The hypocrisy of costings
|
Last week, Treasury was partisan, couldn’t understand Coalition policies and was no better than a mid-tier accounting firm. Today the opposition is very happy with Treasury, but just has some “differences of opinion” with it on costings. Just some minor disagreements over some trivial issues between good friends, discussed in an atmosphere of respect. And anyway, as Mr Abbott, the man who remains more likely to become prime minister shortly said this morning, economic competence isn’t about things like costings. That line was too much even for my, I hope highly-developed, capacity to accept political hypocrisy. We all know Tony Abbott is an economic lightweight, but is there any need to confirm it with comments like that? So for those who came in late, here’s the story so far: the Liberals thought it would be a great lark when they were in government to establish a process called the Charter of Budget Honesty that would trap oppositions into being forced to either be humiliated when Treasury found flaws in their pre-election costings, or dodging the process and looking like they had something to hide. Like most parties when new in government, they didn’t think about the possibility that they might not be in government one day. Come their turn, they opted to look like they had something to hide. Which, it turns out, they did. And thus Peter Costello is presumably having an extended laugh today at the expense of Tony Abbott and Joe Hockey as their convoluted efforts to avoid the Charter trap have made things a whole lot worse in the eyes of the three voters that now matter, the rural independents. For all the talk of a $7-11 billion black hole, it pays to keep a sense of perspective. Some of the “disagreements” are fair enough. The Coalition was not able, given its resources and lack of access to the Public Service, to accurately cost its expansion of education tax refund. And it was caught out by the structuring of tax payments between financial years between 2012-13 and 2013-14, which notionally made its PPL scheme more expensive. As I’ve said repeatedly, there are some things you just can’t know when in opposition. That’s not to say that if Labor had made the same errors in opposition they wouldn’t have been pilloried by the Coalition and the right-wing media, but that’s just ordinary double standards. I can’t imagine the media letting Labor get away with saying 95% of its costings were right, which the Coalition used in its own defence last night. Hell, a 2.7% complaint rate for BER projects has been the basis for an extended campaign about the “incompetence” of Labor. But some other “disagreements” are more serious. The $1 billion costing of savings to the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme — the best savings policy the Coalition came up with — was negated because the government had already factored in exactly the savings claimed by the Coalition. The costing of the Coalition’s employment policy actually broke Charter of Budget Honesty rules by assuming second round job creation effects. That was worth nearly $1 billion over four years. And the Conservative Bias Allowance adjustment looks more than ever like a fiddle. Treasury and Finance’s comment “the Departments’ best estimate of a prudent Conservative Bias Allowance remains that published in the 2010 PEFO” suggests that it clearly isn’t regarded as prudent. Moreover, if that saving boosted the Coalition bottom line by $2.5 billion, it could do the same to Labor’s, taking Labor’s fiscal impact well ahead of the Coalition’s. The Coalition insists it has worked hard on its savings and it will produce a better fiscal outcome than Labor. And there is some evidence to support that. But all that is obscured in the Coalition’s utter hypocrisy about the Charter of Budget Honesty and its fear of legitimate scrutiny. Politicians can’t just agree to disagree with Treasury on fundamental fiscal matters, not unless they want to to sit down with their staffers and write the Budget each year themselves. Tony Windsor is right to be concerned about what he’s learnt from Treasury and Finance. |
|
|
|
77 Comments
Well pit but I still believe the independents will side with whoever offers them the most pork.
I’m sooooo confused. Tony Abbott has a BEc from the University of Sydney, Andrew Robb has honours in Economics and Joe has neither. So when you see the three guys standing on the podium arguing economics Abbot is the one who is classified as lightweight. Abbott seems lightweight on most things he does.
Despite: reluctance to give costings to Treasury; subsequent shakey figures; a phone call from Satan; bullying; ridicule; being despised by their ex-National Party colleagues; Abbott not wanting high speed fibre national broad band publically built & owned - still my gut says that the 3 independents will back Abbott. I hope I am wrong! Maybe I am saying this as a psychological way to cope if it actually happens.
This matter, and the developing scandal about how Horwath’s was used to create a deceptive document, will have a bigger impact than Keane allows.
While I know that the Coalition are favourites still with the bookies and the commentators if you look at how the parties have conducted themselves post-election then it is clear that Labor is out-gunning the Coalition. Labor has appeared suitably chastened (unlike the triumphalist Liberals) and has worked methodically to put together an alliance. Unlike the Liberals they have made no significant missteps and are looking far more reliable as a three year long partner - a critical independent concern.
Read the piece by Kate Legge in the Australian today and you will see why Oakeshott has every reason to have a visceral dislike for the Nationals. Windsor on RN this morning was basically saying that he would find it hard to trust the Liberals. Neither of them have made statements attacking Labor and the evidence points to them eventually backing Gillard.
I think Tone’s big adventure in Rhodes was boxing and rowing, don’t think academics had much to do with anything.
But Bernard forgets that the ALP have Dr of economics Emerson, both Fergusons are economists, Anthony Albanese is an economist, so is S Crean and Tony Piccolo. Last time I looked there were 7 economists on the front and back bench of the ALP.
Windsor and Oakeshott and even Katter should be very concerned about the fiddling done by the lieberals as should we all.
I am amazed that Bernard just doesn’t come out and say it:
“I Bernard Keane am a member (in spirit at least) of the Liberal Party and I believe that Tony Abbott should become PM, because the Labor Party must not be allowed to continue to govern.”
His continued bleatings that the phone calls from Heffernan, the black hole in the costings, the refusal to provide the NBN with public money (which all three independents have said is a core requirement of their support), and any other failures will not be impediments to the reformation of the Coalition Govt are becoming very quite annoyingly repetitive.
Say it Bernard and then we can know not to hope for anything approaching journalism from your writings and simply accept that they will be up there with 95% of the crap written in the News Limited tabloids.
It will be interesting to see how “Limited News” and their “Satellateline” treat this - if it “rates”?
The Libs now have no credibility, The mild aroma of deceit and fear mongering which was at the start of their election campaign has now festered into a stench. If these guys find a way to get into government I am considering migration to NZ!!!!
One thing that has not been canvassed is the independents view of Tony Abbott. They may be prepared to back a Liberal government if it was led by someone a little like themselves. But Abbott is not like them. His relentless aggression, opportunism and general slipperiness with the truth is quite a different style of politics from their own.
If they do go Labor’s way it may be Abbott’s character that is the deciding factor.
I realise this is off-topic, but wonder if I could take just a few lines to register my disgust at seeing the grinning face of Tony Blair, promoting his book, every time I visit Crikey’s homepage today. The man is a war criminal. If anyone should be in jail, it should be Blair. First in, last out.
Crikey has to pay the bills, I do understand. But FWIW, I’d say trading in Kruggerands c.1975 would have been a more moral way of earning dosh.
The coalition has continued to slide in the betting and that slide may be accelerating.
Mug punters or knowledgeable insiders?
There will be more twists and turns before Election 2010 (mark 1) is over.
Where is the landmine himself, Kevin Rudd MP?
What is a better fiscan outcome in this sentence: “The Coalition insists it has worked hard on its savings and it will produce a better fiscal outcome than Labor”. If the Liberal party just wants to cut, without investing in the future (hello, pedal-powered broadband), what’s the point?
The three country independants are all ex-National Party.
Funny thing - the conservative side keep bashing the ALP about disunity, citing their factions.
But, the conservative side can’t even keep their elected members in the tent!
And what is a coalition but factions who can’t even sit together in the same party room?
Talking of being forthcoming….so many seem to have a problem with calling Abbott what he is…a serial liar. He lies constantly, he cannot go through a press conference with lies. He is nothing more or less than a bloody liar. I can see it and if the independents, wiser men than I cannot, then they are not worthy of being members of Parliament.
Previous should read,,,he cannot go through a press conference without lies. Apologies.
Another pathestic attempt at journalism by Bernard Keane.
Couldn’t have said it better than @malcolm.grant1.
And no ‘Bernard Keane’ you don’t have a ‘highly developed capacity to accept political hypocrisy’ because your head is too far up Tony Abbott’s proverbial to be able to see anything clearly. I presume you dine each evening with Miranda Devine and Piers Akerman?
Why is it always surplus? He gets to surplus by shonky means, unjustified and unclarified cuts. Sure pay off your house by living on bread and water and making no improvements but is that the way you want to get a good savings balance.
Holy Crapola Dudes! Whatever you think of BK’s writing, the charge of a bias to the Liberal party is pretty hard to substantiate! BK has consistantly given credit for the stimulus and ridiculed critisism of the BER and home insulation scheme.
Crikey in general and BK in particular has been called out plenty of times for being a raving biased lefty. Both charges cannot be correct!?
I’m sick of people (not just in Australia) confusing News with Opinion/Analysis. This column is in the later category, the point is to hear a point of view, an opinion, which will inevitably not be ‘balanced’. Jumping up and down, pointing your finger and saying ‘OMG BIAS!’ is just a lazy way of trying to win an argument. It’s a stable of such intellectual vaccums as Andrew Bolt, Glenn Beck, Pies Ackerman and now also Malcolm Grant and ‘Jibber Jabber’.
If you disagree with someone or something, explain why in a rational arguement. Calling an opinion biased is just a misunderstanding of the word opinion…
It’s certainly brought Labor back into the game, albeit for superficial reasons. I’ll wager you a lotto ticket that, which ever party is awarded the gong, the nation’s budget bottom line in three years won’t be what they’re saying it is. It might be a few billion better or worse. All these forecasts and projections being thrown around are somebody’s predictions. Nobody can really know what the global economy has in store for us in the years ahead. External events, I suspect, are going to impact us in a big way when the sovereign debt crisis comes into full force. In other words, this is such a storm in a teacup.
Wilkie with Gillard - I am so shocked, not. After all the coalition nearly killed the man with their lies, distortions and abuse.
Sportingbet now has Labor at $1.50 - completely reversing pre-Wilkie betting.
Wilkie did a huge dump on Abbott, revealing him to be a crude pork-barreler who was also vague and disorganised on policy and process and ethical approach to government.
Wilkie in his press conf. also said he realised he had a large labor vote to consider. He has ensured himself another term. Wise man
@ David “he had a large labor vote to consider”
On your reckoning, the 3 Independants will go with Abbott.
The independents are going to absolutely love that billion dollar promise for Hobart Hospital.
Burnt pork has a terrible smell and it will drift across Bass Strait and right across the nation.
@Outstanding Outcome For Australia
Its not my reckoning its the Hon Mr Wilkie’s words. You are free to read into it what you wish.
Fair point @Bogdanovist, having a good laugh, you should try it some time.
Are you expressing an opinion about an opinion I had about an opinion?
“For all the talk of a $7-11 billion black hole, it pays to keep a sense of perspective.” Right…..perspective about a lie. Mmmmm sounds like justification to me. Of course that’s just an opinion!
“The Coalition insists it has worked hard on its savings and it will produce a better fiscal outcome than Labor. And there is some evidence to support that.” Mmmmmmm I wonder what support that is? None given but I don’t suppose you need to when just expressing an opinion!
I think there’s a fair bit of naivety in your argument (spelt argument as opposed to arguement) that “the charge of a bias to the Liberal party is pretty hard to substantiate!” and “BK in particular has been called out plenty of times for being a raving biased lefty.” Maybe you could illuminate me on that point or was that just an opinion?
“The Australian” is still trying to cook up mischief with the BER (some vague link between a NSW BER bureaucrat and a previous business deal in Brisbane, with nothing to do with Rudd or Gillard, but News Corporation keeps trying). It’ll be months before they catch up with T0ny’s latest loony tune.
The 3 Independents won clearly on primary votes, Wilkie fell over the line thanks to preferences. Theres a huge difference here.
Labor now $1.30, Coalition $3.25. James Massola has an interesting article (2.09pm) in the Australian about how the Libs are starting to give up hope of winning over the country independents.
Looks like we are entering the endgame. Watch out for the meltdown at the Australian and Paul Sheehan at Fairfax.
@jeffb….semantics! It doesn’t matter, preferences form part of the Washminister system whether you like it or not! If electoral change occurs towards a form of government based on the Tasmanian system then bring it on. Based on that they’d be at least 10 Greens in the Reps.
We’ve had to put up with the likes of Steve Fielding for the past 4 years based on preferences…..deal with it!
On a side note…….Fred Nile……porn…….friggin’ hilarious!
Julia Gillard has given Shanahan a serve, told him to settle down during her press conference., on now.Pay back time Shanas you unethical fool
Huge serve from Gillard on the the Abbott billion - massively overpaying the Commonwealth’s contribution.
Im aware of how the Westminster system works, Im merely pointing out that the 3 independents had a huge primary vote for themselves not Labor/LNP. Wilkie on the other hand won on preferences in a seat that has a very large Labour vote.
Im not sure what you mean by “deal with it”, Ive got no problem with the system at all.
Huge plunge on Labor - $1.18, Coalition $4.50.
I’m also amazed that after reading the article above that people come somehow see bias towards the LNP. Either some of the people here are terrible at internet sarcasm or they just can’t read.
@JEFFB…[ “I’m also amazed that after reading the article above that people come somehow see bias towards the LNP. Either some of the people here are terrible at internet sarcasm or they just can’t read.” ]
I extend my deepest regrets to you, on learning of your sight and hearing disability.
I expect tomorrow we’ll see Oakeshott and Windsor declare for Labor.
As to Mr Keane’s bias: “That line was too much”, “hypocrisy”, “economic lightweight”, “had something to hide. Which, it turns out, they did”, “utter hypocrisy”, “fear of legitimate scrutiny”, “Windsor is right to be concerned”? Yeah, he’s totally biased right there! Lynch him!!
Seriously, what is with you people who scream “bias” at everything you read? Is the problem that Bernard didn’t use enough colourful, but meaningless adjectives? Maybe a “Phony Tony” or two would keep you in your pants?
The fact is, we have this bullshit every election campaign and Bernard is absolutely right. Neither Labor nor Liberal in Opposition have the capability to develop fully costed policies - That’s precisely why the Liberals developed the Charter of Budget Gotcha-isms in the first place!
It’s no surprise that the Government of the day - who’s policies are developed and costed by Treasury before they’re even announced - can submit everything to Treasury and surprise, surprise, have the costings match. It’s what the Liberals did for years under Howard and Costello.
… and Troy C is absolutely correct when he says:
Just look at 11 years of Howard Government and the last 3 of Labor. After all, remember that NBN? At the 2007 election it was only going to cost $4 Billion. Once Rudd was in, it was dumped and the entire thing re-worked from the ground up into what it is today.
@ David, so care to explain how the article is biased?
I’m with JeffB, biased? An example by jaberwocky or someone refererred to a better fiscal outcome from the Coalition and it appears supported. Well the Treasury document clearly states the Coalition has a better projected fiscal outcome!?! It ain’t opinion….
@john64, re: Troy C’s correctness: perhaps but if one of the major drawcards for the Coalition is their fiscal conservatism -and they generally wave this around a helluva lot- then you can see why they need to cost up their budget properly (or at least better).
Why does BK think Abbott is more likely to be PM? Will ALL the N qld guys go Coalition?
Maybe I should put a few hundred on labour!
JEFFB….I am referring to the MSM bias generally, not Sir Bernards current article….I adore his writing
Except in reality its not the 11 billion surplus the LNP promised but somewhere between 800m & 4 billion.
Sure its difficult for the opposition to accurately cost their promises but that doesn’t excuse them from trying to mislead the Australian public. The fact that their budget outcome is slightly better is practically meaning less after the way they behaved.
@ adr0ck, the article was written before Wilkie had declared support for Labor and after Wilkie had publicly rejected Gillard’s first offer.
Tony Abbott’s faith in his policy costings mirrors his Catholic faith in The Virgin Birth, The Resurrection and The Ascension.
In the end, however, his $11 billion budget black hole was found out because a Protestant Treasury doesn’t believe in The Assumption.
That’s why the Secular Party advised the major parties to Keep Religion Out of Politics.
Whilst most of Bernard’s analysis here is right on the money I can’t for the life of me see how he still rates Toxic Tony and the Turramurra Tea Party favourites to form government for all of the myriad reasons I have stated over the past week
Mr Rabbots huge gaping great big black hole is surely just the final nail in his political coffin at this stage.
Anyway, he’ll be happier in Opposition where he won’t have to go on feigning being Prime Ministerial. Having to remain collegial for more than a few weeks would no doubt have led to him choking to death on his own suppressed bile.
Now he can fulfil his true destiny and morph into the Toxic Avenger - endlessly carping on about Labor illegitimacy and how it must have been the Devils work that a mere woman stole his crown
@adr0ck: I agree and I believe Windsor and Oakeshott will back Labor because of it. The crap Abbott was peddling last week about Treasury “not understanding” didn’t fly - and I think it’s the way they’ve gone about it, rather than the black-holes themselves, that will ultimately push Windsor and Oakeshott into Gillard’s awaiting arms.
Now perhaps someone here could answer this question: If Treasury are always going to come back with different numbers than what the Opposition submit (whomever that Opposition may be), then why not submit policies with a token cost of $1.00 and simply let Treasury cost them? No surprises, no “black-holes”, no argy-bargy over who’s got the biggest cost blow-out. Just fair and reasonably costed policies by the people who are trained to do it.
I would love to be a fly on the petulant catholic boychilds wall right now - he’d be self-imploding in a major way and blaming every one else for it!
Hmmm, After all that Hockey & Robb mudslinging & chest beating about a bigger surplus than Labor, quicker than Labor & always be more than Labor, turns out to be a load of Bull***t.
Imagine many of Howards battlers would’ve liked to be equipt with that knowledge prior to August 21st……..Would we be in this hung situation now????? For the next three years???????? Just more Howard like sneaky tricks from the Abbott family !!!!!!
The headline on NineMSN and Yahoo7 is “Coalition will deliver surplus: Abbott”. The article is hidden away from the main page on NineMSN while Yahoo moved it to the main page after a commentariat complained why it was not on the front page.
Stephen Long on ‘the Drum’ today says he look at the fiscal policy costing on both sides closely and see very different on the outcome in the bottom line between the two and the claim that the Coalition will deliver a much bigger surplus is unfounded.
I believe a large number of voters voted for the Coalition because they believed in the Coalition’s claim to be better economic manager and will deliver a big surplus.
To be fair to the opposition they did not have access to treasury resources to do their costing; however claiming that treasury does not understand their policy and not handing in for costing or now that a black hole is found is simply because of difference in opinion is utterly nonsense. You have to compare apple to apple and treasury has to apply the same methodology of costing to both parties; you can’t have one party saying just trust in us because our way is superior.
I think on the 2PP the majority of Oakshott’s electorate prefer Labor so on such 2PP number of seat basis it will be 75 Labor and 75 Liberal. May be they can have a love fest and share power; wouldn’t that be more consensus and more democratic?
How about Andrew Wilke confirming Toxic Tony offered him a billion dollars for the hobart hospital.
That wrascally Mr Rabbot has seems intent on burrowing his way to as bigger black hole as neccesary in his attempt to lure the Independents along to his Mad Hatters Tea Party
The audacity of News CrapOnOration seemingly knows no bounds
The Australian online is running a headline that says “Forrest, Oakeshott in joint call for mining tax summit”
The only problem is that nowhere in the article does Oakeshot say anything of the sort .. what he says in fact is that even after listening to Forrests’ pitch, he may still back a resources rent tax.
Murdoch is now seemingly so omnipotent he can take words out of Andrew Forrest mouth and make Rob Oakeshot say them
Acidic Muse
“That wrascally Mr Rabbot…”
Thanks, that’s the best laugh I’ve had all day. So much for his warnings about a Great Big New Tax being served up by the government, Mr Rabbot is now matching it with a Great Big New Black Hole.
The ABC News site reports:
Sorry correction on my post above paragraph 2: I was meant to say very little difference on outcome. The outcome number from the two parties will be pretty much the same.
Just got back from local RSL ,where the only daily paper in QLD is Rupert’s Courier Mail. Free to pick up and read , NO Mention of the Great Big Hole in Tony’s Books ???? even at the back - NOTHING, Now that’s bias.
Watched the 3 Independants on SKY tonight, looks like they will deliver Gillard government and give us 3 years of a Swan covered in oil.
At least their policies will be thoroughly debated.
Hope Abbott sacks Robb and Hockey for incompetence.
Can’t wait for Rudd to de-stabalise.
The exaggerated swagger of Abbott and Hockey as they strode into the press conference this morning was laughable. At least Robb had the decency to look a bit embarrassed.
Thanks folks for some really good thoughts,
I’m actually feeling positive for the first time in weeks.
-re Syd’s disgust at seeing Tony Blair being promoted by Crikey, and the focus on the Murdoch press
I thought I might mention the meeting that Blair and Murdoch had on Hayman Island before Blair became
PM. I’m convinced that Blair had to compromise his beliefs to get the approval of Rupert.
Since then there with Fox news and the rest , there is no turning back from the conservative agenda in the US the UK and Australia. Even Rupert’s mum doesn’t always approve. As newspapers dwindle, journalism deteriorates and the
commercial current affairs substitutes tillilation, shock and fear substitute for intelligent investigative reporting.
Watching Andrew Wilkie on the 7.30 report tonight, I was impressed by his clarity of thought and articulation.
You might not agreee with all of his ideas, but at least he’s not a raving ratbag like Stephen Fielding..
The same could be said of Oakshott and Windsor. The shift to honest comment and not spin, is extremely refreshing.
The coalition have gone for broke. Unhappy with the humiliation of oppostion, they’ve almost destroyed Labor by
spouting outrageous exagerrations and untruths that have gone unchallenged by the media afore mentioned.
Like many of the commentators above , I’ll be very pissed off if the coalition get in on their lies and deceit.
On a happier note, I hear Rupert is starting to come round to the idea of climate change. Imagine if he really went into
bat for the science and technology of alternative energy and environmental protection! - Could start a revolution -
Nick Stern says a new industrial revolution is overdue.
@OUTSTANDING OUTCOME FOR AUSTRALIA Posted Thursday, 2 September 2010 at 3:05 pm
Where is the landmine himself, Kevin Rudd MP?
Has no one here heard? Read BK’s piece on Katter’s thing on the renewable energy corridor in his electorate, and my post there. Rudd was involved in those negotiations with Katter a year back or whenever. Rumours tonight say Katter is ready to declare for Labor……….after meeting with K. Rudd (yesterday I think). (And yes, amongst other things, one sweetener must be that there will be no enquiry into the brother-inlaw indiscretion thing, though personally I am not convinced it is all that serious.)
Anyway, while I thought it was always going to be Labor from the Sunday after election night (and you could also read it in Abbott’s every action and in his eyes: he knew he had lost) Abbott has continued to destroy his chances.
Bernard, I think, simply believes that a leopard doesn’t change its spots. But the Oakeshott wife story (kudos to The Oz for publishing it at this sensitive time! kinda tells me something too; did anyone notice no Dennis Shanahan today.) surely means he would not want to rejoin those swine. It seems to me it now comes down to Windsor — and only in the sense of whether he forces a new election. Unlikely, so it’s is all over, the question is whether it happens tomorrow. Windsor says he is going to take the weekend but I wouldn’t bet on that, especially if the Katter thing is true.
Tony Jones interview with that crusty old Coalition curmudgeon Andrew Robbery had me in absolute stitches of laughter. It was like a skit from the Chaser … watch fpr the Lateline repeats tomorrow on ABC1 and 24 …this is must see TV
He actually committed 1 billion dollars to building Andrew Wilkie’s Hobart hospital in a desperate attempt to avoid looking stupid for trying to bribe Wilkie with such a ludicrous offer in the first place - simply because Tony Jones goaded him into it
Even Tony Jones was struggling to keep a straight face
The Toxic Tony’s Turramurra Tea Party are fast devolving into a circus
@Socrates
I suspect this is all fallout from a cleverly constructed Andrew Forrest Press Release that tries to twist Oakeshots previously stated desire to have a broader look at the Henry Tax Revue and remake it as an agreement between Twiggy and Oakeshot to de-construct the Mining Tax
It’s never going to fly .. the tax is a core promise for Gillard and Oakeshot has already said he supports it in principal .
Anyway, Twiggy Forrest is a self absorbed moron who should never have gone off half cocked over the 1st version of the Tax, because it was a FAR better deal for the junior miners than what they ended up with
Forrest has always been a duplicitous loose cannon .. ask Joe Gutnik .. lol
@ Eel
Murdoch hates ending up on the wrong side of important arguments and has a long history of last minute miraculous conversions, like his support for Obama once he realised the writing was on the wall for the Republicunts in 2008
His desire to back winners has often trumped his ideological obsessions down the years - I really hope he get’s behind a price on carbon sooner rather than later
Two matters referred to in your article that are the signpost for Australian politices and our attitude toward it. “Charter of Budget Honesty” and “but that’s just ordinary double standards”. There is obviously an acceptable level of association between honesty and double standard in the votes that count to allow merely a ripple of disgust in how both parties are conducting themselves. Abbott and Hockey need to be laughed out of the room, but hey, they must reflect the attitude of (a close majority) of Australian feeling about doing business in this country it seems.
Andrew Robb has just said that it is OK to do massive pork-barreling because it is so important to get the Coalition into government.
Arrogant, stupid bastard.
Robb on Lateline: “our reasoning is superior to Treasury”.
Treasury should be disbanded and we should rely in future on Robb and Hockey for all economic modelling and analysis.
How long is Australia going to put up with this rubbish?
Andrew Robb was expertly herded into a tight corner by Tony Jones last night when, during the ‘Lateline’ interview, he judged it best not to renege on the $1 billion hospital funding offer made to Wilkie. Neat work by Tony Jones.
The Coalition unwittingly reveal more warts the longer the negotiations with the independents continue. Abbott must be frothing at the mouth with impatience; he’s a good study in anger management at the moment. Can it last?
@David Sanderson…talking of rubbish David, this morning the despicable toad, Opposition health shadow Dutton launched into a tirade of out and out lies, scaremongering and insults. It is obvious the Opposition are now running the Greens left wing scare campaign aimed at voters in the 3 independents electorates, hoping for a back lash over the weekend and a last minute influence on their MP’s decision. This is fully supported by the ABC and the Murdoch rabble as is seen by this mornings papers and that insult to radio journalism Fran Kelly on Radio National.
Toxic Tony and the Toorak Taliban are now simply reaping what they have so cynically and despicably sown.
The Coalition ran a viciously relentless smear campaign predicated on stopping waste that was massively overstated and paying down a debt that was comparatively small by world standards - and undoubtedly necessary in the dire circumstances of the GFC
Having created an unprecedented level of hysteria over this nations need for greater fiscal responsibility, the Coalition are now dying by the very sword with which they cynically sought to eviscerate our democracy.
Joe Fat Back’s whining about Andrew Wilkie “setting them up” is just laughable.
The Coalition set themselves up for this from the very start by dragging our political discourse down to the lowest common denominator in an attempt to grab power they neither deserved nor were ready to wield responsibly
I for one am just loving watching them choke on it
@David sanderson.
Just regarding this political betting and odds, I think it is one of the great scandals that these betting companies have suddenly become the barometers of public opinion.
The fact that Neil Evans of Centrebet, a man seen as too light-weight to host a Football Show on Fox Sports is now some political analyst just defies believe.
It’s all about the publiciy for these blokes and these “big plunges” they talk about about normally just a few hundred dollars.
I hammered these fools over the election but $1000 bet would knock a seats price right in, so it is important not to get carried away that there is any mass swell of support.
People blow up when a poll might have less than 5000 people but with these punters we are probably talking dozens.
Also, let’s not fall into the trap of believing “the punters are rarely wrong” studying the profit and loss sheets of the bookies tells us the punters usually are.
Betting remains a legitimate way of measuring what is going on on a day to day basis, especially as not everything is measured by polls and polls are relatively infrequent in a rapidly changing situation.
Obviously they should be interpreted very cautiously especially as they are very subject to herd mentality factors. In my opinion herd mentality was at play in backing the Coalition into $1.35 and the evidence for that is evident in the market reaction to a predictable event - ie Wilkie signing up to Labor.
Pah, betting is easily skewed with emotional punters. Collingwood supporters bet for their team week in week out and generally never win
As I said in another thread, when can we move on from electoral shopping lists worth a few billion and start talking about the real “black holes” in Australia’s economy and governance, which destroys orders of magnitude more than that?
* the inefficiency of our taxation system
* our bottlenecked ports and our transportation arrangements in general
* the zero-sum-game of the housing investment pressure-cooker
* the cost of commonwealth-state turf wars, blame games in hospital funding, etc
* the commonwealth one-size-fits-all industrial relations regime for the whole country
* the stalemate in our water regimes and the horror of Greens-influenced city governments towards modern irrigation technologies
* all the preferential trading treaties we sign up to, under the misleading label “free trade agreements”
Yes, we get it, Tony Abbott has wedged himself by focusing too much on the amount Labor spent - some of which was necessary under the circumstances - instead of tearing open the incompetent way they spent it.
So when everybody gets all the Abbott name-calling off their chest, will the grown-ups ever get a chance to ask the politicians what they’re planning vis-a-vis the harder stuff I listed above? Stuff which does not lend itself so easily to pithy phrases and name-calling. Stuff which requires a bit of skill to explain why it could raise all our living standards dramatically.
@FreeCountry
No one on the Right seemed all that concerned about this stuff when they thought Abbott’s lowest common denominator directed narrative of endless negativity would deliver them power
I actually have similar concerns about most of the issues you raised there but I suspect my solutions would be very different to yours. For me, fixing the inefficiency of our taxation system necessarily means moving to a system that ensures those who do best out of our well regulated free market economy pay more taxes. I’m all for making it simpler and more efficient but also well aware that for most on the right, this means placing an ever greater tax burden on the less well off in the name of trickle down voodoo economics
Yes, there’s a major problem with infrastructure bottlenecks but the answer doth not lay in lower taxes for the wealthy as John Howard seemingly believed
The impasse here seems to be a mostly ideological one
You might be surprised, ACIDIC MUSE, by just how radical a change a hoary right-winger like myself might advocate.
I would favour a return to read federalism, and the Commonwealth to withdraw from its failed history of funding the States. The Cold War is over in case nobody noticed; we don’t need to maintain the WW2-era centralization of power any more.
Canberra may lack the attention span to address the Henry report, but I just bet one or other of the States would make better use of it, if given the chance. The others would soon see the blooming of living standards and follow its example.
Then you and I could both both have what we want, and a lot more democratic choice. One or more states might use taxes to fine the rich for the crime of being rich as you suggest (and good luck with that - UK marginal rates of 95 per cent in the 1970s collected very little revenue, because there are far fewer rich people than poor people) while others might try out something flatter. In theory it’s possible to abolish income tax altogether, you can run a state very effectively on just land tax and GST. Fat chance of that ever being tried while the Commonwealth rules everything from on high.
And if you ended up in a regime more to my liking, and vice versa, the abolition of stamp duty that would swiftly follow would make it easy for us to sell up and swap places, voting with our feet.
“read federalism” - I meant to say real federalism. Like all the other modern federations that are catching up to our ideas from the 1890s and overtaking us.
What the people who keep stressing that the three independents are likely to go over to the Opposition, in this the most important of post election blues, fail to understand is this.
The National Country Party is Socialism for the rurals. The forms of socialism with which most of us are familiar seek to bring the poverty-stricken of the country up to more-or-less the same level as the very rich (of course, what really happens is that the very rich are mercilessly hammered into the ground by huge taxes.)
So the National Country Party wish to be-in theory only-the poverty-stricken. And we, the humble tax-payer would be forced to pay ever higher taxes in order that the rural NCP voters get to live in a style to which they never, in their wildest dreams, thought was possible.
To assume these three gentlemen would go onto the same side as the Liberal Party-because of recent couplings, is sublime ignorance. The NCP possess no feelings of loyalty to their previous pals.
They will side with the Party who offers them the most money, the better deal, the most publicity, you don’t think Bob Katter purchased a whole new collection of threads if not to impress the MSM do you?
He will vote for the Party who brings his brother-in-law the greatest amount of money/business.
I just thought to make sure people know what really motivates these Independents. And the people keeping tabs on the amount of money being slung around will be the first ones to know which way the three (un)wise men will cast their vote.