells for me. The leak excuse is plain lame. Does it really matter whether news of the $800m shortfall came via the back door or by official channels? The fact remains that their sums were out by that amount - and that’s just on one policy.
Couple this with the admission that their tame accounting firm have actually been “costing” their crap since mid June, and you come to the inevitable conclusion that they never - EVER intended to let the voting public scrutinise their economic cred or lack thereof.
@HDMC
The whole election promises funding this has been a joke, I agree, and it need an independent panel, aka Reserve Bank security, but dont forget
1. Labor has not submitted all their policies in 2010
2. Labor submitted its 2007 policies less than 12 hours before polling day and not the National Broadband (was $4b now $43 billion), nor Schools BER etc
So you need balance here
@ harrybelbarry
the TV ads shopped last night, so no more spin
@ROBERTSON
Yeah, a truly independent adjudicator would be good - coupled with a realistic deadline it would be even better.
But on the question of balance, aren’t you overbalancing a bit? How could Labor have included stimulus measures in it’s costings when there was no need for a stimulus at the time of lodgement?
And I was under the impression that Labor HAD submitted everything for this election - what did they miss?
@HDMC
Its three years ago and my memory is such, I thought it was the two I have mentioned and maybe laptops for every school kid (which did not happen either).
@ROBERTSON
Sorry, I didn’t make that very clear. I was refering to your “Labor has not submitted all their policies in 2010” statement.
@HDMC
Yes thats right Labor have only submitted a few of the policies for 2010 and certainly not all. Craig Emerson was just asked about it live on ABC News 24 and answer the question saying the issue here is Tony Abbott and the fact that he has used an accounting form not the treasury.
“Labor insists it has submitted all of its policies to Treasury for costing and will continue to do so.
Labor sent 75 policies to Treasury for costing before last Friday’s 5.30pm deadline. And 17 announced since then have also been submitted.
A spokesman for Wayne Swan told The Australian last night anything that had been submitted to Treasury after the deadline had been announced after 5.30pm on Friday.
“We have adhered to the Charter of Budget Honesty and we will continue to do so,” the spokesman said.”
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/coalitions-surplus-claims-sunk-by-attack-on-hollow-log/story-fn59niix-1225907049110
@ROBERTSON
I’m new here and not familiar with the posting rules. My comment is awaiting moderation, presumably because it contained a link?
Anyway, from today’s Australian……
“Labor insists it has submitted all of its policies to Treasury for costing and will continue to do so.
Labor sent 75 policies to Treasury for costing before last Friday’s 5.30pm deadline. And 17 announced since then have also been submitted.
A spokesman for Wayne Swan told The Australian last night anything that had been submitted to Treasury after the deadline had been announced after 5.30pm on Friday.
“We have adhered to the Charter of Budget Honesty and we will continue to do so,” the spokesman said.”
FITTER, yesterday at 2:28 pm:
For those of you who want your prime minister to be the Messiah, I can see why someone admitting he’s ignorant would be a downer.
For me, admitting he doesn’t know everything is one of the fundamental qualifications for the job.
The spooky thing about Rudd, Gillard, and Swan, is that they think they are Olympian gods. They read a couple of paragraphs in the executive summary of some departmental advice - like the stimulus advice or the tax review - then take one or two points and spin them into a whole policy, without ever discussing it with the rest of cabinet.
Interviewers always want policy to be made up on the spot, during their own interview, so they can get the scoop. Their questions are typically, “Will you commit now to this?” rather than “Can you explain why you committed to that?” Abbott will have to learn to take more control during these interviews. He’ll have to learn to say: “These are the principles we work on, they do not change. Exactly what we’ll do about the situation you describe, we’ll decide that in the proper way in due course.” That’s very different to the way Gillard makes decisions.
GEOMAC:
Here’s the 2004 Lateline interview. Quite interesting to go over it again. It seems to me from beginning to end of the entire interview, Jones was trying to paint Abbott as an agent of the catholic church. The old anti-catholic witchhunt, still going after all these years. Jones failed to do that, but scored his point by making it look as though Abbott had tried to cover up a meeting with a cardinal.
Of all the things to cover up, why would anyone want to cover up a meeting with a priest? I’ve been in the situation myself, not remembering a recent event when questioned in vague terms, and then remembering when a specific detail was added. Like Abbott, I was under pressure and was then accused of having initially lied. It’s a cheap trick.
Abbott’s book last year makes it very clear what he intends to do. Here’s a digest of it put up by a third party. I disagree with some of Abbott’s policies. But it’s incorrect to say you can’t pin him down - this stuff has been available in bookshops and libraries for over a year, and he hasn’t deviated from it.
@Astro and Robertson
You are the same person arent you ? You both claim to be from the same electorate, you both use the same language and arguements, you both ignore the same facts.
Eg. “Our school only got a new retaining wall”, despite the fact that you also got new electronic whiteboards, classroom maintenance and $2.1 milion worth of new classrooms being constructed. You never did reply on the previous post where you didnt mention the new work at all (and it took me all of 5 minutes to find it).
It is OK to say you are sorry, if you learn from your mistakes. Me. Abbott continues to say sorry with a smirk on his face. I am surprised that the economy is sound at this stage. There has been nearly three years from three different leaders of the opposition talking the economy down. It was if the were willing the economy to collapse. We have come through a bad time economically and we still have a fragile economy. The stimulus still has a part to play in us going forwarded. Severe cutting spending at this time could be disastrous. Wages and inflation are steady. I recall that under Mr. Costello there were surpluses and savings within the budget. Interest rates went up many times.
PINS You have a bit of a point (with the Messiah thing - spot on BTW) but I think that characterisation of how government makes decisions is overly simplistic and a bit one-sided. Ministers usually have decisions put to them in simple terms after many people have deliberated over them. There is a high level of skill used to craft advice so a minister can make a sensible decision. Sometimes they don’t or they go off on a caprice but these occassions are rare.
Of the people you mentioned two of them have reputations for being very well informed and having a very sound grasp of the details of what goes (or went) through their offices.
It is the nature of westminster government that oppositions have less support, poorer advice and tend to speak ‘off the cuff’ more often. Of all the ministers I have ever dealt with Hockey (who will be our treasurer if the libs win) was the most illinformed and made the poorest decisions.
You are spot on Florence.
People forget that the previous government sold off much of its Australian public assets way over the dodgy 92 billion deficit they sprout they ‘paid back’.
I read that the mining boom added 400 billion to the Howard government coffers and yet little of that money went on helping the St Vinnies and other agencies look after the poor including ppl working on workchoice wages.
$4000,000 wine bill in one year for Howard and gave half a million off the cuff for urang utan welfare to impress a little boy. And Howard currently is comfortably spending millions of our money on himself above his pension. The libs really do think they are Australian royalty born to rule.
Figures can lie and liars can figure applies so aptly to the fibs. Who cannot forget the massive trucks carrying the current account deficits misinformation. After they won, the deficit exploded under the libs stewardship and we never heard about it again.
Their ravings over the country being in ruins over Labors mismanagement are just more crying wolf. They have managed to confuse many punters into believing we are in trouble.
And Nauru is a dump. Did people really live in those sheds in the oppressive tropical heat for years? Not only is the place a dump that can’t pay its own way but its way, way out into the Pacific.
It is far easier for refugees to reach East Timor without using people smugglers and, at last something of a queue they can finally be able to join.
Prior to the issuing of temporary protection visas, there was no need for the mum and kids to come along in the boats. These visas cruelly did not allow family reunification for accepted refugees. Sadly after this we saw women and children crammed onto the boats, many of whom perished.
What sort of policy is that? We accept that you have fled some serious shit but your family must now fend for themselves back in that dangerous environment without you.
And, just to rant on a bit more…..
Don’cha reckon that the adjective furtive is so on the mark with the wide eared one.
They say you can tell the person from what they look like.
When tony answers a question that’s beyond him, he seems to suddenly grow long whiskers and morph into a shithouse rat with all its cunning.
If Labor were to lose I would have felt much safer with Costello at the helm than tony.
Never thought I’d say that.
SBH - Your point about oppositions is very pertinent to all this stuff about “costings” and “budget black holes” (which was also used to blowtorch the ALP in opposition, exactly the same as it’s being used to blowtorch the Libs now). Why do we require both parties to write, in effect, an entire budget during an election campaign? A good government spends months in discussions with Treasury and other departments before tabling a budget. Ideally I’d like them to discuss some aspects of it with NGOs, academics, and advisor bodies like the Productivity Commission as well. Wayne Swan is playing an old, tired game by nitpicking anomalies in the costings instead of discussing principles of good economic government.
Good economics is like this: Give a man a fish, and you feed one man for a day. Teach him to fish, and you feed one man for life. Find and root out economic inefficiencies affecting the sale or production of fishing equipment and fish markets, and suddenly fishing is on for young and old. Because I don’t care how much you know about fishing; somewhere out there are people who know fishing much better than you do. And somewhere out there are fishermen who can’t quite afford fishing equipment, and families who can’t quite get to the fish market after work, or can’t afford to buy the fish.
Whatever Gillard and Swan may know about fish or fishing, they do not understand the principles of how to listen or how to govern. They are constantly stuck in a routine of pushing a rod into a man’s hand and saying “Here, do it like this”. That’s what I mean about thinking they are Olympian gods - Gillard thinks she is Promytheus and nobody knows how to do anything except her.
Whatever Abbott and Hockey do or do not know about fish or fishing, they have made it clear repeatedly that they understand this principle, and they respect the ability of citizens to make their own choices.
This goes in one ear and out the other for many people who, like journalists, want all the answers from the guv’mint, and they want it right now.
You and I agree from different sides that this shitty stupid gotcha campaigning is an insult to the intelligence of voters.
Unlike you I don’t feel that Abbott & co are better (or worse) listeners than the other mob but I do think they are less competent.
That aside these things are of little value to me. I want to know what they want to do with this country and why. These things should be the real subject of debate and then we could have a proper discussion about why your model is wrong and mine is right (err… left). All the other crap that’s been going on is just a waste of time.
If we get the government we deserve we better start taking a lot more interest.
Agreed, wholeheartely
It goes to the nature of election campaigns. 3 years after the last one, what happens? Suddenly everyone is announcing policies and getting them costed 7 days before the poll.
What have they both been doing over the last 3 years?
In fact, why not announce everything at the start of the election campaign - fully costed - and then spend the rest of the campaign explaining it?
Oh that’s right, the media would run stories about how “nothing new” was released and focus on the cost of sauce on pies instead and how “boring” this campaign is because apparently, nobody can be arsed asking questions about the actual policy.
And if anything good is announced before the election, then “the other side” pinch it and say “me too”, getting the benefit of the credit and leaving the party that announced it without much to run on.
my head hurts.
I am distressed to think that WE have voted in these people.
I hate that Aust is lagging on so many things - oh but we didnt go into recession, thats right….
BUT it feels like a recession…… a RECESSION of vision, leadership, innovative strategic thinking and action.
JOHN64 - Agreed, except for the “fully costed” part. There are thousands of variables affecting the budget which keep changing all the time. For example the projected MRRT revenues changed dramatically between earlier and later versions, due to volatility in commodity prices. Most variables don’t change as fast as that, but any budget is still partly out of date by the time it’s tabled.
To be fair, only one of the leaders has written a book a year before the election, stating broadly what he intends to do and why. Abbott’s advisors have probably told him not to answer questions with “Why don’t you start by reading my book?” Fat chance, average attention spans being what they are.
It’s a bit rich to not even read the book, and then to complain that there are no policies only slogans.
We need to return to a commodities-backed currency.
I hope I’m utterly wrong, but I think the global debt bubble bursting is inevitable. Hyperinflation in the USA & elsewhere in the Western world is a very real possibility in my opinion. Didn’t really work out for the Weimar Republic or Zimbabwe did it?
Anyone have a view on this? Just curiously, would you describe your economic views as keynesian, monatarist, neo-classical, austrian or other?
I think fiat currency is the ruination of the West.
Dr Harvey m Tarvydas
@JOHN64 — you said
“What have they both been doing over the last 3 years?”
One has been running the country through the most difficult time in nearly 100 years.
The other has been stroking his budgie.
HARVEY, did you read that off your ALP candidate’s mail-out? You don’t think WW2 was just a little bit tougher than a setback of a couple of years of productivity? Even the energy crisis, among stacks of other tough times …
Hmm interesting article. The first thing I must take issue with ,
“This is a man who, by his own admissions, gets rattled under questioning and resorts to lying to get out of trouble.”
I may be incorrect but in my opinion that’s fairly slanderous. To me it sounded like when hes engaged in rhetoric and debate, points may be stretched too far, of course to those familiar with rhetoric and debate this sounds pretty much par for the course. and rather defining especially of ‘rhetoric.’
For instance, when Gillard would grill PM Howard, she would exclaim “Every boat arrival is a failure of policy” but of course obviously such a criteria no longer applies, she could be honest and say “hey I was point scoring” in much the way Abbott has discussed this honestly. Or she can do what she did and just move forward. I know what feels more immoral to me.
Secondly, “And when Abbott says repeatedly — as he has done over the past 24 hours — that Australia is now less safe for investment than tinpot African dictatorships, it’s exactly the sort of statement that has economic ramifications”
By this point I’m wondering whether this article is supposed to appear balanced. Nevertheless, lets read an impartial source, ComSec analyst Juliette Saly ;
“‘There has been quite a bit of concern from the mining companies the proposed resource super tax is going to slash profits and cost jobs so that is where we have seen most of the weakness,’’ Ms Saly said. ‘‘When you see big falls among the major miners it does drag on the overall market.’’
“The resources sell-off came after the government yesterday announced its response to the Henry tax review, which will involve imposing a 40 per cent tax on profits made from non-renewable resources from July 1, 2012.” - May 3rd 2010.
Is it the fact that Abbott is shedding light on this matter that concerns you? Perhaps your concern would be best applied to the actual matter being reported by Abbott? Unless your the type who LIKES to sweep things under the rug. I guess he just likes to pull out the problems and get em fixed, no hiding.
Oh and here’s another incredible misrepresentation, “His insistence that economic stimulus was unnecessary and wasteful is another.”
Now that’s just blatantly untrue, and even the smallest amount of research/inquiry would tell you as much. The Coalition supported the first stimulus but thought better of the second seeing it as not much more then the potential rort it turned out to be, not even on time either to even have a hope of making a credible impact. Of course I could go on and ask you to plot on a scale from ‘successful recovery’ to ‘ongoing’ the countries of the world and the size of their stimulus, here’s the first two, Germany and the USA, go figure.
Wow , okay now that the most egregious misrepresentations are sorted I can go on with my main point! Are the professional punditry really so delusional they think Abbott is worse on the economy? Either personally or in policy?
A) We are talking about economics after all, one of the few fields in academia to move conclusively to the right, if Gillard and Swan talked like they do now, 20-30 years ago they wouldn’t even be allowed in to the ALP. That being said they can parrot the free market all they want, its obvious shes never read Adam Smith and doesn’t share that belief heritage. As such against a serious opponent she would come across as not just sounding uninformed, but down right archaic.
This is why for me Abbott V Julia is insignificant, be it KRudd or Julia at the top, Labor is still the party of Big Government, why do you think all that was said of the BER , Pink Batts, Green loans and consumer websites by the Coalition came to fruition? They don’t have a crystal ball, but just as surely small l liberals everywhere knew with certainty these programs COULD NOT work, the world has simply moved on.
B) How can there be so much discussion of Abbott v Julia on the economy and not one look at their CV’s?
Julia would be putting up an LLB, Swan a BA (!?!?!?!)
To face off against Abbotts LLB/BEc, Rhodes Scholar, MA in Politics and Philosophy? Are we having a laugh or what?
This matter for me was highlighted by Swan and Gillards cute but wholly incorrect debt analogy, I’m sure we all heard the “its the same as taking out a $6,000 loan on a $100,000 income” first ludicrously uttered by Swan then parroted by the unknowing or unable to check Julia. No it is not the same you get that analogy by comparing our debt to GDP, disappointingly for the Labor party they cant yet claim the entire nations wealth as their own. No instead (as any Econ101 student would know) you compare debt to government revenue.
Absolutely shocking, I wouldn’t be throwing the term innumerate around if I was her and NOT a flaming hypocrite. By the way Julia, turns out your not making $100k a year with a $6k loan, you actually earn $300k a year with a $70k loan.
Can you imagine if one of your friend was that clueless about their income.
McTarmac,
Thanks for quoting a piece of speculative commentary from someone made the day after the Henry tax review was released. Unfortunately for you, we can now rely upon the actual facts of what occured months after the date.
The facts are that in the months after the tax was announced BHP shares rose - a fact that Rudd was daily pointing out in Question Time to the embarrasment of Dutton, who bought the shares shortly after the tax was announced.
The fact is also that the share prices of mining companies overseas performed worse than the share prices of the mining companies on the Australian Stock Exchange.
You repeat the coalition talking point that the second stimulus package was a rort. A rort with a 97% success rate, a rort that kept all of the construction jobs in the sector working as private sector construction collapsed. Oh and proof of course, can’t forget that:
http://bit.ly/b1Jeud
I love your defence of neo-liberalism and the free market and criticism of the stimulus package - as if rampant deregulation of the banking sector in the USA wasn’t the thing that started the whole pack of cards collapsing!
Again thanks for mentioning the members’ degrees in a discussion of the economy. If none of them have an economic degree then none of that matters right? It’s like when an insectologist signing one of those anti-climate change letters despite their area of study having nothing to do with climatology.
You make it too easy.
Mr Byrnes,
Can you explain with respect to the creation of real wealth & long-term Real GDP, how did these stimulus packages impact on the aforementioned values? The spending was financed by borrowing, one should hope some sort of decent return is earnt on said government expenditure, given that borrowing is a claim on future production. In other words, ‘We consume today, in deference of tomorrow’s consumption’, I cannot stress how important it is to look at debt that way.
The problem with defending Keynesian economic policies becomes apparent when you compare to our European, American & Asian counterparts - many of whom have allocated stimulus spending packages several fold over the amount we ourselves [our government] have spent. The Americans are haemorrhaging trillion dollar deficits, yet are still unable to get back to pre-2007 levels of growth & economic activity.
The Chinese government initiated a RMB 4 trillion ($USD 586 billion) stimulus package between 2008-2009. In my opinion the Chinese stimulus spending had more effect on the Australian economy, than the one undertaken by Mr Rudd; their [Chinese] demand for minerals was sustained by public expenditure and pulled Australia through the recession. But this example does illustrate just how powerless our Federal government is at influencing the global economy.
The important thing to note is that the Chinese actually spent their stimulus money on nation building projects; the largest portion of the package being delivered on long-term infrastructure projects involving rail, road, ports, irrigation & airport construction. A significant portion was also devoted to reconstructing regions hit by the 8-magnitude Sichuan earthquake last May.
In fact the overall impression I get at examining the Chinese stimulus package is that they knew exactly where it could be spent for value, and they did not politicise this process nor abuse it with marketable ‘achievements’ that could be paraded on Television & for election announcements.
I think it is also relevant to compare Australia & China with the Western world in light of the re-surging popularity of Keynesian economics. The basic premise of what Keynes advocated, was government ‘stimulus spending’ to support the economy [and jobs] during an economic depression. However the flip side of this economic strategy is that one must pay off the debt during the periods of boom, and maintain a strong surplus to use next time the boom-bust cycle results in recession. This is what China & Australia did - Howard paid down net foreign debt whilst the Chinese were lending to the rest of the world. The Americans & the Europeans did not do this - they borrowed and spent; rinse & repeat.
In Europe & the USA on the other hand, government expenditure was significant during recessions (e.g. dot com bust)… and then even more during the boom!
I’m sure you aware of the fact that the USA went from in the 60’s, the world net creditor to in the 2000’s the world net debtor, and their massive current account deficits confirms what many people are thinking: they’ve been ‘living beyond their means’.
De-regulation is not the problem per se, as the robust Australian regulatory framework has successfully demonstrated. What is a concern, is getting the RIGHT TYPE of regulation, which our Western counterparts so obviously lacked leading up to the GFC. Our lending standards were much more conservative, despite significant periods of microeconomic de-regulation under Hawke, Keating & Howard.