I was of the view that Newspoll was going out of the polling business for some time, so this one surprised me:

Labor 56%

LNP 44%

Best Prime Minister:

Anthony Albanese 59%

Peter Dutton 25%

The only reason I have posted these statistics courtesy of the Poll Bludger is to exemplify that the first step in restoring our Democracy has been taken.

We have wrenched back Government after the forces of the far-right conservatives threatened to destroy our system of governance.

After the election, people observed Anthony Albanese and saw a humble man, unlike other political personalities.

Image from thequesttimes.com

They have seen a man not dissimilar to themselves. They have witnessed his authenticity and his trustworthiness, and above all, his sincerity.

The Poll Bludger tells us that:

“Anthony Albanese’s approval rating has shot from 41% before the election to 61%, while his disapproval rating has fallen from 46% to 26%. The former exceeds honeymoon approval ratings recorded by Tony Abbott (47%), Kevin Rudd (59%) and John Howard (45%) upon Newspoll’s return after the three previous changes of Government.”

Democracy takes many forms and varies throughout the world. Simply put, a democracy is a political system where like-minded people come together with ideas that eventually become a philosophy from which parties are born.

These various ideologies pull in different directions in a quest for majority approval by the people. Australian democracy is far from flawless, and the philosophies can be elastically flexible. Indeed, the world even has democratic dictatorships that are unpredictable, volatile and highly combative.

Australian democracy was imperfect but constructive and generally benefited society. At its best, it expressed Government for the people by the people. It accommodated diagonally opposed ideas, extreme or otherwise. All in all, it was an imperfect beast that served us well.

It changed with the election of Tony Abbott; however, the decline in our democracy over the past decade can be traced back even further to Ronald Reagan and John Howard. Howard spent our wealth on retaining Government. Reagan invited the fundamentalist churches into the political domain, and all hell broke loose. America sneezed, and we caught the flu.

In the absence of anything better, most democracies have a capitalistic economic system. However, capitalists, as far as democracy is concerned, can take it or leave it.

In Australia, the right to vote is the gift that democracy gives. People are free to vote for whichever party (or individual) they support.

An oddity of our system is that many people believe in a democracy but at the same time think their party is the only one that should win. That all changed on 21 May 2022.

A clear indication of an Australian democracy in decline was that people were giving up this voting gift, literally saying: “A pox on both your houses.”

Thousands of people were not voting because our political system had been in crisis for over a decade. Why? Because our solicitations have failed to speak with any clarity on issues that concern people.

Our democracy should be a work in progress and open to regular improvement (new ideas) in its procedures and implementation. Its constitutional framework should be exposed to periodical revision, renewal, compromise and bi-partisanship when the common good cries out for it.

Moreover, if we were an enlightened democracy, we would give the people a sense of purposeful participation.

Previously I have suggested a full-time sitting panel of prominent citizens who would review the contents of the Constitution, take submissions from the public and make recommendations in a yearly report to the Parliament and the people.

But above all, the function of an inclusive democracy should be to serve the common good. We have not even approached that in the last ten years.

The democracy we had during the Luddite period (of Howard, Abbott, Turnbull and Morrison) existed to serve secular interests and was overseen by the elite of business, politicians and media interests, And corruption flourished.

They had the power to implement their version of a democracy, and without hesitation, they, with sinister aims, did. They didn’t comprehend that democracy works better when it serves the collective from the ground up rather than top-down. Their way is fundamentally anti-democratic.

But it was what a succession of conservative leaders Howard. Abbott, Turnbull and Morrison placed on the menu.

We became trapped in the longevity of sameness, and we never saw better ways of doing things. We allowed the far right to have its way, and in our laconic attitude, we sank into a quagmire of similarities with American Tea Party Republicanism.

The Australian democracy I grew up with no longer exists. The demise of Australian democracy originated in a monumental shift to the right by the conservatives and the left forgetting its origins.

Neo-Conservatism replaced the Liberal and National parties.

The Labor Party, in opposition under Albanese, rid itself of outdated social objectives and invested in a social philosophical common good instead and recognised that eliminating growing inequality in all its variants was a worthwhile pursuit.

Tony Abbott and Scott Morrison trashed our Parliament, its institutions and conventions, and people lost faith in the political process and their representatives.

Ministerial responsibility became a thing of the past.

Question Time became an excuse for mediocre minds who could not win an argument with intellect, charm or debating skills to act deplorably toward each other.

The Chamber descended into a place of hate where respect for the other’s view was seen as a weakness.

Light frivolity and wit were replaced with smut and sarcasm. Members debased the Parliament and themselves as moronic imbecilic individuals.

Question Time is the showcase of the Parliament and is badly in need of an overhaul and an independent Speaker.

Our democracy suffered because no one had the intestinal fortitude to give away the slightest political advantage. Recent times have demonstrated just how corrupt our democracy has become.

Corruption, like mud, continued to stain the carpets of Parliament House, walk its way into the highest offices, and then insinuate its way through all sections of society, including unions, businesses and politics.

We witnessed a plethora of inquiries, all focusing on illegal sickening behaviour, and all areas of the community called for a national anti-corruption body. That is except for the Coalition parties who would supply a new commission with its first three years of work.

Our democracy was bereft of leadership, and Abbott and Morrison debased the Parliament, so there is now no compelling reason to be a politician. Even the Senate elevated itself above its intended purpose of being a house of review and became a house of policymakers.

The worst effect of this Luddite period was that it legitimised lying as an effective political tool and undignified self-interest and narcissistic personality embedded themselves in our politics.

The pursuit of power for power’s sake and the retention of it has so engulfed political thinking that people become secondary, and the common good occupied a small recess somewhere in the labyrinth of small minds lacking the capacity for sound public policy that achieves social equity.

One cannot begin to discuss the decline of Australian democracy without at the same time aligning it to the collapse in journalistic standards and its transformation from reporting to opinion.

With blatant support for right-wing conservatives, Murdoch and his majority-owned newspapers did nothing to advance Australia as a modern enlightened democratic society. On the contrary, it damaged it, perhaps irreparably.

The advent of social media has sent the mainstream media into free fall. It is losing its authority, real or imagined. Declining newspaper sales have resulted in lost revenue and profits. Now bloggers reflect the feelings of grassroots society.

In summary, three things have contributed to the decline in our democracy:

1. Murdoch mastheads promoted free speech as if they were the sole custodian of it.
2. The Abbott and Morrison factor and the death of truth as a principle of democratic necessity.
3. People had forgotten that our democracy is nothing more or less than what we make of it. The power was with the people, and it was incumbent on the people to voice with unmistakable anger the decline in our democracy. It took nine long years for them to do so.

People needed to wake up to the fact that Government affects every part of their lives and should have been more concerned. But there was a deep-seated political malaise that clouded their thinking.

It was a time when horrible things were being perpetrated on us. The shame is that we normalised them and adjusted accordingly.

 4,536 total views,  122 views today

By Max Ogden and John Lord

One of Australia’s most vexing questions is a more equitable taxation system.

At the 2019 election, the ALP presented a couple of mild tax reforms, which unfortunately contributed to its defeat.

Later, when reflecting on his defeat, Bill Shorten admitted that perhaps he should have taken a different approach with personal tax cuts for millions of workers.

He conceded that his proposed tax reforms on franking credits and negative gearing went over like a lead balloon:

“Mr Shorten also acknowledged he should have campaigned with “fewer messages” and taken a different approach on franking credits, the tax reform that infuriated older Australians who stood to lose thousands of dollars.”

Most Australian economists and taxation experts think tax reform should be high on the agenda of any Australian Government. Many have tried, but none have succeeded.

Why? Because they have all tried an “all at once reform” which the electorate refuses to accept in any shape or form.

Remember, the beneficial Henry Tax Review commissioned by PM Rudd that never got off the ground. It now gathers dust in the bottom drawer of some bureaucrat’s desk.

Economists thought it was groundbreaking, whereas politicians knew that they couldn’t sell it in its totality.

These and other experiences show that achieving equitable tax reform is complex compared with the ease with which a government can cut taxes.

It requires sizeable public support, which can only be achieved by profound and long-term discussion by the electorate.

The Albanese government should establish a Tax Commission, or maybe a National Tax Cabinet, which will be charged with generating an extensive and deep public discussion about the whole system, with the objective of achieving three principles.

1. A more equitable system
2. Generating a stable economy.
3. Contributing/supporting climate change action.

The ALP government will not legislate significant tax changes during its first term, except for what it is already committed to.

The Tax Commission/National Tax Cabinet will organise discussions in local communities, workplaces, with state and local governments, employers, employer organisations, small businesses, unions, and ethnic groups, and facilitate any groups which want to be part of the nationwide discussion.

The ABC and SBS could replicate its recent Compass project as a Tax Compass on Australian policy preferences.

The Tax Commission/National Tax Cabinet will conduct surveys, polling, and research, including examining the best international tax systems which achieve the three principles.

An urgent consideration for the Tax Commission/National Tax Cabinet should be to enquire into the various tax advantages open to the rich and privileged in society and the enormous handouts to mining companies.

Towards the end of its first term, the government should convene one or several prominent summits to discuss a new tax system based on the three principles.

Arising from the summit, it should formulate policies to take to the next election, seeking a mandate to implement legislation when elected for a second term, as it currently looks likely.

This is similar to what John Howard did when he legislated for the GST but did not enact it until after the election, so there is a precedent, except this discussion would include the whole community.

The suggested process is similar to the Uluru Statement From The Heart, where there was extensive discussion among indigenous communities, leading to the unanimous agreement at the Uluru Summit.

Polling over many years consistently shows that most electorate is prepared to pay more tax, provided they are assured it will be used for public assets such as health and education.

This does not manifest at an election because there is never a widely discussed detailed proposal, such as suggested here. Such polling provides a reasonable basis on which to develop the process outlined.

The book “Nordic Edge” by Andrew Scott and Rod Cambell indicates that Nordic countries like Sweden, Finland, Denmark, Norway and Iceland have the highest tax rates in the world but also have the most robust economies.

Known as The Nordic Model, these countries have the highest living standards with low-income disparity. The Nordic model merges free-market capitalism with a generous welfare system.

Rather than appoint an economist or tax expert to head the Tax Commission/National Tax Cabinet, it should be someone with expertise in adult and community learning, as they will know the best processes for getting broad involvement, polling, and knowledge. Tax experts and economists should be employed to undertake the research that will be required to assist the Australia-wide discussion.

Contributing authors: Phil Drew, Luke Whitington, Neil Watson, Brian Aarons.

 4,718 total views,  66 views today

1 The first Question Time of the 47th Parliament this time last week was revealing for several reasons. Firstly, it demonstrated the enormous gap in experience between the Prime Minister and the Opposition Leader. Secondly, it showed the considerable gulf in intellect between the two.

Because the Opposition carries so much baggage, they have to defend themselves one way or another making it nearly impossible to ask a question that somehow doesn’t reflect poorly on them.

Nowhere to be seen were the refreshingly new standards l was expecting. Well, except to say that the new Speaker, Milton Dick (Member for Oxley, impressed with his authoritative manner and dulcet tone that kept the bear pit under control.

I must admit it was more combative than I thought it might be, but that may have been because my idealism was on high alert. More time might be needed before making a judgement.

Paul Fletcher – considered a “Liberal moderate” – “is now Manager of Opposition Business.” His entry into the pit was both surprising and confusing. Was he angry at losing questions to the Teals? Was he flustered on his first day, or just incompetent? Fletcher’s anger at his party’s reduced number of questions brought forward this remarkable statement:

“Indeed, [with] this standing order, Mr Speaker, we will be right up there with the Russian Duma as a toothless legislative body.”

Really? On a day that Australia recorded the fastest annual rate of growth in consumer prices for more than 20 years. This occurred during the Coalition’s Luddite period, so Dutton didn’t want to go near it. It was a dark, dank day for the Opposition. Note: Luddite period is a term I use to describe the last period of Coalition governance.

However, the usual full of himself Angus Tayler went where angels fear to tread and asked the Prime Minister if he stood by claims in his pre-election modelling that power prices would come down as a consequence of the Government’s climate and energy policies. He conveniently left out two words, “longer term”.

Albanese gave a “come in, spinner” answer by listing all of Taylor’s mistakes as the former energy minister, including delaying a vital electricity pricing update until after the election, which left Australian voters blacked out about possible increases in their power bills.

He then congratulated Taylor “on his courage for asking the question”. And then proceeded to pound Taylor for keeping secret the fact that he knew prices would rise in July.

Dutton’s contribution to Question Time on the first day was to make vague accusations about a construction union he said would now run rampant because Labor had gutted the Australian Building and Construction Commission.

Albanese answered his questions, smiling calmly at the opposition leader across the dispatch box and giving the Liberal leader some advice about his vocation:

“I wish him well,” the prime minister said, pausing for a beat, “and I hope he stays there for a very long time.”

Fortunately, Question Time isn’t high on the list of peoples viewing choices. Dutton looks like a loathsome character from a horror movie and speaks in a quiet, almost sinister tone. None of us can help the way we appear, but I find it impossible to see how he could ever gain any public popularity.

Every question asked by the Opposition had a hypothetical tag attached saying, “it was our fault.” And every answer contained all the force of a sucker punch.

Dutton looked visibly shaken when Albo hit him with the Ruby Princess debacle in #qt today. The Libs need to be aware that for every "gotcha" question they put to Labor there are scores of coalition f*ck ups on the same issue over the last 9 years to be thrown back at them…

— Gary Fallon (@GaryFallon2) July 28, 2022

On Thursday, rebuttals of onerous questions ensured that the Opposition received a battering from the Government, highlighting their inaction over the past decade.

It will take years, maybe a decade, for the Liberal and National parties to throw off a well-earned reputation for dreadful governance. Read on to find that we are still discovering more of their political shenanigans.

2 As if time has stood still, many things have converged to remind us just how bad the conservative Luddite period has been. Since May 21, we have learnt that Morrison deliberately brushed aside a long-standing convention to leak information about the arrival of a suspected asylum-seeker boat.

Every time one thought Morrison couldn’t sink any lower, he did.

The Guardian reported the incident with these words:

“The former government ‘sabotaged’ protocols for political gain and was ‘without precedent’ in Australian history.”

3 On top of that, yet another corrupt activity has surfaced:

“An audit of a controversial $1.15bn Coalition grants program for regional development found Liberal-held seats received twice as many grants as Labor electorates.”

Michael McCormack and Barnaby Joyce decided on the allocations. It seems they learnt nothing from the unethical activities of “Sports Rorts.”

4 Trent Zimmerman was one of those in the Coalition that you couldn’t help but like. Quietly spoken and centre-right with a pragmatic view, he always seemed to be on top of his subject. Indeed, it was sad to see him go at the last election. So, when I read his piece for The Guardian (Friday, July 29), I was impressed with the clarity of his thinking:

“When your party is on the losing side of an election, why double down on policies that helped facilitate that defeat?”

Zimmerman may have lost his seat but not his wits.

5 From what I read, many in the Liberal Party were unhappy with Dutton’s captain’s call to continue with a climate policy bereft of any creditability, let alone common sense.

6 On Saturday, July 30, the Prime Minister at the 2022 Garma Cultural Festival in Arnhem Land released a draft of the proposed words that would enshrine a voice in our constitution for our First Nations People:

“Do you support an alteration to the constitution that establishes an Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice?”

1.There shall be a body, to be called the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice.

2.The Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice may make representations to parliament and the executive government on matters relating to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples.

3.The parliament shall, subject to this constitution, have power to make laws with respect to the composition, functions, powers and procedures of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice.

I believe Peter Dutton will play the spoiler in the proposed referendum. The same as he has on climate change. He will risk a backlash in doing so, but the man’s character dictates his actions.

7 Only a man of great charisma could deliver a despondent economic speech to the House of Reps with the charm of Jim Chalmers. He is also a much-appreciated truth-teller.

 8,278 total views,  58 views today

In his interview with David Speers last week, the leader of the Greens in the Australian Parliament, Adam Bandt, came over as a contemptuous young man of little diplomacy.

He would do well to read the now old book by Dale Carnegie, How to Win Friends and Influence People. One would have thought his party had won the election; such was his obnoxious manner.

They indeed increased their position in the House of Representatives and have a healthy presence in the Senate, but they are not the Government.

Whilst not for one moment do I doubt his sincerity for the beliefs he holds; he needs to tone down how he demands his right to them.

In the interview with Speers, he outlined these demands and the conditions under which he would negotiate climate and energy policy.

Speers: “Will the Greens support a 43% target?”

Bandt: “It’s too early to tell yet.”

On the draft legislation:

“It doesn’t compel the Government to do anything.”

“We have seen the Legislation, and there are a number of problems with it, but we are willing to talk about it.”

“The 43% becomes stuck in law, and the parliament would have to come back to change it.”

Referring to new Gas and coal power stations:

“You don’t put the fire out while you’re pouring petrol on it.”

“You can’t even have this discussion if the Government is saying. It’s my way or the highway.”

Speers: “If they can fix the wording or amend the wording to give you some sort of assurance about coal and Gas in the future. Would that be enough?”

Bandt: There are four issues: 1) There can’t be a ceiling, 2) There must be a genuine floor so that we can’t go back to it, 3) Is it just symbolic, and 4) What about Coal and Gas?

“We will put them on the table in a good faith way, but there has to be an end to the “It’s my way or the highway” or else it’s going to be a very long three years.”

This sounds at worst like a man demanding he gets his way, or at best demanding he gets it even when he isn’t in Government. A man with an attitude that grates.

Note: I have taken these quotes from a video of the interview. For complete accuracy, I’d recommend viewing it.

Also critical was David Wu from Sky News:

“Greens leader Adam Bandt hopes he can sit down with the government to improve the wording on the climate legislation – but only once Prime Minister Anthony Albanese drops the ‘take it or leave it’ approach.”

After more than 10 years of debate, Anthony Albanese wins Government for the Labor Party. After being thwarted by the Liberals, the National and the Greens from implementing their policy, it now has the Greens telling it in no uncertain way what it can and cannot do by a disagreeable leader who needs to learn some political manners. You can explain your grievances without demanding their implementation.

By precisely submitting the policy, they took to the election. Labor intends to introduce its legislation when Parliament resumes on 26 July. It will lock in the emissions reduction target of 43 per cent by 2030 and reach net zero by 2050. Climate Change Minister Chris Bowen met with independents and representatives from the Greens on Thursday, 21 July, to introduce Labor’s draft of the bill.

If Adam Bandt wants to change it, he won’t be doing so in the Lower House and in the Senate. Newly elected ACT former Rugby star David Pocock has indicated he will support the legislation.

Staying too far from what the government desires would invoke memories of 2009 when the Greens voted against a bill that would have promoted action but voted against it because it couldn’t get its way. The Greens wouldn’t want to do it again. Labor has never forgiven them.

Labor legitimately claimed that if the Greens hadn’t voted against its Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme (CPRS), Australia’s carbon emissions would have been more than 200 million tonnes lower, and electricity would have cost less.

The Prime Minister has said that:

“If the Greens Party haven’t learned from what they did in 2009 – that was something that led to a decade of inaction and delay and denial – then that will be a matter for them.”

Having said that, Labor doesn’t have to do anything it doesn’t want to. It can proceed with its policy without any legislation.

The Prime Minister promised a new politic. It would be better, however, if it did agree with the Greens where it can. Here is an opportunity to rise above their natural dislike of them and demonstrate it.

But if Labor isn’t willing:

“… to negotiate on even this minor tweak from the Greens, who now seem resigned to accepting the 43 per cent target, what kind of sensible, good faith amendments will it listen to? Surely not the minor party’s demands for a moratorium on new coal and gas projects, an essential part of the Greens platform that doesn’t particularly gel with Labor’s position.

And so we have a conundrum. The Greens want to flex a bit of muscle, and Labor wants to exercise its authority.

Labor should be flexible enough to concede a little to the Greens by finding a way to prove that its 43 per cent target is just a minimum commitment. And the Greens should take whatever they can get in “sensible’ good faith” (their words) or be “crucified” as a spoiler.

Who knows, the Independents might have some viable suggestions.

As reported in The Guardian, they have had briefings with the climate and energy minister, Chris Bowen, late last week and have outlined some things they want to be included in the legislation.

They also want to include what they describe as a “Dutton insurance” policy. A clause that would make it difficult for future governments to ease up on action for climate change.

I have often written that the world won’t act on climate change until something really catastrophic happens. On that, we are edging closer.

 5,880 total views,  2 views today

1 The right of politics has, for some time now, imposed its thuggish propaganda and intimidatory behaviour on democracies worldwide. As far back as Reagan and Thatcher, the right has had its way. Other than a few exceptions, they have chalked up many more years in power than governments of the left. In Australia the extreme right-wing has primarily been in power. Since 1910, non-Labor governments have governed for two-thirds of the time and Labor for one-third.

In their governance, the right has attracted a proliferation of odd xenophobic people who have sought to plaster their thoughts on every parliament wall, from religious extremism to coal is good.

The true Liberalism of Menzies is now dead and buried and has been replaced by a brand of Conservatism unique to American politics. The Liberal party exists in name only.

In an article for The Conversation, Frank Bongiorno points out that:

“Labor’s two-party-preferred vote in 2022 is only slightly behind Gough Whitlam’s in 1972… an argument can be made that the 2022 election discloses an electoral shift to the left. It is perhaps the most significant since the combined momentum of the elections of 1969 and 1972 that brought the Whitlam government to office.

Changes of government in federal politics don’t happen often. There have been eight since the second world war, and three of those were in a turbulent decade between late 1972 and early 1983.”

Australian voters are a laconic bunch who have wrongly interpreted the quote “she’ll be right.”

It was never meant to have a lazy terse meaning but an optimistic one. So, we have, for the most part, clung tightly to antagonistic non-Labor governments.

Because Australian voters regularly return governments, tending not to discard the incumbent, we can reasonably assume that the last election signals a broader shift in voter attitudes and leanings.

This Government I speak of was a false democracy. It looked harmless to the voting population, but as time progressed, all the interaction with everyday people, the pretending to be a hairdresser or whatever, was only a perception of Morrison’s creation. In the beginning, people were fooled by his acting, but when you see it every day for years, you eventually must wake up from your vacation.

It was peculiar to all governments that the conservatives held power over, from Howard, Abbott, Turnbull and Morrison.

Although Albanese started his leadership in times unsuited to massive change, it may be that he was chosen for just that reason. Therefore, we can reasonably be assured that an Albanese Government will receive two terms of Government if they fulfil their commitments. All going well, perhaps another three.

The start of his tenure demonstrates that he comfortably fills the shoes of the office. He looks the part, listens with dignity, and speaks with understanding.

No one would dare suggest that Albo has the charisma of John Curtin, Gough Whitlam, Bob Hawke or Kevin Rudd. Still, he does display sincerity, warmth, integrity and authenticity.

In comparison, the newly elected Leader of the Opposition, Peter Dutton, decided to go on holiday not long after being elected. I would have thought he would immediately start mending the many things that needed fixing, but he has continued as though nothing happened.

On Albanese’s travel, the Opposition has proven that they have taken nothing from their loss. The cynicism coming from it about Albanese being out of the country is nothing more than what the Prime Minister himself described as nothing more than “beyond contempt.”

We seem to learn more about governments and their leadership when they have died (much the same as ordinary people) than when they are in Government.

Climate change, anti-corruption, gender equality and competent Government – are now the domain of the progressive left and hopefully will remain so for some time.

Whom should the Coalition blame? Well, Howard and Abbott are front and centre. Scott Morrison, his lying, and the Coalition support for fossil fuels and, of course, the rogue irrational MPs for their climate denial.

The Murdoch media defended their stupidity but couldn’t recognise its own. And let’s not forget their attitude toward women and the party infighting. And, of course, their questionable values and governance.

And yet they still seem to be at peace with their party’s relationship with the fossil fuel industry.

But the Coalition stars will always be John Howard, who took the party to the right. Tony Abbott may have been a better liar than Scott Morrison, Malcolm Turnbull, who traded the leadership for well-worn beliefs and Barnaby Joyce, who proved himself to be the Leader of the many nut cases that formed the National Party.

Morrison believed that success, for whatever reason, depended on being seen doing everyone’s job but their own. Albanese is allowing his ministers to do their jobs.

How many guises did you see Scott Morrison in, ambo, hairdresser, test pilot or poultry boner and many more?

He put on hard hats, high-vis vests and gauze caps and propelled himself into the lives of the average working citizens who have been identified as politically advantageous. All these images were implanted in us, on TV, in hotels and in gymnasiums.

Do you know why? Well I don’t, either. I guess that about sums it up. Now let’s move on.

2 Together with the Prime Minister’s promise of a new politic comes a commitment to implement an influential Integrity Commission. The Greens and the independents will reject loose ends that allow for an escape route for corrupt politicians.

Furthermore, if this promise is to have some bite, it must also have adequate freedom of information process.

The independent auditor-general must be “independent” with a reasonable budget. The same goes for the Ombudsman.

The Government must create an impartial, professional and effective public service resembling that of yesteryear.

3 Something we can all agree on:

“Former Attorney-General Gareth Evans has called for Witness K’s conviction to be reversed following the decision to abandon the prosecution of the whistle-blower’s lawyer Bernard Collaery.

And Evans states that:

“Decency would also demand that the Witness K conviction be effectively reversed, but that’s probably a bridge too far.”

4 The Monthly reported that:

“The gap between male and female Coalition voters: only 28 per cent of women now say they would vote for the Coalition, compared to 38 per cent of male voters. The gap has widened since the federal election, with women continuing to drift from the Coalition under Peter Dutton.”

Who could blame them?

5 They are not mucking about, this Albanese Government. They have announced details on:

“… its promised jobs summit, to be held in Parliament House in early September. Treasurer Jim Chalmers says workplace reforms agreed to as part of the summit may be introduced as early as this year.”

6 In yet another example of Labor’s intention to make change a priority:

“Politicians will have to declare political donations over $1000 in real-time as part of a sweeping package of integrity measures.”

7 Special Minister of State Don Farrell wants to introduce the changes by mid-2023. “Truth in political advertising” laws will also accompany this legislation.

8 Another change will “potentially double the number of senators allocated to the Northern Territory and the ACT, from two to four.” The joint standing committee will examine the proposals on electoral matters.

 6,520 total views,  8 views today

I’m trying this morning to get a feeling for the future of politics in our country. Not much critical analysis has been written about the aftermath of the May 21 election.

Probably the most substantive thing I noticed was that the young have finally caught up with the aged. Yes, the Millennials have caught up with the Baby Boomers. Let me explain: For many years the old have supported the right of politics, and the young have latched onto the left. Polls have consistently shown this. The seniors in an ageing population are dying quickly and taking the conservative vote with them.

The young left vote has been exposed in significant proportion. Labor, the Greens and the Independents obtained 75% of the total vote. The old card-carrying supporter of my vintage has gone, and the young with no natural allegiance have moved in.

Our national census tells multiple stories about a country experiencing considerable change. It doesn’t paint much of a picture of the chances of the right in the next election. Population shifts in Victoria and New South Wales will lead the Electoral Commission to eliminate what were three blue-ribbon Coalition seats. All now held by so-called Teal Independents.

Another ingredient in this recipe for a rapidly changing nation is its browning. And the focus on immigration has shifted from the end of the war, white Europeans and the 60s, Italians and Greeks, and the Asian influx that followed to the now Middle Easton, African and Indian persuasion.

In my thoughts on what might emerge in the aftermath of the election, I find it astonishing that no self-reflection has occurred. I mean, does the Coalition think they were just victims of being in office a tad long? Maybe they feel that being on the far right eliminates any circumspection.

We have heard not even a cry that the leader failed or that we should never have appointed him as our leader. It’s as if he is not to blame for anything – the young saw his deceit and cunning through his lies and voted with purpose. Why couldn’t more of the elderly see through him?

At this point in my writing, you are probably asking yourself, “didn’t he watch Four Corners?” on July 3. I did, but it only focused on branch stacking and pre-selection in NSW. There is more to it than that.

I want to know why Morrison had such a hold on the party. When it became apparent that they were going to lose, why was he not confronted? Why wasn’t he told to tone down his religiosity? Those and many other questions remain unanswered.

It leaves the conservative parties caught between a rock and a hard place. Just like when John Howard advised Tony Abbott against Royal Commissions into the Unions and Pink Batts, opining that they weren’t worth the trouble.

Labor hasn’t much choice. Having championed a Corruption Commission for so long, the Prime Minister is duty-bound to provide it with some work. They have enough investigative work to last a couple of years.

Here are but a few examples of alleged corruption:

The land they paid 30 times its value for, Sports rorts, misappropriation of water from Murray-Darling by coalition donors, $444m to Great Barrier Reef Foundation with no tendering, many of Angus Taylor’s questionable activities, $30 million to Foxtel for no apparent reason and there is a list as long as the Flemington straight.

On the one hand, voting against an Integrity Commission will cause much grief for the Opposition. On the other, they, the Coalition, have no choice but to vote for one in the knowledge that there are those in their party who will have to face the music for their sins.

What happened with Robodebt and who gave the order to proceed when it was illegal needs a Royal Commission.

Prime Minister Anthony Albanese will have to make a similar choice to Abbott’s. He can say that we must investigate all the allegations to return to a decent democracy or that he is not into vengeance politics. However, we may need a prick of spite to prove what can happen to democracies when corruption is allowed to flourish. I believe blood needs to flow now so that the governance we were forced to endure never happens again.

Of the many mountains the Coalition will have to climb to return to its once-held dominance, none will be more important than relevance. It will not be regaining lost seats or how far right it should go, but how relevant are they as political parties. By the next election, their base will be further eroded by the loss of more elderly voters, leaders unsuited to the times and two parties who have drifted away from each other. So much so that even talking to each other brings on conflicts.

You cannot buy relevancy. It doesn’t come in a box. It comes about with good policy, leaders of proven trust and saleability, and a capacity to overcome past errors.

At the moment, the leader of the National Party, David Littleproud, looks out of his depth. Peter Dutton has picked a rather odd time to go on leave (all expenses paid) after declaring that his party’s policy on climate won’t change and that he will fight the next election on education in the belief that communists are teaching our children.

Making it even harder is a Government quite the opposite of the previous one – a trustworthy leader backed by a team of competent ministers ready to put things right over time. An understanding electorate is glad of the truth even when difficult to swallow. This Coalition has none of these prerequisites.

Anthony Albanese exhibits leadership qualities the populace has been waiting a decade for. Of vast experience with a diplomatic manner and forceful tone. Comfortable on the global stage without a hint of self-importance.

Yes, inflation may rise to 7%. Yes, interest rates will continue to go up. Yes, climate change and energy will be costly, but the people will accept it if you tell them the truth. The same goes for our debt.

Relevance is a consistent reminder of how the electorate views its politicians. The Government is ready to do its job; the Greens are emboldened and Teals excited. This parliament starts its repair work on Tuesday, July 26 2022. The question is, though, will the Opposition have any relevancy? Only time will tell.

The independents and the Greens would do well to recognise that they are not in power. They, along with the Opposition, form part of the body politic and should behave maturely if they want to be seen as relevant.

 5,150 total views,  2 views today

1 Apparently, after being soundly defeated at the election, the Coalition still thinks there is mileage in continuing to oppose climate change while supporting coal. This sort of talk takes us back to the Neanderthal age. It’s flat Earth stuff.

Wouldn’t you think that after a thrashing at the election, mainly because of lousy policy on energy, anyone with a scintilla of intelligence might have admitted defeat and quietly backed down? No, not this mob.

Most normal people would accept the loss and back away. Even with the loss of “Wentworth, North Sydney, Mackellar, Kooyong, Goldstein, Curtin, Bennelong, Higgins and Ryan,” they still think they can front up to the next election with the same policy. It goes to show how far right they have gone. Having said that, I still believe that Labor has a lacklustre target for 2030.

Traditional economic thinking says that it is the less well-off who will have to forgo wage growth to bring inflation under control: Cap on wages or cap on profits.

Why not a Resources super profits tax? I’m in favour of real wage growth rather than wage stagnation. Just a thought.

I still believe that the tax cuts for the more privileged should be cancelled as part of an economic crisis plan. You can hardly expect others to have their wages held down when the more advantaged are getting tax cuts. Use it to cut the deficit. The rich don’t need it. As Abbott said about the ‘carbon tax’, if it can be legislated, it can be unlegislated. Well, words to that effect.

2 The new Minister for Workplace Relations, Tony Burke, has promised:

“More than eight million Australians will have access to 10 days of paid family and domestic violence leave by the end of the year as the new government pledges to make workplace equality reforms a priority.”

3 The final two-party preferred count has Labor on 52.1 per cent of the vote and the Coalition on 47.9. How that many could vote for the Coalition astounds me. And guess who gave it victory? It was the better educated, the under 55s, and women.

4 The government confirms it will terminate the controversial Cashless Debit Card trial across Australia.

5 In 2015 Bill Shorten asked:

“… if we were drafting our Constitution today, does anyone seriously dispute that we would require our head of state to be an Australian?”

That is just as important today as it was in 2015. Indeed, the Monarchy belongs to our past, not our future.

The same can be said of our flag. It also speaks of our past and says nothing of our future. Most of it contains another nation’s flag, and the balance is a few stars. Nothing in it recognises our First Nations People or our future. And contrary to some views, we don’t fight for a flag; we fight over right versus wrong.

6 Peter Dutton doesn’t understand that not everyone acts in a grubby self-interest.

I just saw Peter Dutton accuse me of acting because I “want a job on the Reserve Bank board”! He doesn’t understand that not everyone acts in grubby self-interest. I’ve already got a job thanks! #insiders

— Sally McManus (@sallymcmanus) June 25, 2022

7 The new education Minister, Jason Clare, has decided to do away with the compulsory religious element of the national school chaplaincy program and open up the program to allow schools to choose either a chaplain or a professionally qualified student welfare officer.

8 America may be the most advanced technological nation on earth. However, its social progress on matters of great moral importance is still fighting its way out of the Dark Ages when mysticism was rampant.

9 Cross benches advisor allocation has been reduced from 4 to one. The parliamentary Library will be given more resources to assist them. I expect it will finish at two.

10 Prime Minister Anthony Albanese continues to repair our international relations. (It was, of course, in dire need of much repair.) Big kudos also for our Foreign Minister, Penny Wong, who looks quite at home on the world stage.

11 A new budget on October 26. Parliament reconvenes next month and a jobs summit shortly.

My previous article: Dutton and Speers: That pathetic interview.

 9,146 total views,  4 views today

One of the promises the new Prime Minister made during the election campaign was to create or recreate a more civil parliament and, for that matter, a more tolerant and reasoned society. Most would all agree that we want our politicians to put their better minds to the problems confronting us. We want the screaming and disrespect to end.

This can only come about if we show each other consideration. Respect is an admiration for someone or something elicited by their abilities, qualities and achievements. Some say that we earn it by way of our behaviour toward others. I think we would all agree with that.

To quote Roy Jenkins (from 2003):

“Civilised conduct, mainly: courtesy or politeness, lamented the decline of civility in our politics. It lacked a polite act or expression of the little formalities of political society.”

However, other words come into play if Anthony Albanese is to achieve a more civil parliament.

Manners are associated with a person’s outward bearing. Manners are often described as either good or bad to indicate to others whether or not their behaviour is acceptable.

In sociology, manners can indicate a display of social status and a means of differentiation between classes. This is less so in Australia, where class matters less.

Manners are integral to the function of the social norms and conventions enforced through personal practice and upbringing and are self-regulated in public and private life. They also apply equally to both men and women.

Other words such as etiquette, politeness, charm, values and demeanour also come into play.

All these niceties, of course, don’t only apply to politics. I believe erratic behaviour in sports comes about because of a lack of respect for the games they play by the players.

Respect for the sport you play and provides you with a living is the first criteria for being a success at it. The best are usually hard-working, humble, show respect for their opponent, and are gracious when they lose. However, some seem to think the sport they play owes them something.

The same can be said of politics, where politicians generally enjoy privileges that far outweigh other areas of society. In our politics, Question Time is often seen as the showcase of our parliament. It is here that Albanese wants to start his crusade against bad behaviour.

No one could seriously challenge the thought that it has descended into a bear pit of savagery.

Some think they can win a debate by being loud and crass. Others believe they can win with a perceived superior intellect. Few realise how necessary civility is to produce reasoned outcomes.

A debate is not necessarily about winning or taking down one’s opponent. It is an exchange of facts, views, ideas and principles. At its best, it is simply the art of persuasion.

The public might be forgiven for thinking that the chamber has descended into a hate forum. A sideshow where respect for the other’s view is seen as a weakness. Where light frivolity and wit have been replaced with smut and sarcasm. And in so doing, they have debased the parliament and themselves as moronic imbecilic individuals.

“How refreshing it has been to hear Albanese and others talking about our problems without the constant interference of politics interrupting the discussion. Policy problems and how to fix them is now the new politic.” By @saint13333 #AlboIsMyPM https://t.co/ujEKQpIGnE

— Michael Taylor 🇦🇺🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿 (@AusIndiMedia) June 22, 2022

There is no doubt in my mind that at the beginning of Tony Abbott’s Prime Ministership, we entered an American period of our politics. A term I use to describe the Trump form of lying, bad manners and vile politics that became the norm in the US. It had a rotten smell that has hung around for a decade.

Those on the right fostered these behaviours until they became legitimate tools in the armoury of political tactics. And so, over the decade, the Australian politic fell into disrepair.

We abused free speech when what it required was respect. In a democracy, the right to free speech is given by the people through the parliament. Therefore, it should be incumbent on people to display decorum, moderation, truth, fact, balance, reason, tolerance, civility and respect for the other point of view. Nobody has ownership of righteousness.

In the American period, all that mattered was that you created a picture of a man or woman you wouldn’t trust. If you dragged others in, so much the better.

With that said, how will the Prime Minister create more respect than disrespect at Question Time? From what I understand, the manager of the House of Representatives, Tony Burke, doesn’t plan many changes to the standing orders. Much to the chagrin of many, Dorothy Dixers will still be allowed. Burke reckons they fill a function of informing the parliament about government progress. Some questions usually allocated to the opposition will now go to the teal members. Dutton is said to be unhappy with this arrangement.

Without any formal statement, it is challenging to predict opposition behaviour, and given Dutton’s foul-mouthed past, one cannot imagine any change. Although now that parliamentary behaviour is front and centre, I would expect Peter Dutton to make some sort of effort or carry the consequences.

 5,576 total views,  2 views today

I regret that I’m compelled to write again about the Leader of the Opposition. In what was an interview about the past, he told us everything about the style of leadership we can expect from him. Let’s call it “Liberal Negative” to give it a name.

Frankly, I was shocked by Dutton’s incapacity to concede defeat. The born-to-rule attitude runs strong. Or so his answers indicated. Time and again, when he ran out of reasoned words, he resorted to the Morrison tactic of abuse and blame.

It was astonishing, even laughable, to hear a man just appointed to be his party’s Leader trying to blame Labor for the very policy failures that the people had overwhelmingly condemned them for two weeks earlier.

As reported in The Guardian, the opposition leader constantly deflected blame for the national energy crisis, saying there is “fault all-round” while blaming the states for locking up gas reserves. For heaven’s sake, they were the Government for a decade.

“Dutton also suggested that there was a “sense of panic” on display from the new energy minister, Chris Bowen while defending the Coalition’s management of the national energy market when it was in Government.

“The sense of panic from Chris Bowen that is out there at the moment wasn’t there when Coalition was in government,” Dutton said. “I think he is a bunny in the headlights.”

 

A clearly unimpressed Mark Kenny responded via Twitter:

Where is the conservative apology over the chaos and collapse of the coal/gas-heavy energy market? Remember their fulminating clarity when a perfect storm took out SA’s power in 2016? Turns out coal & gas are not always “base load” & not always available. @InsidersABC pic.twitter.com/CewXDIIPUF

— Mark Kenny (@markgkenny) June 18, 2022

How can Dutton, a dyed-in-the-wool true-blue conservative after a decade of the most robust opposition to any reform, now claim that it is all Labor’s fault. Or at least 50% is. Those sorts of lies are why the LNP lost. The people woke to it.

Even though heartland seats fell to climate independents across the country, Dutton said they would not support Labor legislation that enshrined the 43% cut in emissions by 2030. More likely, they would take a smaller target to the next election.

Instead of uniting in the hope of tomorrow, Dutton has surprisingly chosen to reside in today. Does he not realise that the electorate has said no to the type of governance his side practised? Lie and attack, create chaos and confusion, divide and rule. We are on the periphery of a new politic.

Those were my thoughts as l watched Peter Dutton’s interview with Speers on Insiders last Sunday. Even after a resounding defeat, he couldn’t concede that the lack of an energy policy was a key reason. Had he overlooked that he had been part of the Government for the last nine years?

He seemed underprepared, or putting it more bluntly; he wasn’t sufficiently up with the detail to give a reasoned answer to anything, so he repeatedly aborted his answers to attack Labor negatively. All he could offer was a hatred of Labor. It was unprofessional politics and showed his limitations.

He was so wooden that you could almost hear his media advisers’ sighs of despair. My take on the interview is simple. They have learnt nothing from the defeat. We can expect a totality of hostile opposition in the Abbott mould. The Liberals will move further to the right, and the Nationals will remain the climate deniers they are.
Nothing has changed. Nothing.

Speers also asked him about an article published in The Australian where he said he had devised a plan when he was Defence Minister to buy a couple of submarines from the United States to fill a capability gap.

At the time, his comments were disparaged by Defence Minister Richard Marles as “rank politics.” There were even allegations that Dutton may have leaked classified information had the plan been canvassed by the Government’s nuclear submarine task force, which Vice Admiral Jonathan Mead was leading.

No such thing, Dutton told Speers. Apparently, he had reached his conclusion after visiting the Connecticut production line.

The remarks had been formed by “his judgment.”

“There is nothing top secret in a professional judgment as the former defence minister that I have made. It’s not based on classified information or secrets but the judgment that I made,” he said.

Speers went on to ask about the Indigenous voice to parliament that Labor has promised to deliver as a priority.

The opposition wanted time to go over the detail of the proposal before deciding on support, Dutton announced without even a hint of bipartisanship.

“We want to see that detail and there are lots of questions that will come from that. I don’t think the public has any understanding yet of what the Government is proposing,”

Perhaps I’m a bit of an idealist, but I wouldn’t say I was enamoured with the tone of that last sentence.

He then more or less changed the subject to bring up that; “I really want to see the closing of the gap.” It, of course, is a separate issue. And one that is hard to believe.

Labor has promised an Uluru statement from the heart in full. It would include a truth-telling Makarrata commission as a first step toward a treaty with Indigenous Australians and constitutional recognition of the voice to parliament.

Dutton’s record on anything to do with Indigenous folk isn’t great. He is on the record in 2019 as opposing the voice to parliament because it would create a third chamber. A nonsensical suggestion if ever I have heard one.

Liberals tend to pull up the shutters when equality for others is proposed.

In 2008 he opposed the national apology to members of the Stolen Generations, but after becoming Leader of his party, “mistake.”

Of course, changes in the constitution have an abysmal record without the full support of both major parties. In the past, Dutton has shown a giant chip on his shoulder when it comes to people who, in some way, are different. Or at least perceived that way.

Amidst all this negativity from Peter Dutton, the Minister for Indigenous Australians, Linda Burney, has urged Dutton to be on the “right side of history” in supporting the voice.

My previous article: About “Boofhead”

PS: Trying to deflect blame for Australia’s energy crisis onto Labor shows all the intelligence of a reincarnated Tony Abbott.

 14,184 total views,  2 views today

1 For a long time now, l have been promoting the idea that only Labor has the ideology and the know-how to manage the changes necessary to restore our democratic processes and implement massive change.

“The secret of change is to focus all your energy on not fighting the old, but on building the future” (Usually attributed to Socrates, but this is not true).

It wasn’t a difficult decision to reach. The LNP had proven themselves incapable. The Greens would never have the numbers, although they might have a big say in the Senate, and the independents might find themselves as an idea’s forum without the balance of power.

I said if you want change, change the government, and fortunately that is what happened, and is precisely what is happening now. I also said that when Tony Abbott became Opposition Leader, he would wreck our democracy if given the opportunity. Guess what happened.

In November of 2013, I wrote my first piece for The AIMN titled An Abbott in the Lodge – Never, in which I commented that:

“On a daily basis the negativity of Abbott spreads like rust through the community. He seeks to confuse with the most outlandish statements. Hardly a day passes without referring to Prime minister Julia Gillard as a liar while at the same time telling the most outrageous ones himself. And with a straight face I might add.”

It got far worse than that, and it never changed in the years following.

2 As illustrated by its actions post-election, the Albanese Government is hell-bent on righting wrongs and implementing policy. Thus far, their attack on the issues has been impressive. They have kicked goals in foreign affairs, wages, health and human rights to name a few. They have inherited more problems than first identified but are in an attacking mood.

3 NDIS Minister Bill Shorten is in a fighting mood, vowing to consider the scheme’s more comprehensive economic benefits when assessing the scheme’s sustainability.

4 Work has begun on legislation for a new fully independent corruption commission. But patience is required because it won’t be effective until June next year.

5 Last Friday, the Government held their first National Cabinet meeting, and I’m sure there wasn’t a lack of things to discuss. A possible recession might top the agenda. Health was a priority, followed by the lack of skilled workers. If I could have added a point, it would have been to stop subsidies for fossil fuels and put the savings toward aged care.

6 Ostensibly, in the period after the downfall of the Morrison Government, one thing stands out like the proverbial: That being the disclosure of just how inept this Government was. The prime example has been the lack of an energy policy and any belief in climate change. The Federal Government has now provided the market with the certainty they have wanted for a decade.

It will take time to resolve the energy problems. Because of a stream of bad policy decisions, the previous Government has left our energy system almost unable to meet the demands.

However, we are now committed to a more ambitious emissions reduction target. There may be mountains yet to climb, but there is also a desire to reach the summit.

As Anthony Albanese has pointed out:

“Scott Morrison went to the Glasgow conference last year and gave an empty speech to an empty room with no changed position. We saw a pamphlet released by a former government rather than a policy framework, and we continued to see arguments even during the election campaign about the science of climate change, let alone the need to act.”

7 The writers of political history should record in the archives just how abysmal our governance was in this Luddite decade. And they should do so in a way that compels the reader to absorb just how near to disaster we ventured.

8 The Federal Government has now provided the market with the certainty they have wanted for a decade.

9 Still, not a month into its incumbency, Albanese Government is finding out the hard truth of the problems it finds itself surrounded by; interest rates will rise, unemployment, now 3.9%, will increase as soon as immigration recommences.

10 In yet another example of this Government’s progressive nature, they showed a willingness to listen.

The first act of the previous Government was to abolish the Climate Commission. One of the first acts of this Government was to meet with Emergency Leaders for Climate Action (ELCA):

“Led by Climate Councillor and former Commissioner of Fire & Rescue NSW, Greg Mullins, Emergency Leaders for Climate Action (ELCA) has cut through the political noise and firmly articulated that worsening extreme weather is being aggravated by climate change, driven by burning fossil fuels.”

11 How refreshing it has been to hear Albanese and others talking about our problems without the constant interference of politics interrupting the discussion. Policy problems and how to fix them is now the new politic. There is no time for constantly trying to score political points by criticising each other.

Now that the election has concluded, it is hoped that our politics has learned a lesson. The conservative far-right has tried its hate for hate’s sake style of political confrontation. It took the electorate a decade to wake up to its dangerous consequences; then, they were told where to go. People lose faith in the process when politics gets in the way of solutions.

Weaponised adversarial politics has ended, and there has been a notable dialling down of political hostility.

Albanese often uses the phrase “people have conflict fatigue“. This decade of weaponised politics by the right has so degraded trust in public life that politicians have spent little time addressing the things that improve the lives of voters.

Only Labor can implement the much-needed change we need. As the old saying goes: “That is a no-brainer.”

My previous article: About “Boofhead”

 5,878 total views,  4 views today

1) I am somewhat surprised at the lack of remorse from the outgoing Government. It’s as if this terrible loss came as a surprise to them. Better to own up, apologise and set about renewal.

There has always been a degree of bloodletting from the defeated party in the past. This time, I cannot recall any comments that might have the sting of guilt or blame about them.

There have been no repercussions, no scapegoating. Even the former Prime Minister has escaped the wrath of colleagues even though the fault for this most grievous loss sits squarely on his shoulders. As a fundamentalist Christian, he would, in all probability, put his defeat down to God’s will.

When a loss of such proportion demoralises a party, those who have lost their seats typically seek retribution or use words calculated to damage those responsible. There has been none of that.

Maybe I have been spooked by the last decade and never want to see a repeat of it. Whatever it is, it’s unsettling.

Nowhere can l find the word sorry for nine years of Luddite philosophy. Perhaps it’s just a matter of waiting for the invasive weeds to die off and for the political history of the time to write itself.

After a couple of weeks into a new Government, the Dutton Opposition is claiming that everything is Labor’s fault. However, the new Opposition leader already displays an intention of “business as usual,” or put another way; he shows every sign of just being who he is. Not the changed man he promised to be. Perhaps there will be a flood of books in the not-too-distant future.

Maybe they are telling us they will take a long time to get over the loss, or perhaps everyone has gone quiet because they have the letters ICAC ringing in their ears.

In any case, the sooner they come to the party of enlightened politics, the sooner we can get on with righting all those wrongs of the past decade.

I found three examples of this new enlightenment this past week while perusing the pages of respected publications. The Murdoch’s still seem to be in mourning. And yes, everything is Labor’s fault.

2) How refreshing it was to witness Chris Bowen methodically but quickly (within 14 days of being elected) bring the states and territories together to agree on devising an energy policy that everyone agrees on and will benefit all. Yes, we are on the cusp of change. It may not happen in a day, a month or a year. Still, we are witnessing the genesis of a new political evolution, refreshing honesty, transparency and the acceptance of new ideas. It was favourably reported on SBS that:

“Energy Minister Chris Bowen chaired a roundtable with his state and territory counterparts on Wednesday, where 11 action points were unanimously agreed to.

No silver bullet, no magic answers, but material steps forward in a very positive fashion…” he [Bowen] told reporters following the meeting.

The meeting also agreed to devise a national transition plan for the energy market ahead of the next meeting in July.

Noting the urgency, Mr Bowen later told a press conference that:

“The reason why we are in this crisis today is because there hasn’t been enough planning about the changes that are necessary…”

After a decade of monumental stuff ups and a three-ring circus mentality from the former Government, we are finally getting some action.

3) Another example of correcting wrongs from the past is that work has commenced on an anti-corruption bill. There’s still a lot of work to be done, but new Attorney General Mark Dreyfus isn’t wasting any time setting up Australia’s first Anti-Corruption Commission, and we now know that:

• It will have retrospective powers and be able to conduct public hearings.
• Labor will consult with the independent MPs on its design.
• Dreyfus hopes it will be up and running by the middle of next year.

2023 might sound a little distant, but a lot of consultation needs to occur because they must get it right. It will be based on the independent member Helen Haines’s draft legislation.

4) In contrast to the Prime Minister, Peter Dutton has been saying silly things like his Shadow Ministry has an enormous depth of talent when everyone knows it’s as shallow as a toddler’s wading pool. In addition, a piece in The ABC (and elsewhere) about submarines suggested that Dutton contravened elementary rules of foreign affairs.

It is recklessly irresponsible for Boofhead to reveal secret plans to buy two US nuclear subs early. Like the French, the Americans will know they cannot trust the Liberals with anything. https://t.co/Rkb0Qmber2

— Mike Carlton (@MikeCarlton01) June 9, 2022

This quote from Peta Credlin, as reported in Crikey (firewalled) is interesting as well as ridiculous:

“Dutton has got to do better than this. In the end, what are we? One cohesive nation or a collection of tribes, ethnicities and genders all nursing our grievances and looking for the next chance to take offence? So far, the new ­opposition leader is saying that he has an ‘open mind’ on the Indigenous Voice while asking the Government for more detail.”

While announcing the total cost to Australia for the blundered subs contract ($3.4 billion), Albanese further contrasted the now apparent difference in style. Dutton is about as boring as his appearance, while Albanese is already making a difference, as are his ministers.

5) So good to see that the Tamil family have returned to Biloela. A little bit of kindness goes a long way.

My previous article: Why is Scott Morrison remaining in the Parliament?

 7,406 total views,  2 views today