Are we there yet?
When Scott Morrison took over as Treasurer, he took waffle to a whole new level.
“It’s like going off on that summer holiday,” he told us. “You get in the car; you know where you’re going; you don’t put the passengers at risk; you get to your destination safely. Of course there will be people chiming in from the back seat like my kids always do, saying, ‘Are we there yet? Are we there yet?’ Well, we are going to get there and we’re going to get there with everybody on board.”
What has seemed an interminable trip along a pot-hole ridden track, with innumerable unexpected detours and passengers being thrown out the door along the way, is finally drawing to a close and the kids are getting excited about being able to get out of this old clunker and into some fresh air.
There has been spirited debate here at the AIMN about what Labor and their supporters should be doing right now.
Should we refrain from saying anything that could be perceived as critical of Labor, particularly of Shorten? Should Bill go quiet and save any policy announcements for the campaign? Valid questions with reasonable arguments for and against.
But we are actually running out of time.
Parliament resumes for a dreadfully onerous seven sitting days between February 12 and 21. Should Labor leave it to the crossbenchers to pressure the government on tricky issues? Will the bullied and ignored women in the Liberal Party fall in behind the propaganda that female enablers are trying to spin about the Liberals being wonderful to and for women?
The December quarter GDP figures are scheduled for release on March 3rd. Might that influence the election date? We keep getting told how wonderfully well the economy is doing but they always leave out the bad bits.
Whilst the headlines for the September quarter figures showed the Australian economy grew 2.8% through the year, it also showed a concerning drop in household saving.
“The subdued growth in gross disposable income coupled with an increase in household consumption resulted in the household saving ratio declining to 2.4 per cent in the September quarter. This is the lowest saving rate since December 2007.”
Presuming they stick to delivering a budget on April 2, Morrison will have to call an election immediately which gives Bill the last word in his budget reply speech.
After the House is dissolved or expires, writs for election must be issued within 10 days and the election must be held on a Saturday between 33 and 58 days after the writs have been issued.
That means the writs must be issued by Monday 15th April at latest for a May 18 election.
Realistically, the campaign has already begun.
An effective debating technique is to anticipate the other side’s arguments, concede the undeniable before they can make their argument, and be ready with a substantive “however”.
The Coalition are entirely predictable so that makes the job even easier.
They are manoeuvring to attack Labor on taxation but that angle is easily rebuffed.
The OECD’s annual Revenue Statistics report found that the tax-to-GDP ratio in Australia (27.8% in 2016) ranked it 30th out of 36 OECD countries where the average was 34% of GDP.
It is true that, relative to the OECD average, the tax structure in Australia has substantially higher proportions of tax revenue from income taxes and a somewhat higher proportion from corporate taxes. However, we pay much less GST and, more significantly, we pay no social security contributions which makes up, on average, 26% of tax receipts in other OECD countries. We are not a high-taxing nation.
The Coalition proposed changes to income tax in the last budget. Grattan Institute analysis shows most of the revenue reductions to government from the plan are the result of lower taxes on high-income earners.
“Once the three-stage plan — including removing the 37 per cent tax bracket — is complete, $15 billion of the annual $25 billion cost of the plan will result from collecting less tax from the top 20 per cent of income earners.”
This sets up a significant challenge for future governments to cope with less revenue and greater inequality.
I know many disagree and make good arguments for a different course, but if I was Bill I would be pre-empting the budget, making as many announcements as I could coupled with rebuttals for expected Coalition policy.
Have the figures at hand for how much cheaper power prices will be with more renewables in the mix. Have an answer for the reliability discussion which, along with storage, could be largely overcome with targeted transmission and interconnection investment and demand management.
It’s too late for the Coalition to come up with anything new and if Bill announces a good plan, they are too silly to adopt it. Their raison d’etre is to oppose anything Labor says or does.
Whatever the strategy, we are in the home stretch.
Like what we do at The AIMN?
You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.
Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!
360 total views, 2 views today
85 commentsLogin here Register here
I can hardly bear to wait 🙂
Well written as usual Kaye Lee, I just wish that the Labor party could convince the mainstream voters of how disingenuous the government are especially as so-called financial managers. I know too many people who quite openly hate the COALition but believe them to be better economic managers and I feel that it is really necessary to disabuse them of that notion.
Bring on a March election!
Labor is not getting my vote, and the votes of many others, unless they get moving on Adani/China Thermal mines and Newstart.
Once again in an effort to win Liberal votes -who would rather vote for ISIS – they are abandoning the Labor left. They never learn
Uhm ….. I would have thought that reducing the too many free gratis gifts to corporate Australia, currently valued at about $150 BILLION PER YEAR, should be a major election platform. Little things like $30 MILLION gifts to News Ltd because Rupert is such good bloke, fuel concessions to oil exploration corporations, and of course the inevitable foreign investment allowances for foreign owned corporations to legally minimise any Australian taxation liability to zero.
When the undeservingly wealthy pay their fair share of the cost of maintaining Australia as a stable peaceful political nation allowing commercial endeavours to flourish while costs are socialised and profits are privatised, only then will we see a fair go for all.
It’s time ….. again.
I’m not stepping into Scomo’s bus…oops,I forgot, he does not step into them either…
Alright, I’ll not travel with him in any fashion…
I believe I reach my destination faster by walking it alone, not having to listen to his and his mates bickering about whose turn it is to be our PM…
It also worries me that Labor seem more scared of giving the Coalition and the Murdoch media ammunition than concerned about losing progressive and even centre voters to Independents or Greens. When we discussed this on another thread I pointed out that whilst the Greens only have one seat in the lower house, they got 10.2% of the first preference vote. With the Greens Party enduring inner turmoil of its own, the time is ripe to attract people back.
They do have a to be a little careful with Adani because there is some suspicion that Adani are hanging on long enough to sue us if we pull the plug. Bill could easily remind us all about the hurdles Adani still has to jump whilst giving them a veiled warning about prosecution for unapproved drilling and lying about hazardous spills at Abbott Point and bribing Indigenous people to get them to vote to give up their Native Title etc etc
Interesting thing is that there has only been one steady and reliable leader in this country’s federal government for the past five years and, in a strange way, we have Abbott to thank: If he had not worked to remove two Prime Ministers in the way that he did, the ALP might not have agreed on the measures introduced by Rudd to stabilise the leadership question. Good thing the Coalition won’t follow any example set by Labor.
For whom will you cast your vote and your preferences?
Placing Labor alongside the LNP at the bottom of the ticket will not help. By all means select preferences according to candidates addressing the needs of Australia. However, if Labor wins, as is mooted, then a clear mandate in the HoR with a senate of many variables (messy but that’s all we have to keep the bastards honest), is the only way to begin healing a very broken political system.
Labor will not be able to repair the damage wrought by the self serving policies of the LNP within a single or even a succession of terms.
They will need all the help they can get.
Which means learning to collaborate with other Progressives, lest we return to the same pattern of regressive politics we have endured for decades.
Just one little problem, Dannaart – the concept of “mandate”.
“Mandate” is misused as a cover-all excuse, claiming that the whole of the population is in tune with all of the actions of the Party in government.
Clearly, that cannot ever be the case.
Insert word of choice.
I agree “mandate” has been corrupted like so much. However, Labor cannot repair without the means of support.
Mentioned the other day on another thread preliminary results of a voting intention survey by YourLifeChoices an info/help service for seniors … update of survey today after 2450+ responses is:
Liberal 40% Labor 37% Independent 10% Greens 5% Nationals 3%. Website is www. yourlifechoices.co.au
Lots of comments and they make interesting, but too often, dismal reading. So many boomers vomiting up the usual garbage from shock jockeys, DarkSky, Oz, CourierMail, etc….. LNP best money managers, Labor will tax you to death and you’ll die on a public hospital wait list, leftist globalists will open the floodgates, and so on…and many sensible respondents get the troll treatment. Reminded me of some responses to First Dogs cartoons on the G.
Nicely put as usual Kaye and i hope mr Shorten’s Centre Right Party trounces the gangsters and at some stage the good people in the CRP stop governing for themselves and resurrect the spirit of 72.
Agree, James Lawrie. And Kaye, “It also worries me that Labor seem more scared of giving the Coalition and the Murdoch media ammunition than concerned about losing progressive and even centre voters to Independents or Greens. ” This infuriates me! And the main reason I won’t be giving Labor my vote. They need to grow a pair. They are far more scared of the Coalition than the voters are.
Labor never gives a full reply. I guess they think the people know the lnp are lying, but by the amount of people that still vote for the lnp,proves that they don’t. Labor please denounce their lies. Correct them each time. Not with a campaign spiel but with straight talk.
I’ll be voting ALP, but I would like to know the party’s position re China’s “One Belt One Road” (OBOR) economic plan and whether Australia may join the BRICS countries (Brazil, Russia, India, China & South Africa), as both are intertwined. Can we afford to ignore what is potentially the world’s largest trading bloc, particularly regarding our geographic location re India and China?
The environment – the ALP has a clearly defined policy, but what we need to know is a timetable and how their aims will be accomplished and the ongoing benefits – and not just motherhood statements about how “our” policies are better than “theirs”.
Defence spending. FFS – get it sorted into something practical and affordable.
Social issues – the ALP needs to rebut their proposed review into Newstart payments. It’s screamingly obvious that one can’t survive on the current rate and an increase is required immediately. Same with other social welfare payments that haven’t increased in real terms for years.
Infrastructure – the incoming government should issue investment bonds at competitive interest rates to assist with the financing of major projects. An incoming government must announce what projects are being contemplated/examined and when they’re planned for completion.
Health – bolster Medicare and increase health funding across all sectors.
Taxation – a thorough review with emphasis on disallowing “dud” commercial deductions.
The Australian public need to know where the country will be in 10, 20 or 50 years time. Any sort of vision currently is sadly lacking.
That’ll do for starters.
Labor has more ammunition than they realize with the cost of living increases already flagged for 2019.
For example, public transport costs in Brisbane will rise by an average of 1.8% on 7 January 2019. Food prices on basics, excluding the milk levy, are increasing in most super markets already. Where prices remain the same, I notice the packaging is for smaller size. Honey was $4.50 for 500mg. It is still $4.50, only 375mg now. Watch for many more examples in your super markets before the election is announced!
It seems Scumo has 2 flat tyres, with no wage increases in sight and no sign of any destination yet, so it might be a while before the show is back on the road. I also wonder what dirt Murdoch has on Bill?
I was almost there, almost ready to vote Labor for the first time but your readers and the Author have raised enough concerns that I will stand firm and vote Liberal with the expectation that they have learnt enough to set a steady course for a further term.
I have seen the actions of the Greens here in Victoria where they failed to work cohesively with Labor and could not assume things would be any different nationally
I do not expect Morrison to lead the Liberals but have hopes that Julie Bishop may come to the fore.
Although not a student of politics, your readers have alerted me enough to feel that Labor would be a do nothing Government and I will have no problems relaying the thought your reader provided to my friends and associates
Good suggestions and concerns/requests coming out.
A couple more….
Labor should increase the tax free threshold. That would be a change that would help the working poor.
They should also increase the superannuation guarantee to 10% at least. If a business has a payroll of $10,000 per week that would only mean an increase of $50 for the business but the cumulative effect of increased super for workers over a lifetime adds up.
Gee John Ward….I could be wrong but somehow you don’t sound too genuine to me. Are you trying to make a point that we should not discuss policy? If you were being genuine (which I doubt), perhaps you can explain what in this discussion has led you to believe the Coalition would be the best option.
John Ward, perhaps you might just look at what the current coalition has actually done for Australia. If you think Julie Bishop will be better, you might try googling ‘ Julie Bishop Asbestos’. You could learn something about where the coalition comes from.
Phil Atkinson, you mention ‘Defence Spending’. Are we so blind that we actually believe that we could defend this country with the equipment we own now or with whet we intend to buy? Defence spending is a lie. It should be called ‘supporting munitions manufacturers’. How sad that we could not afford to support a car industry, but we apparently can afford to manufacture weapons under this coalition’s ‘planning’.
You haven’t read any of the comments at all.
There’s nothing here to inspire voting for the COALition, nothing.
John Ward Re:
What a seriously pathetic attempt by a rusted on Member of the Labor Party – bent on treating progressive supporters as absolute fools. Sub-text – don’t vote Green and whatever you do don’t question Labor.
Here’s a clue John Ward. The Labor Party is but a means to an end but not an end in itself. However, you, supposedly not being a student of politics, won’t understand that (and in all probability) it will also fly way above the heads of your supposed friends and associates.
John Ward your attempt to rally support is a complete fail. And embarrassingly so. Shakes head. (I can guess how it plays out from here.)
I wish those people who say they won’t vote ALP would clarify what they mean to do with their vote. Are they really going to vote Liberal/National? Or are they planning to lodge an Informal vote. Otherwise they have to distribute preferences for the Lower House and this means ultimately a preference for one major party ahead of the other. In the Senate they can pop in a 1 above the line for some obscure party but that is simply giving that party the right to distribute your preferences. No matter your choice (other than informal) you will be voting ALP or Liberal/National eventually
king1394, what you say is true BUT not in all instances. Voters who don’t understand the voting system we have (and it’s less than perfect, logical or rational) can make mistakes and have their preference(s) distributed in ways unintended. That’s particularly true when it comes to the Senate.
There are still lots of people, for example, who think preference allocation in the House of Representatives resides with the Party and not the elector.
I think everyone here is really hoping for a Labor government. Surely the Labor Party is interested in hearing what voters care about?
Me thinks John Ward is:
a) just trying to stir us up, and
b) talking rubbish.
The latter is more obvious.
Ha,ha! I suspect John Ward is having us all on.
” was almost there, almost ready to vote Labor for the first time but your readers and the Author have raised enough concerns that I will stand firm and vote Liberal ”
Really? If I am to believe any of this I have to be completely delusional. Good joke! Please ignore this nonsense if you haven’t got the message yet.
Il Duttonuci reminds me of a mandate, he’s got a face like a puckered arse.
I suppose there must be the odd right winger who reads AIMN, if only to see what a lot of punters are thinking but John Ward, big eye roll, not even clever enough to be satire.
I too wonder where nonALP voters are going to go. Surely never the Current mob of drongos.
Labor have been remarkably disciplined under Shorten, but as many have pointed out, including me elsewhere, it would be really great if they would make some significant promises now on the issues which are worrying fellow commenters.
I understand the not wanting to enrage the Murdochracy, but really, when you look at the readerships of his increasingly appalling rags, they are pretty pathetic numbers and only talking to the converted mostly.
I think that was one of the big things to come out of Wentworth, the fail of the Daily Telegraph.
What saddens me, one of the earliest of the baby boomers, is that so many of my generation are apparently spooked by the prospect of a Labor Government. I mean don’t they know that even if Labor does as promised with Cap Gains and Negative Gearing, it won’t affect the investment properties they already have.
This is the task for Shorten and the crew, to rebut the lies we know are going to be told but also to clarify why such changes are needed.
Of course, if you don’t pay tax you don’t necessarily care that taxpayers are subsidising investment properties, the exploration costs of the multinational fracking companies and those other rorts that legitimate taxpayers are supporting. Multi-Billion dollar French Subs anyone?
John Ward was almost ready to vote Labor for the first time?
Gee, he must be pretty young.
What a wonderful opening line, Kaye!
Followed by some great thinking. Thank you again Kaye!
The current ALP dilemma (for want of a more accurate description) reminds me and my late father and the shouting matches we had over the years. Thunderously loud, Zeus-like shouting matches.
I don’t know how mother was able to just sit there and cope with the decibels. You would think that now at 93 she’d have diminished hearing because of those shouting matches! Nope! Hearing fine!
Sis would walk in the lounge (also known at the political sandpit) and we’d drop our voice to listen to her quiet one: “What on earth are you two shouting about? The whole neighbourhood can hear you. What are you saying to one another that makes you shout so much? You are both raving lunatics of the Left, communists to your marrow, both hate the Right, both give how to vote cards for the Labs… what is it that stirs your gall so much? Your political beliefs are identical so what gets you angry?”
And it’s what’s happening now between Labor voters. They believe in the same things, they’re on the same side, they hate the other side with a passion, yet they scream at one another.
And I’m one of them!
I hear myself often and though I don’t like the fact that I’m doing it, I can see that “doing it” is a very valid thing.
Labor’s most recent history does not please me. Nowhere near as much as it ought to.
Labor’s timidity and waffling over some very important issues makes me very angry.
Labor’s lack of imagination, lack of willingness to examine some issues thoroughly, makes me sick.
Labor’s persistent walk towards failure to be elected makes me despondent and wanting to turn my back to them and walk away to anywhere -oblivion even- but very far away.
So far what I see them talking about are pulp policies; things that are obvious, as obvious as someone sweeping the floor of his/her house. You don’t boast or gloat about that. By all means announce that you’re sweeping the floor and doing the dishes, cooking even and doing the ironing -as Abbott urges women to do- but unless you tackle significant issues, of which there never is a shortage, those perfunctory deeds will be treated with the disdain they deserve.
No issues like free education, free medical care, housing (negative gearing tweeking? Wow!) refugees, foreign affairs, the zionist explosion, the corporati paying no taxes (and get tax cuts!), Prime Ministers burring their money in tax havens (what a display of shameful scorn for the country you lead, man!) prices of polluting power… the list is endless. Phil above mentions but a few of them. What are they saying about any of these items?
Father wasn’t but I was a member of the ALP and stood for them in ’82 and ’85 for the State. In the suburb that was then called Balwyn. Impossible to win back then, it was won in the last election. I loved seeing Clarke’s (against whom I stood) during the day. Pale is too timid a description.
I now forbid myself to deify politicians. I no longer have political heroes. The last one was Gough and I was searching ever since. Nope! Not Keating (though he gave us a few laughs) nor Hawke who I considered then and do now a traitor. No one.
No heroes but I have warm(ish) feelings towards people like Hewson, for example, and Wilkie and one or two others.
I think shouting matches are good. They are at the very least, educational. And they are loud enough for the politicians to hear. No point in whispering and mumbling to each other our grievances. Nor is there a point in talking in tongues as does our Prime minister or with mealy mouthed words.
The shouting should be loud and the words crystal clear!
By Zeus, I miss father!
Then again, maybe he’s just one of those people who can’t make up their minds…
Rather like the Liberal Party which he suggests will have their fourth PM in five years.
I think, now I could be wrong, but Labor not wanting to enrage Murdoch? Already happened, many years ago. 😏
The MSM are gonna continue with “KillBill” anyway, no what what Shorten says.
Diannaart, you are dead right. Murdoch has been bent on union destruction since he encountered the British printing unions in the 70s, and he’s been quite successful in his crusade. As far as anyone in the Murdoch/ALP camp think Bill Shorten and unions are synonymous. No matter what Shorten does he’ll never shake that so he may as well consolidate the left and get back to Labor basics.
In the UK you have Jeremy Corbyn who has the guts to talk about nationalisation after the neo-liberal privatisation thefts, but we have no leader here of similar calibre who will take on entrenched interests and do something about systemic inequality. All Bill Shorten is offering is ‘humble labor’ and doffing his cap to the elites so he can get the Big Seat
John Ward, re the Greens-Labor “cohesive” collaboration.
Mate, neither Party want to be used as political pawns by the LNP. Nor do they want to be confused for the other, nor do they have the same policies. Why should they compromise their positions when they feel that they are the correct positions and that hose positions of the other party are wrong.
If I were a member of the Greens, I would not want to accept many -if any- of the policies of the ALP; and the feeling mutual.
They are two distinct parties, unlike the Nats and the Libs, and One Nats and all the other so called Independents.
All of these parties would have one or two policies that coalesce but that doesn’t make them the same.
The ALP and the Greens are not lovers engaged in secret trysts. They’ll never marry.
The sooner people understand this the better.
Alas, the whole bloody lot of them are so similar that one might well mistake Oz politics as a multi spouse marriage!
One thing Labor should emphasise is that the vast majority of the welfare bill goes on the Aged Pension – people who have worked all their life, maybe even fought in wars for their country, and deserve to get a little something back. The MSM love to bleat about ‘welfare recipients’ all being dole bludgers and suchlike and the figures really don’t back that up.
Tania Plibersek seems to be the only one prepared to call the LNP out on their lies at the moment – like their joke about how good the LNP is for and to women! – perhaps this is a deliberate policy on the part of Labor?
“No issues like free education, free medical care, housing (negative gearing tweeking? Wow!) refugees, foreign affairs, the zionist explosion, the corporati paying no taxes (and get tax cuts!), Prime Ministers burring their money in tax havens (what a display of shameful scorn for the country you lead, man!) prices of polluting power… the list is endless. Phil above mentions but a few of them. What are they saying about any of these items?”
George, you haven’t been paying attention to the discussions on this blog. If Labor talks of any of these things that you mention, do you know what the coalition and their “donors” and backers in the media will say? How will you pay for all that? And unless you have a decent answer to that question, they will accuse you of spending like drunken sailors, taxing the economy to death, etc. etc. You know the drill. And the Labor party apparatchiks know it too. So what should they do? In the words of a (in)famous senator, “please explain”.
@Kaye Lee: Naughty Kaye Lee …. talking about policies when Liarbral supporters have difficulty spelling the word, let alone formulating one with the electorate.
@John Ward: Liarbral Notional$ trolls are easily recognised on this site.
Rupert’s hatred towards Unions happened way before the 70’s. He spent a while in training, at the ‘Barrier Miner’ newspaper in Broken Hill, that daddy owned.
Broken Hill has had a long and proud Union tradition and the Unions owned their own Newspaper, The ‘Barrier Daily Truth’ aka the “competition”.
It is but interesting to note that the Barrier Miner rag is long gone yet the Barrier Daily Truth, the world’s oldest worker owned newspaper is still going after 122yrs.
Rupert never got over his time in the Hill or how he was treated like a Scab. 😆
That was an interesting response to see that the fact that I won’t vote Labor somehow has me as an undercover Labor plant.
Sorry folks, I am concerned at change if the readership here is a representative example of the anti Liberal forces that could form a Government if Labor were to win
Stay in your world I’ll depart back to mine,after all it was but a passing visit
So no answer as to what makes you think the Coalition is a better choice?
So John Ward is doubling down. So, so predictable. A person – supposedly not being a student of politics – can’t let the moment pass without further comment. Hilarious and yet Pathetic!
One could make reference to being concerned with change. OR – I’ll depart back to mine – as though there was a movement based on a few comments whereas there’s been X years of – whatever. Disaster would be a good example.
John – you must do better. But I’m confident those words ring constantly in your ears.
… I am concerned at change if the readership here is a representative example of the anti Liberal forces that could form a Government if Labor were to win…
John your difficulty with comprehension is duly noted. Too cerebral, all this talk about pensions, equal wages, health, refugees, climate change action, public education, all that caring about others – whereas being selfish and a drone to the almighty dollar is simpler.
Thought you’d just hurl some condescension our way, without a single cogent word of well reasoned contradiction. Rather like being slapped with a dead snake, a little bit nasty but that’s all folks.
And RWNJ’S wonder why we won’t ever vote for them.
Like I said, don’t listen to John Ward.
He changes like the wind. More than you’ll know.
Let me just point out no matter all the catcalls the Liberal Party in all Polls over decades is the most popular individual Party by far and even at its low points it outpolls the Labor Party .All current opinion Polls still have the Liberal Party as a standalone Party in front by a significant margin over Labor.
I am bemused that the fact I said I would not vote Labor is being attacked by supposed Labor supporters who say they themselves would not vote Labor
Should we refrain from saying anything that could be perceived as critical of Labor, particularly of Shorten? Should Bill go quiet and save any policy announcements for the campaign? Valid questions with reasonable arguments for and against.
Absolutely not. Criticise by all means. But include facts! The problem is with so many of these articles is the absence of fact. In particular, the absence of facts about Labor, presented in a way to make Labor sound as if, they are against something, don’t support something or playing the “small target” I think it’s called “Lying by omission.”
People may argue this is innocent and non political, but I strongly argue it is highly political. If people were “for Labor” as opposed to “purposely misleading” these types of articles would see authors doing actual research and we would see the inclusion of the reasoning of Labor’s decision making on various topics. But yet what is presented is poorly researched, Ill informed opinion pieces, designed to lead readers up the garden path.
These type of articles are designed to appeal to the “anti majors” voters. The ones who say the know Labor will form Govt but argue to give the number one vote to a minor party or Independent “to teach Labor a lesson.”
Once again, I argue this is political.
Readers may not agree with certain decisions, but the reader should have all the facts to make an informed decision.
When this is argued, many of the AIMN commentariat call this “blindly following Labor.”
No, it’s just insisting that facts and research are crucial.
This article is just another example of that. It’s designed to have the reader believe that Labor hasn’t announced anything and is playing the “small target.” That’s the same argument as the Murdoch Press.
As opppsed to the LNP’s pamphlet in 2013 and upgraded to a “plan for a plan in 2016.” Labor presented 100 costed and detailed policies in 2016.
Since then, Labor has lead the agenda in all policy areas. They have presented huge reforms in the areas of:
Early Childhood Education
A revised Asylum Seeker policy
A 50% renewables target
Higher Education Reform
Massive TAFE reform seeing 2 out of 3 dollars returned to public TAFE
Apprenticeship & Training Reform seeing quotas for apprenticeships
Labour Hire and contracts reform protecting workers
Reinstate penalty rates
Labor Market reform, abolishing Work for the Dole and PATH and replacing these with fully funded cert III AND a paid placement
A dissenting report and voting to block Robo Debt
A dissenting report and voting to block a roll out of cashless welfare beyond the trial.
A review of the JobSearch framework which is currently privatised and resulting in massive hardship and stigma.
Guaranteed to abolish the ABCC
Guaranteed to abolish ROC
Reinstate the Road Safety Tribunal
Plus an updated platform to be released any day now.
And so much more.
These are all just off the top of my head. I think Labor is far from playing the small target.
I think it can be strongly argued Labor has led the policy agenda for five years.
It’s also now widely agreed amongst quite a few in the MSM that Shorten is underestimated. I think this is the case here, particularly in the arguments about the budget. With Mr Sugar Daddy resigning in two weeks, it’s quite possible the election will be called before the budget. There is no benefit in pre-empting a response to the LNP budget. There is a formal budget reply and it would be assumed to be done then. Being the last speaker on the issue is a perceived advantage if done well.
The strength of Shorten’s front bench is Bowen and Professor Leigh as the Economics team. Labor’s key announcements around the budget have the central tenet or fairness. Professor Leigh has held quite a few talks around the country and has been quite vocal on equality, fairness, charities and volunteering and of course the banking Royal Commission.
All that is required to accurately “criticise Labor” is some actual research and not Ill informed opinion, labelled as “analysis”.
I don’t think anyone has a problem with that type of critique. Will we see it? Is the question.
totaram, they DO have the answers for all these things. And the notion that you don’t show that you have virtuous ideas because those with nasty ideas would deride them, shows a palpable weakness of conviction, among many other flaws.
With that attitude the voter has only history to go by and as I said, the History of the ALP since ’75 hasn’t been all that remarkable.
Since my days in the party all I ever saw was pragmatism. No idealism, no ideas and a marked slide into capital-friendly policy making.
One development we should expect in this journey was outlined by Kevin Rudd in his speech to the recent ALP Conference:
While not a fan of Rudd, it seems to me that he’s simply remembering the past and rather accurately. He proceeds:
Yes – some of The Fox anchors have but there’s still much idolising. And now for the crunch:
Yes that’s how Murdoch (and his offspring) play the game. Will Shorten be seduced? Probably! At least a tiny bit.
Trish you waste so many words being an angry ant about me when you could be actually talking to people about the things that concern them. It truly seems like you want to drive people away from Labor rather than win them over.
I fully agree that this was not a complete dissertation on all of Labor’s policies past and present with footnotes and a bibliography. That was not my intention. It was a conversation starter which you have, in your usual fashion, completely misrepresented. By all means, write an article to inform us of Labor’s policies. This was about election timing and campaign strategies, not whatever you think it should have been about.
I doubt you win too many people over with your perpetual. and oh so predictable, belligerence.
Indeed! Facts are crucial to any case broadly defined, but as any historian will aver – facts are a dime a dozen the task becomes the selection of facts, the ordering of same and the meaning subsequently given to the resulting tapestry. As you yourself argue, these matters are highly political – exercises in power and all that. And you do proceed:
Is that an admission, that facts (while essential) are not the end of the matter? If so – then I am in complete agreement. To suggest that Labor is playing the small target (as conventionally defined) would also be wrong. Nevertheless, is that a fact or an opinion? And how do you differentiate?
Will Andrew Leigh be on the front bench in a Shorten Labor Government? What happens to Chalmers? And should Leigh be still referred to as Professor – given he no longer travels under that title and he hasn’t be granted emeritus status to the best of my knowledge? Or are facts not important? Or are their important facts and unimportant facts? Just askin …
I really think Bill has made a big mistake with the Newstart thing. There is such widespread support for an increase and extensive evidence about the economic and social benefit that would follow. All that came out of National Conference was a commitment to review it within 18 months, but no commitment to raise the payment itself.
I can certainly understand that it should be part of a broader package but isn’t that what they have been working on for the last five years? They have already announced many good policies so obviously they have a plan. It would have been extremely remiss of them not to include this as part of their plan when they know the need is so urgent. It would be easy and a good start to increase the payment pretty well immediately whilst they also instigated their other plans re education, training, employment and housing etc. Or at least tell us why they are waiting so long and what another review is intended to look at. Will immediate relief be offered in some other way? It would be good to hear more about their thinking on this.
Kaye. Where is the anger in my comment? A delusional response. If you can’t accept criticism, that is seriously not my problem.
MN. If Leigh is a Professor by his peers, he holds that title for life. He is a Professor if Economics. That is not a titled position such as a Dean called a Professor by position.
I have no problem listening to criticism about what I write but your critque had no connection to what I actually wrote or the sentiments expressed in the ensuing discussion. Verballing people is not helpful.
You accuse me of “Lying by omission.” and “purposely misleading” people. Perhaps you can correct any factual errors in the article then because I most certainly do not want to mislead anyone.
And please let me correct you. You are completely incorrect when you say “These type of articles are designed to appeal to the “anti majors” voters.” You are absolutley wrong about my intent and should not so presumptously try to tell me what I am trying to do because you are flat out wrong Trish.
You seem to want voters to sit back and wait for Labor to tell them what they are going to do rather than being part of the discussion. Surely Labor wants to listen to voters’ thoughts too? Everyone here are potential Labor voters. Surely you should be trying to win popular support rather than castigating us all for our opinions? If I was running a campaign I would listen to concerns and try to answer them honestly and I would expect my team to do the same thing.
PS ‘angry ant’ is not a reference to an emotion. It is an allegory for someone wasting time trying to knock something over rather than helping to build something.
TC – perhaps you are in error? Perhaps a link might inform?
Note – might be given that title. Or are you suggesting that there are alternative facts?
Before I proceed with this discussion – is this a thread that TC can censor? Have had bad experiences in the past, I am now wary. And that’s a fact. As to the meaning a reader might give …
In general, the title of professor is strictly used for academic positions. Leigh was Professor of Economics at the Australian National University from 2004 to 2010.
Oh Dear Trish…once again your comments do not help your cause, as playing the game has not helped Shorten. We need to keep them all honest at the end of the day- .It will be down to us to ask questions and expect answers. Whats the problem with that?
If Trish is any guide of Labor members, it seems to me that it is them who cannot take criticism….or questions….or suggestions….or even a discussion. Unity is great but not if it means we all have to shut up for fear of asking something they don’t want to talk about. And I don’t buy the “that’s not important, look at this other great policy we have” deflection. Of course everyone won’t agree about everything but shutting down discussion is not productive or reassuring.
Could have sworn I had made a previous comment, perhaps another thread, on keeping labor honest versus voting for them. I thought it was binary involving some posters because your can’t keep them honest if they are not in government. Do
both, even if the first is probably as impossible as getting Corry to comment constructively, if only to put the LNP out and avoid rewarding bad behaviour. They have had six years to do good and only have done harm.
If Labor won’t mend its ways THEN kick IT out in three years time when it has proven what is suspected, the same as you ought to do now with the Tories, on evidence now in.
My claim is that the LNP are SO bad that we no longer have a choice at the next election. Labor may prove to be as bad it remains to be seen still. But ti cant be worse and on that basis the only sensible thing is to give it your vote of vote Green, preferencing down to it.
I have noticed that Australian governments of all persuasions have failed to meet up to their own aspirations ever since Abbott replaced Turnbull. His negativity has been the most destructive influence on democracy that I can remember, since I first voted more than half a century ago. I believe that this characteristic was patently clear to those who lived with him during his days in the seminary.
We cannot expect the next Government to fare any better while he remains in parliament.
I nominate Kaye Lee as ALP Chief Campaign Strategist.
Kaye- totally agree.
Bad things happen when good men/women do nothing,you’ ve only got to look at the Catholic Church to see how that saying has played out.
Paul Walter- although I agree with most of your statement ( including the bit about TC) I am not willing to put up with three more years of not nearly as bad. Its no good Labor saying – ” well we’ll just say all this stuff and then change our minds once we are in Government”- re refugees etc- people are suffering. And isnt that the same as this lot have done- lie?We’ve had no policies for so long from the IPA/LNP circus some of us are looking for real leadership, and vision for this country.Keeping quiet, and letting them go about their business- is that what democracy is about? Even the Greeks had a way of getting rid of bad politicians.Although presently mob rule isn’t such a good idea ( look at the USA,Brasil etc) there has to be a way of holding these people accountable which does not mean waiting out the Winter until Spring comes again. I’m sadly not convinced that Labor will change bills and laws the LNP have brought in. I reckon that fence around Parliament House was erected with the blessing of BOTH parties- for good reason.
To be fair, Labor have announced some good policies on major issues some of which Trish briefly mentioned earlier. The only options we have for the next term of parliament are the current mob – I’d rather eat glass – or a Labor government whether that be in majority or minority. I think the Gillard government did a fantastic job in a minority government but the current crop of Libs would make it basically impossible for that to work if they had anywhere near the numbers to cause disruption.
I agree that Abbott has been an enormously destructive influence on Australian politics. The prospect of him getting anywhere near the top job was what prompted me to start writing in the first place.
MN made what I consider a very astute comment when he said “The Labor Party is but a means to an end but not an end in itself.” We must continue to ask questions of them and remind them that getting elected is just the first step.
We are entitled to ask what their plan is about the things that concern us like what the hell are they going to do with the people stuck on Manus and Nauru if they can’t find a suitable third country for resettlement. Interestingly. a woman running for preselection in Andrew Broad’s seat, Ann Webster, said the region was hoping to attract more refugees to struggling small towns to help fill unskilled job shortages, highlighting the success of the Burmese Karen who have settled in Nhill.
MN: correct about the emeritus title. It is given by the Uni so long as you continue to work as a Prof., at least as far as research is concerned, without pay, but with some facilities such as an office on the campus, library facilities etc. If the emeritus position is not “renewed”, at some stage, you are no longer an emeritus, or even a Prof. However, you continue to have your degrees (Ph.D. etc.) for life. At least that is the convention in Australia. It might be different in, say Germany, where the “habilitation” degree confers the right to hold lectures at the University, for life, whether paid or not. And these things are changing as we speak.
The election of Labor, while a momentary relief from the histrionics and sheer lunacy of the LNP, is not any form of panacea, to think that Labor is the only solution is as dogmatic in nature as any zealot from the Conservative right.
For example, arguing a two party system as the only means of government in an increasingly more complex and diverse world. We are fighting for diversity in political representation, yet refuse to consider multiparty governance.
Resilience means adapting to change and progressing from that change. That’s evolution and it is neither easy nor conclusive.
While the election of Labor is almost odds on, there is an Augean Task ahead – affecting and infecting both sides of the political aisle. (Augean. adjective. Exceedingly filthy from long neglect. Requiring heroic efforts of cleaning or correction:)
Michael West provides a clickable pictorial link to the post parliamentary careers of some well known Members and Ministers. Note in particular the coming together of past adversaries. For example, SAS links Anthony with Sciacca in the lobbying business. But what links Bolkus and Downer? All has been revealed in his Revolving Doors article. (Clearly their parliamentary pensions are inadequate so there is a pressing need for extra income – derived by selling their connections.) Yes the cleaning out of the Augean stables is a Herculean challenge. But will they even try?
totaram, the rules around the emeritus title are flexible.
Actually, my points are very relevant to this article Kaye. No, you don’t like criticism. You never have. It always ends up in the surly attacks on me. And I’m not here for any Labor cause. I’m commenting because I’m sick of this same formula of writing style using omission of facts as a key feature and a lot of others are too. So hell, why not speak up?
Such deranged thinking. I have zero interest in trying to convince Greens or Ind or Hanson voters to vote Labor, when every comment from the same old same old five or ten commenters over the years is the same, that Labor certainly is not their preference. Your stupid games are getting boring. Change the toxic channel.
It appears this article has already lost one swinging voter and they will now vote Liberal. Bravo!
It is very clear that Kaye lacks the fortitude to address the constant issue with her writing, I have complained about for years and years and that is framing Labor in a negative light by omitting critical facts. This article is a case in point. It is deceitful writing. It’s baseless opinion, written to appeal to a particular target audience.
Shutting down discussion?? What!?! Oh my! someone hasn’t fawned over my article. They are shutting down discussion. Seriously, get a grip. No one is stopping anyone from discussing anything.
As usual, Calling me names or having the same surly and nasty commenters jump to your defence, or plunge yourself into denial, or trying the boring old shaming technique about bringing shame on Labor (Yawn) or blaming me because I used actual criticism; will just see you churn out the same old, same old stuff.
Once again, not my problem.
Oh and Kaye is also now also an expert on everything academia. Rolls eyes It depends on your respect for the profession, to make such triflng arguments. If voted a Professor by your peers, no one can take that away from you. Such a sad point to hang onto, in defence of yet another article written in a deceiving manner.
Kaye and co on AIMN still don’t get it. It’s fine to criticise Labor, but include facts. The resulting commentary that “no one can criticise Labor” is taking my comment way, way, way out of context,again, to suit your own purposes. And that is an excuse to continue to present Labor as something they are not, by excluding critical facts or information.
And I will reiterate, this tactic is highly political.
Maybe the problem is it is too hard to recognise anything positive about Labor for some people on this site. Particularly certain Authors and certain commentators.
This is a good quote:
“This question I have left until last because it is crucial to how we see our future as a society. Most importantly, I ask readers to please ponder upon this question. This is because the Government tells us everyday who we are. We need to stand up and tell them who we want to be.Therefore, it is crucial to argue if welfare is a right or a privilege. This is intrinsic to who we are as a society”.
Does this not also follow other sectors of our society? Our concerns about Climate Change? Our concerns over torturing people in concentration camps when we signed agreements to look after those who have suffered so much already? Our concerns over having transparent representation from those in Parliament? Our concerns for those who dont have a basic cost of living through something like Newstart?
That’ s what I, and many of us intend to do Trish. I for one am not defined by a political party, but by ideas, and hopes. If the party that used to represent what I held dear have changed tack, I have every right to change also.My political affiliations dont mean I am stuck with wearing a red shirt when I am thinking that green is more my colour. You are known on Twitter for attacking anyone who says the slightest thing about Labor, and now you are on here doing the same thing. Yes, you have a point of view, as do we all. Its just some of us, dont try and ram it down people’s throats. I for one have concerns and I want answers. You seem to have taken on the mantle as an elected member. If you are so concerned, why arent you putting yourself forward as a member for the ALP? You certainly have passion I’ll give you that.
By the way- that quote I posted up there- that’ s yours.
Is criticising the party you vote for damaging or helpful?
Does anyone in his/her right mind think that John Hewson, for all his criticism of the Libs will ever vote Labor?
His article in this morning’s SMH is headed “A directionless, self-obsessed rabble: Liberal brand is damaged goods”
…and he does not mince his words, nor talk in tongues. Here’s one of his paragraphs:
“The Liberal Party is totally consumed by itself. It is an unfortunate combination of selfishness, ignorance and pure arrogance to ignore what has happened to the standing of the party in the Longman and Wentworth byelections, and the Victorian state election and, even worse, to deny any lessons, simply offering spurious and fallacious excuses blaming everything and everybody else.”
etc, etc, etc.
The cynics among you will proffer the view that John Hewson is simply propping up John Hewson. He is taking on the guise of a simple observing voter but he’s in fact behaving with calculations and schemes and plans. He might well be doing that. I don’t know and I wouldn’t be at all surprised if he is suddenly handed the reins of his party’s chariot. Wouldn’t surprise me at all.
If that ever happens then Bill and his chariot batter look out. They’ll have a lot of work to do to get within a cooee of the finishing line.
Bringing back Keating won’t do it either. Many, like yours truly, feel sick when they remember the bit in Parliament when our loving Paul scorned across the bench to Hewson, “I wanna do you slowly!” It wasn’t funny then and it certainly ain’t funny now.
So I doubt he’ll be much of a sword to counter Hewson’s either.
And this is why, I suggest we criticise when criticism is warranted, we demand what is reasonable to demand, transparency, clarity, courage; and we don’t let the donkeys that drag this ALP cart, pretend they’re young stallions whose reins are in the hands of Achilles!
We criticise our kids -and we love them to death. We guide them and explain to them what we have in our minds and hearts.
Politicians? Multiply this by hundreds!
Trish, I would encourage you to include any facts you may feel relevant to the discussion. The article was actually to start a conversation about election timing and campaign strategy – not a thesis about all of Labor’s policies – but I would be very happy for you to answer the policy concerns that people are raising … if you can. You don’t have to tune into this “toxic channel” if you don’t want to but since you are here. why not use the time constructively? I understand you may have no interest in courting votes but I very much doubt that the people who are actually running for election would be happy with such a dismissive approach. We are both trying to get Labor elected. Our bickering is a pointless waste of time and energy and no doubt very annoying for other readers. As George points out, wanting someone to do better does not imply you are against them – quite the reverse. No-one is talking about how the Coalition could improve because we are completely over their ineptitude. I am not trying to win people over to my point of view. I am asking them about theirs. Party politics doesn’t interest me. Results do.
Denying the right to critique or question a party, any political party, is the tactic of autocrats.
Trish, you would not describe yourself as autocratic, yet you persist in denying any criticism of Labor. As jaq has pointed out;
Our concerns about Climate Change? Our concerns over torturing people in concentration camps when we signed agreements to look after those who have suffered so much already? Our concerns over having transparent representation from those in Parliament? Our concerns for those who dont have a basic cost of living through something like Newstart?
Are all valid concerns.
Sigh. Here we go again: The Trish Cory hates Kaye Lee show rolls eyes
The Herbert seat around Townsville is held by Labor with a wafer thin margin (37 votes in 2016) but the LNP reckon they’re on a winner having endorsed an army veteran who was discharged from the army with physical and mental disabilities and who subsequently threatened violence against Muslims in the following facebook post :
The man has since apologised and blamed PTSD for his outburst resulting from his service in Afghanistan.
Lavarack Barracks is a major Australian Army base located in Townsville. The barracks is a large working, training and accommodation facility, and is home to about 4,500 soldiers and 280 civilian employees.
In a blatant exercise in dog-whistling the LNP will be standing by their candidate despite him being mentally and emotionally unsuited.
Whatever it takes !
I do apologise Rhonda. I wish it didn’t happen too. Trish actually has good ideas. I wish we could focus on that instead of me but I am at a loss as to how to make that happen. She doesn’t trust my motivation and I seem unable to do anything to change that.
John Ward –
“Let me just point out no matter all the catcalls the Liberal Party in all Polls over decades is the most popular individual Party by far and even at its low points it outpolls the Labor Party”
You’re confusing the 2PP polls with actual election results – last federal election, the ALP received 34% of the vote. The Liberal Party got 28.7% (not including the LNP which only exists in Queensland). With the 2PP polls, voters are comparing the ALP with the COALITION – not the Liberal Party. The Coalition comprises FOUR political parties, who between all of them, could only get 42% of the vote last federal election. Hardly a vote of confidence or a mandate.
Perhaps you should focus on how a coalition of political parties can claim an election win where 58% of voters didn’t vote for them?
What are your views on an incoming (ALP) government establishing a Federal ICAC?
Trish, you talk as though The AIMN is anti-Labor.
Perhaps you are ignoring that 99% of our political articles have either been pro-Labor or anti-Liberal.
Perhaps you choose to ignore this – it gives you an excuse to keep on hating us.
@John Ward: .”All current opinion Polls still have the Liberal Party as a standalone Party in front by a significant margin over Labor.”
Uhm … have I missed something here??
The Liarbral Party has been in COALition with the Notional$ you have for a 19th century future for most Parliaments since 1949. When the Liarbrals have won sufficient seats to stand alone they have declined, giving “conservative unity” as the reason. Well, you just gotta keep the government money flowing into private capitalist pockets regardless of ideology, haven’t you??
This has been a very successful thread for discussion despite the rabid attacks on AIMN authors. Perhaps this is the first attempt by Liarbral Notional$ unelected political hacks to attempt to recover some credibility before an election.
It’s time ….. again.
VOTE ANYONE BUT NAT$
Jaq, understand your reply and sympathise, but what else are we to do, we are captives of a designed system.
Rhonda, the more you ask Trish to “get with the program”, the more she doubles down. The hostility turns people off her and has them doubting her motives and aims. Neg carping.
Rhonda – Trish does nothing to get people onside- and that is a shame as she has the knowledge. Having been on the wrong side of her re Adani ( she supports the mine) it was just boring putting up with the abuse on Twitter. Everyone’s POV needs to be respected but LWNJ are just as bad as RWNJ, and I’m sorry that Kaye has copped such abuse, when honestly there was no reason for it.
Yes Paul- we are captives of a designed system, but a little waywardness wouldnt go astray. Those in the know and understand how to thwart the system on both sides are quite happy for it to remain- so perhaps its up to us to be the change- history has shown its always the people who change the system- not those in power. Its time.
The only thing that troubles me about Trish’s abuse is how she turns people off the Labor Party when the rest of us are working so hard to get them over the line.
Kayte Lee: “The only thing that troubles me about Trish’s abuse is how she turns people off the Labor Party when the rest of us are working so hard to get them over the line.”
Perhaps she intends to get people turned off the Labor party? “False flag attacks” are a well-known technique in this arena. Who can tell?
Trish is a passionate Labor member and can write eloquently and intelligently about many progressive causes. Yet, criticism of Labor remains her bête noire, blinding her to opportunities of support.
if bill wants to be pm, I think he would be good one, he must overcome the little trust tag.
Most interested and political people can see the fault in centrelink, indue and newstart the majority will not disagree with whatever take murdoch makes.
Nobody gives a rat’s arse about climate change to change their vote
I am fixed on the rabbott/green alliance establishing a distrust of the green boys so care is needed to take votes from the loonies without allowing the lnp deniers enough rope to frighten the labor voting workers with ‘carbon tax’.
Very productive area for autocue morning show children, murdoch and the lnp when dilubbransimkims become ‘poons’.(to we of the silent generation this was a man who snuck around sniffing seats) and attack labor.
I was tired and lost the source but I agree wholeheartedly with the post that said:
how dare you drape this flag around your shoulders, my dad shot people who use that evil salute.
It is too late to attack bill must be calm and prepare daily releases of the medicare, centrelink excesses find some super need for nbn eg this morning in darwin there was no link to sunrise or today just pixelated or blank
A small concentrated ‘pictures’ to fix the errors of the lnp small slogans to disspell the debt fears.
I am a panic half empty ratbag but on my facebook the lnp fear mongering works, the memory of the rabbott’s lies are believed with absolute faith labor debts rule and the boats will come.the former may become a laugh against the rabbott and the lnp.
The deflecting tactic of of a prepared question to pose at every interview could set up some laughs at the antics of fanning, brandt joyce fly by busing etc??
I agree diannaart. Trish has written some excellent articles. I remember asking her once when we were disagreeing about Adani to, as a local, give us some suggestions about non-mining employment opportunities in her area and she came up with great ideas. Sadly, I can’t find her comment now (it was years ago) and she is disinclined to respond to my requests for a repeat of her suggestions. She has a lot to offer if we could only find a way to communicate sensibly.
“nobody gives a rats arse about Climate Change”.
I have kids and I’d like them to have kids that can breathe fresh air thanks. You may be over the hill and care not, but many of us do. I’d also like to be clear about what I’m voting for, rather than whom I’m voting for.
An Aussie version of arewethereyet.