An Open Letter to Peter van Onselen
Dear Peter
On Monday you asked this question on Twitter and seemed quite flabbergasted about the situation, so I thought I’d do you the favour of writing to you with some answers so you don’t do what you threaten and completely give up. Because we need you!
‘How in the name of God is it sustainable that half the working population don’t pay any income tax… I completely give up.’
Firstly, as you were told in response to this tweet, in fact the figure isn’t half, but more like a third, outlined by Greg Jericho on Thursday. So why don’t a third of the working population pay any income tax? If you think hard enough about this question, the answer might come to you but I’ll just tell you to save you the mental energy: it’s because a third of our working population don’t earn very much money.
In your career, I’m going to assume you’ve never earned so little that your annual income was below the tax-free threshold, except maybe when you were a teenager or perhaps a university student. At this point, I just want to clarify that you’re upset about the people who don’t pay income tax because they earn little, and not the millionaires who pay no income tax? Am I right? You’re worried about the people like Duncan Storrar who don’t pay income tax, but as Duncan cleverly pointed out, do pay GST and petrol tax, which has a much larger impact on his overall income because this tax is such a large chunk of his income since he earns so little? Glad we cleared that up.
If you read the comments on Jericho’s article, you might think people are upset with you, but I think they all misunderstood. Really, you should be applauded for being so concerned about the sustainability of this situation, because you’re right! It’s not sustainable to have such a large portion of the population earning so little and the government really should do something to fix this problem! I can see now you’re campaigning to raise the minimum wage, and you’re saying we most definitely should not be paying young people $4 an hour as that’s just going to entrench them in a cycle of poverty of which they may never get out. You’re also obviously saying that workers deserve a greater share of profits, since they’re the ones doing the work, instead of all the spoils going to the shareholders and over-paid executives which is entrenching wealth inequality. I agree Peter! Good on you. Good on you for making this point and don’t you ever give up making it.
You should, Peter, however, be very careful to make yourself more clear in your standing up for the little guys, because it’s understandable that your concern was taken out of context. This context is the world of your right-wing-buddies (where you are apparently a moderate?!?) who are busy using stats like you’ve used to argue that half the population, who pay income tax, are supporting the other half of the population who don’t pay income tax. This rhetoric leads to the narrative of the haves supporting the have nots, the lifters supporting the leaners, the hard-workers supporting the bludgers.
Don’t get me wrong, we’re used to being outright told by the likes of you and your political bed-fellows that the unemployed are a drain on the up-standing-tax-paying members of society, but it’s coming as quite a shock, I must admit, that the ‘drain’ narrative is now being applied to poor workers as well. It doesn’t make much sense to me that people who go to work and earn very little for that work should somehow be framed as the problem in our society. Apart from the fact that this vilification ignores the valuable contribution many low-income workers make to our society, contribution which you, no doubt, place no value on, but for which the country wouldn’t survive without such as looking after people too young, old or sick to look after themselves, or volunteering in their local community. Two year olds are too young to go to work, you are no doubt disappointed to hear, and they’re not very good at looking after themselves either. You were two years old once Peter, and I’m sure you weren’t left to fend for yourself.
But I digress. Apart from this un-paid and under-appreciated contribution, which by the way is mostly made by women, as any credible economists will tell you, the economy is 100% reliant on its consumer base, which is made up of both people who do pay income tax and people who don’t. Low and middle-income workers have to eat, have to feed their families, have to buy clothes, petrol, pay rent or mortgages, have to exist somehow and existence costs money. This is the very same money, out of the pockets of the poor, out of the wallets of the minimum wage earners, which flows into cash registers, into the economy, into the tax system, and eventually a chunk of that money flows into your wallet, into your pocket, into your privileged world where you can’t even imagine not being able to afford to go out to dinner with friends, to own your own home, to buy a car, to wear expensive suits, to take your children to the movies, to have an iPhone, and probably an iPad where you send snarky tweets, where you voice your outrage at the unsustainability of a system stacked against low-income earners. I could also note that none of the spending of these people, who have so little that they spend everything they earn, none of this spending leaks out of the economy into unproductive activities like speculation on the stock-market and tax-avoidance in Panama. Just saying.
You should more careful about what you say Peter, and careful what you wish for. I agree that it’s completely unsustainable to have so many people in society earning so little and the rich taking all the spoils and the investment properties for themselves. Wealth inequality is bad for all of us. I look forward to you using your television show to campaign about this issue in the future.
In solidarity comrade.
Victoria Rollison
97 comments
Login here Register here-
Michael Coll -
Jennifer Meyer-Smith -
David -
Garth -
Jack Russell -
jimhaz -
MichaelW -
Anomander -
Adrianne Haddow -
brickbob -
Andreas Bimba -
Conrad -
Royce Arriso -
MichaelW -
JJ -
Matthew Oborne -
Don A Kelly -
Jennifer Meyer-Smith -
totaram -
Steve Laing -
Jennifer Meyer-Smith -
David -
David -
Michael Taylor -
Jamie -
Gangey1959 -
John Massam -
Nick Brownell -
Brad Adams -
Jennifer Meyer-Smith -
Bob Hunter -
LT -
Athena -
totaram -
Charles Witner -
Jennifer Meyer-Smith -
cornlegend -
Jennifer Meyer-Smith -
cornlegend -
Jennifer Meyer-Smith -
Backyard Bob -
Jennifer Meyer-Smith -
cornlegend -
Backyard Bob -
Jennifer Meyer-Smith -
Jennifer Meyer-Smith -
Jennifer Meyer-Smith -
cornlegend -
Jennifer Meyer-Smith -
Backyard Bob -
cornlegend -
Jennifer Meyer-Smith -
Jennifer Meyer-Smith -
cornlegend -
Jennifer Meyer-Smith -
Athena -
cornlegend -
cornlegend -
Backyard Bob -
Jennifer Meyer-Smith -
cornlegend -
cornlegend -
cornlegend -
Backyard Bob -
cornlegend -
Jennifer Meyer-Smith -
Jennifer Meyer-Smith -
cornlegend -
Kaye Lee -
cornlegend -
Jennifer Meyer-Smith -
Kaye Lee -
cornlegend -
cornlegend -
Athena -
Athena -
Athena -
Kaye Lee -
Athena -
paul walter -
Kaye Lee -
Jennifer Meyer-Smith -
cornlegend -
Kaye Lee -
cornlegend -
Kaye Lee -
cornlegend -
Athena -
Jennifer Meyer-Smith -
Jennifer Meyer-Smith -
Jennifer Meyer-Smith -
cornlegend -
helvityni -
Jennifer Meyer-Smith -
cornlegend -
Jennifer Meyer-Smith -
Hate biased journalists
Return to home pageThis is the best article on this issue I have read and you nail it perfectly. Inequality is the greatest threat to our society and the P Van Onselens of this world with their university educations are complete morons when it comes to this economy. Just sayin, maybe a day in the shoes of Duncan or one of his fellow travellers might change Peter’s point of view. Privileged Prat that he is.
Well said, Victoria.
Peter should consider himself fortunate to have a well paid job, so that he is in the position to pay an appropriate level of tax. He should also consider himself fortunate that our society provides all the publicly funded infrastructures and services that have allowed him to reach his comfortable position.
Peter doesn’t know it yet but he’ll have more to sook about soon when the current neo-liberalist system is overturned by Progressive Socio-Economic Reforms that no longer favour him and his elitist mates, but all of us.
Brilliant Victoria just brilliant. It is also very clever of you to explain yourself in every day language so as not to confuse poor Pete anymore than the dear soul is already.
It must be very taxing on his ability to understand who pays what and why, with all those hours spent in a tv studio under those darned hot blinding lights.
Then of course rushing home to write his Australian column for his Granpa Rupe, must keep in with the dear old *%#+ woops boy. Oh nearly forgot, adding to young Peters mind thrashing turmoil is the need as a part time lecturer at UWA, to prepare his ‘sermons’ to be delivered to the up and coming students.of that venerable Institution. I am surprised he is able to keep up with how much tax to pay himself…must keep that hungry wolf from the door dont ya know!!
Ah testing times indeed for one so busy, no wonder the paying of Australia’s Income Taxes, by who and why completely escaped his wise counsel.. He should be now somewhat wiser
The hide and hypocrisy of these newscorp columnists snarking about low income people not paying tax when Newscorp paid no tax in Australia in the recently released figures. How in the name of god is it sustainable for 600 of our country’s biggest companies to pay no tax…. I completely give up!
Thanks Victoria. This should be required reading in more places than AIM.
This utter prat’s smug superiority blinds him to the fact that he’s also on the menu for the ravening cannibals at the top.
Even if we went back to the 50’s it wouldn’t be much different. Back then half the population was more or less excluded from work.
Apparently 81% of federal and state revenue comes from PAYE employees and the GST.
So I guess the other 19% comes from Multi nationals (maybe?) who take billions of dollars overseas every year.
Democracy in action. Lord spare me..
That’s the thing about right-wingers. They can never acknowledge they may not be right, and if proven wrong, they always have to go on the attack, as is perferctly evidenced by the media onslaught against Duncan Storrar for daring to challenge them.
Unfortunately, their control over the media is so comprehensive, they are able to sway the opinions of so many ignorant dolts who continue to vote for them, even though it has been proven – time and time again that doing so is against their best interest.
Deafening applause and heartfelt cheers aimed at you, Victoria.
Well said.
Let’s hope Peter is not really the selfish, entitled, inexperienced little snot he appears to be.
And to think our heard-earned taxes paid for the education of this prince.
Wonderful writing Victoria,i just got home from work and yours was the first thing i read and it made a pretty bad day a lot better for me.
Really good article Victoria. On a different tangent is Peter van Onselen related to Leith van Onselen of Macrobusiness who has helped the progressive side of politics a lot with his excellent economics research??
Today The Australian turned on the person who challenged the Minister. He is getting dumped on in The Australian, but my Comment in its column is thus:
What a shocking few days for our selfish LNP. Kelly O’Dwyer gets flummoxed when confronted by a disadvantaged person, and doesn’t want to come out and say directly that the selfish LNP really doesn’t care all that much about people like him, when all their ‘Plans’ are fixated on how to send more money to the wealthy, and to their interests (private schools, their ballet pursuits, and their rapacious negative gearing and tax avoiding rorts).
Then the next day Malcontent gets addressed by a mother very concerned about the wealth-gap she faces in trying to educate her children. All Malcontent can do is mouth pious platitudes about how she has a good spirit: “”They are going to be great,” he said. “I can feel what’s in your heart” – for blithering sake! What sort of pathetic answer is that? The man is heartless, selfish and a fool. No wonder he was so desperate to get her unscripted interaction away from the media.
And now The Australian turns on Duncan Storrar – in a clear case of “playing the man, not the argument”. Malcontent keeps channeling the “floating boats” argument, but what a selfish swindle that is. George W. Bush in 2003 passed his “Jobs and Growth … Act” which cut taxes for the rich. The effects were disastrous: US national debt grew from $5 trillion (2001) to $13 trillion (2010). U.S. federal revenue went from 20% to 14% of GDP, while unemployment doubled from 4% to 8%
This 2016 Election is about the LNP trying to game the electorate and my fervent wish is that they get chucked out onto their comfortable rubbish heap so they cannot do any more damage to our society and to our lovely Earth.
How in the name of God is it possible that someone of Van Oselen’s standing is unaware that taxes are no longer the form of revenue they were decades ago?
Taxes pay for nothing.
More to the point, taxes support nobody.
How on the name of God is it sustainable that companies (including News corp) don’t pay any tax?
During 2013-2014 Three hundred companies with a turnover between $100,436,000 and $14,904,300,000 PAID NO TAX.
I give up..
I love you Victoria!
Tell him if you do get a chance that we are sick of being trickled on.
Royce……Like Meatloaf said in his song…”you took the words right out of my mouth”. I always thought that Peter Van Onselen was a well educated economist. All he has done is display his complete lack of understanding of the Modern Monetary System.Much of Onselen’s thinking would apply if we were living back in the 1950’s when our currency was convertible into gold, what was known as the “Gold Standard” and was abandoned in 1971. The Australia government has been issuing its own flexible fiat currency since 1971. Onselen’s is only fuelling Neoliberal groupthink which has also permeated into the public debate. Fiat currency has two defining characteristics: a)Non – convertibility and b) Flexible Exchange Rates. People need to recognise this major shift in history before you can understand why the economic policy ideas that prevailed in the previous monetary system (based on convertibility) are no longer applicable. You cannot assume that the logic that applied in the fixed exchange rate – convertibility days translate over into the fiat currency era. The fact is that it doesn’t. Our government is a monetary sovereign, it spends currency into existence and taxpayers use that currency to pay their obligations. The analogy neoliberals draw between household budgets and government budgets is false. Households use the currency and must finance their spending. The government issues the currency and must first spend before it can tax. They also talk about bringing the budget to surplus. All this does is expose those that are responsible for controlling the National finances to their collective lack of understanding of the National Accounts Income–Expenditure model in Macroeconomics.
A government that issues its own money can never run out of money. So when they talk about ‘the government must live within its means’, when a government issues its own currency, the means that it has are the real resources that it can buy with that currency, including all of the available labour that doesn’t have a job. We are constantly told that if government ran fiscal deficits there’ll be inflation. One of the myths because if the government was only running deficits to fill the spending gap created by the non government sector tending to save, then businesses and firms are going to want to sell things rather than put up prices.
Another myth: Fiscal deficits impose crippling debt on our grandchildren. The response to that is that the worst thing you can do for your kids and grandchildren is to leave them unemployed from teenage to adult, to start to wreck the standards of education and health systems, to degrade the quality and quantity of public transport system. That’s the burden you leave for your grandchildren.
What deficits can do if they are properly targeted is build first class education and health systems, first class public transport systems and ensure young children who stay at school, or get trades, or go to university, have jobs to go to and a future to look forward to.
Thanks Don A. Kelly,
we need Labor and the Greens to promote MMT and to explain it plainly to ordinary people over and over again over the next 6+ weeks, so the benefits of our sovereign currency for MAKING diverse employment opportunities immediately for ALL demographics, are crystal clear.
That will do Australia a great service. It will also resoundingly defeat the LNP trickle down neo-liberals. The other bonus will be that it will bring Labor and the Greens together in the Alliance that will protect Australians and the environment.
Don A Kelly: I salute you. Another way to put it for those who are completely brainwashed by the neo-liberals: Tax, borrow and invest – all companies and corporations do it. Why shouldn’t the Federal govt.?
However, you will find it tough going to get anyone to understand what you are saying. Sometimes you have to go in stages as I suggested above. Or you can try to get them to understand the sectoral balances so that govt. deficits allow the private sector to save. So hard…Please do soldier on.
Jen M-S: if you can explain it in six weeks I’ll be forever in your debt.
Professor van Onselen was apparently an adviser to Tony Abbott when he was Minister for Workplace relations. He seems remarkably ignorant for someone who is apparently a Professor and political adviser. I guess his professorship was entirely on merit…
totaram,
people can be persuaded by the most positive elements broken down in dot pointed summary first, so it wets their appetites.
Then, if they require more information to explain why it would work, they can go to a more detailed explanation.
It’s important not to bog them down with too much information because it becomes overwhelming. Important also to expel the myth of the comparison with macro economics with household budgets like Don did above.
I’m speaking from the viewpoint of a novice just getting my head around it with the first tentative steps of thinking I’m beginning to understand.
Conrad..top comment agree with all you say
Royce…Says a helluva lot about PVO, none of it good
I saw a tweet from PVO a couple of months ago where he said that the Coalition deserve to win the next election. When questioned why, he responded that new government deserves a second term. Did he not take into account how horrible they’ve been? What a great political commentator he must be if he comes up with such ludicrous claims.
Dear Peter. If you give up, what are you going to do? Or, is it better to keep striving like so many have to?
Brilliant, Victoria.
@ PvO. I’ve read Victoria’s article twice, and all of the responses, with which I heartily agree, several times too, and all that I can come up with is Yes. Please.
Give up.
Just walk under a bus, you brainless dickhead, and give the rest of us a break.
The 2014 Federal Budget was bad and mad. So were the 2015 and 2016 Budgets. Money is created by global bankers (yes, the big 4 Oz banks aren’t 100% Oz) at virtually no cost, especially these days with computerised transactions. The cure is for governments to create money – but they are about as untrustworthy as the banks.
But, if real idealists got into parliaments, they would have to set up statistics of production levels, PLUS monitoring the POSSIBLE production levels. Then the incomes of the super rich would have to be lessened by some means or other, and the two streams of money distributed to the people by price discounts and citizens’ dividends.
Put all sitting members last, unless s/he is outstandingly good on working to save the 11 per cent unemployed and underemployed.
Thanks Victoria. Just terrific…
It’s so easy to pick at little things like this instead of addressing the fact that the ‘system’ is broken. 5 million people on some sort of welfare with around 11 million working, and probably half of those ‘under employed’ as part time, casual and contract. But who started this false “youth on $4 an hour” talk? And why did nobody else check it? Making silly statements only gives the right wing more ammunition when they come to pick holes in this. Fight the work for the dole and internships on the basis that they have been tried before in many countries and have never proved to provide permanent employment for people. Training people for jobs that don’t exist. Oh and on the other matter. Newstart = $527 a fortnight for a single. The ‘internship’ program adds an additional $200 for working a maximum of 20 hours a week. Now divide $727 by 40 hours and tell me how you arrive at $4 an hour. For it to be $4 an hour they would need to work 90 hours a WEEK. Can’t believe nobody else was able to work that out …….
Well said John Massam,
especially your last line.
Yes, the current government deserve another term. It will take all of another term to clean up the mess left by the other mob. The country is headed to 3rd world status with thousands of so called “asylum seekers” heading over, while the union movement will make sure that jobs in their thousands will go off shore with the through the roof wage claims. Not every business (in fact very few) have share holders & CEO’s on big bonuses & its the small & medium employers who will bare the brunt of Shortens “run the country like a union” statement of 2 weeks ago.
Well written truth Victoria
PVO had better hope that Gina Rinehart doesn’t get her wish for all Australians to work for $2 per day. No one will be paying any income tax then.
Bob Hunter: You just didn’t read the article did you? Nice attempt at trolling. Enjoy!
We have no chance of fixing an ‘issue’ if we are not looking at it correctly. The government does not tax to raise revenue. There is no revenue constraint and how much the government spends is a policy/ideological issue.
Yes, Bob Hunter sounds a wee bit desperate in the knowledge that Malcolm Muck and his LNP Degenerates are about to lose government to the Labor/Greens Alliance come 2 July.
There will be great celebrations all round.
Jennifer Meyer-Smith
“Labor/Greens Alliance come 2 July”
Not happening !
Check Shoerten, Albanese Plibersek, Wong etcs comments More likely a Green’/LNP deal if it’s close
cornlegend,
stop sounding Sooooo desperate to allay the strong possibility that Labor will still succumb to the ever abiding desire for self-preservation by forming the Alliance with the Greens.
Guess what too? I’m helping Labor AND I’m helping the Greens in our upcoming election. They both know I want the Alliance. So no secrets.
You might want to tell your mate Billy Shorten and her ladyship Tania Plibersek to come down to Gippsland and meet with the party faithful in the fast growing and diverse electorates of McMillan and Latrobe. Their support will be immensely appreciated by the true party faithful.
Jennifer Meyer-Smith
Absolutely no desperation with me 😀
Been through too many elections to let them bother me, though I can hope .
I am off on a road trip to do some electioneering {delayed, as grand daughter suffered appendicitis and got the chop}
Chris Buckingham and Simon Curtis are 2 great candidates and I’m sure they will get lots of support from their ALP colleagues
although Chris has the job ahead
I can tell you one thing though, even with todays polls ALP 52.5 LNP 47.5 , individual seat polling shows Labor not picking up the swings across the board and in the necessary seats .
If you feel inclined, volunteer for the next round of #gameofphones
Second shift underway at @UnionsACT Secretary .@alexanderwhite hitting the phones.
Australian Unions,
#gameofphones
Australian Unions Verified account @unionsaustralia May 14
Today our army of dedicated volunteers got over 2000 other union members to commit to a #BetterFuture #gameofphones
Young Labor
Vic Trades Hall @VicUnions May 14 Melbourne, Victoria
Few feelings better than persuading voters to stand for education, health & jobs by putting Libs last #gameofphones
cornlegend,
I will consider that possibility.
Bottom line is LNP Degenerates need to be defeated by a reputable government that includes compassion to vulnerable as its motto.
I really think I’ve reached the point where I need a trigger warning for the word Alliance. I’m not kidding.
ByB,
is that the best you have to offer?
Now’s the time to bring Labor and the Greens together. If you don’t promote that, then you show yourself to be a charlatan despite your eloquent speeches that pull certain some into your net of disruption.
Jennifer Meyer-Smith
Now, to be realistic, what benefit would it be for the ALP to enter some ‘Alliance” with the Greens,, other than to give the Greens some feeling of importance?
The Greens control 0.67% of the seats in the H.O.R {one Seat out of 150}
ALP would be better to negotiate with Independents if in minority Government and let the Greens take their chances and vote on issues accordingly.
There is a small likelihood LNP could control the Senate, so Minority Government would be pretty hellish if that were the case
JMS,
ByB,
is that the best you have to offer?
It’s certainly the kindest I have to offer. Would you like me to offer a psychoanalysis of how you’ve become neurotically engaged with the idea? How some of us have had to watch that process unfold, with you offering no substance whatever when asked to do so with respect to said idea, and how you’ve totally ignored every effort to educate you as to why the concept is nonsense with regard to the Labor Party? I could do that, but what would be the point?
Frankly, I’m heartily sick of your moral posturing about a notion that has no legs, no substance and no meaning beyond verbal fairy floss. One is a “charlatan” and a “disruptor” for not falling for a phantasmagorical delusion? Ok, I’ll cop to that, then. I’m a charlatan and whatever other pejoratives you want to throw at people who don’t buy into your particular fantasy.
The degree of your defensiveness to criticism or dismissal of the “idea” is indicative of your harmful attachment to it. It’s becoming religious in its nature. Criticising the “Alliance” is like criticising the Bible – you’re automatically a bad person if you do it.
I mean, enough. Step back. Think about what this concept actually entails and articulate it. Again, you’re like some religious devotee saying, “How can you not get what God is? I do!” without them ever saying what God actually is.
Leftist/progressive parties will swap preferences as they see fit. In government they will vote as they see fit, usually along ideological lines. A formal “alliance” is an utterly redundant idea. In the event of a “hung” parliament progressives will support Labor to form a minority government. No formal alliance beyond what is necessary for the practical continuance of that government will be necessary.
If you think differently, please spell out the practical ways in which an “alliance” – whatever that actually is – will be beneficial. In doing so, remember one thing that has been pointed out to you before – there is no “progressive” idea that doesn’t exist and has been debated in the halls of the political pantheon that is the Labor Party. In other words, don’t tell me that any minor party can bring policy ideas to the Labor table that it already hasn’t heard and examined.
ByB,
your psychoanalysis failed to depict my determination to keep the significance of the Alliance in the public discussion. Did you note the words I used: determination and public discussion. Impose any other psychoanalytical words as you like on that simple admission. What motivates you and let me psychoanalyse you.
My support of the Labor and Greens amongst numerous other leftist/progressive parties and candidates is to ensure immediate voter impact in this election which will be essential to defeat the LNP disaster. But it doesn’t stop there.
Once the terms of agreement are negotiated by the various party participants, they work together with their assorted progressive policy frameworks so their combined might can prioritise implementation of each policy for the common good. This way the micro parties get their voices heard by smart negotiations, the Greens’ commendable support of vulnerable people on welfare and in detention centres AND the environment are empowered, and Labor gets much needed support in remodelling itself as the party of the people again and not hostage to the conservative Right.
Now that I’ve attempted – yet again – to tell you what my motivations are, I again request an explanation from you of what your political motivations are.
PS If you’re bored or frustrated by what I write, I suggest you take a bex and overlook my comments. I’m sure we’ll both survive the experience.
cornlegend,
I haven’t got access to the stats as no doubt you have but I happen to know Labor has lost many good voters with consciences. Those good people like yourself who remain, should be encouraging them back at least into such an Alliance because the spirit and the motivations of compassionate/humane and clean energy-only policies are lacking in Labor and that is very bad for Australia.
cornlegend,
I would also appreciate your support in getting Billy Shorten and Lady Plibersek to come down to Morwell to speak with the community and your party faithful from the electorates of McMillan, Latrobe and surrounds. These electorates need Labor’s attention and support.
Snotty Morrisscum was in Latrobe the other day. Does Labor continue to concede defeat to the LNP because it thinks it is just a bunch of farmers? NO it ain’t.
West Gippsland is (unfortunately) fast becoming outer suburbs of Melbourne. Latrobe Valley is a boom waiting to happen especially as we transform from dirty coal to clean energy. Labor needs to open its eyes and see beyond its NSW bias.
Jennifer,
Good news 4 Greens members have come back to the fold at the last ALP Branch meeting in my electorate
Good to see they realised the error of their ways 😀
By “Lady Plibersek ” I assume you mean Tanya?
She will be going non stop from now till the election
“Labor needs to open its eyes and see beyond its NSW bias.”
What?
Bill has done 25 Community forums in QLD,Tassie, W.A. and points in between
Albo was in W.A. yesterday, QLD last week and he too wiill pop up everywhere as will all other MPs
You still didn’t answer my question about Bill and Tanya visiting Morwell and Gippsland surrounds.
Good luck to the Greens who you think have come back into the fold. You might find they are mergers also. Any self-respecting political person would not want to associate with conservative neolibs, so I suggest they could be people who want to pull Labor left.
JMS,
PS If you’re bored or frustrated by what I write, I suggest you take a bex and overlook my comments. I’m sure we’ll both survive the experience.
I will not “overlook” your comments nor will I be silent about them. You are pushing a highly significant political idea/agenda. I believe, as it stands, it is a mostly empty notion and I don’t want naive people getting emotionally caught up in something the actual logistics of which remain nebulous and questionable.
Let me ask you this: if it is possible for all the minor “progressive” parties and “sane” independents to reach meaningful and workable political accord over a range of policy areas, why don’t they simply join together and create a fourth political party/force? A United Progressives Party. Why not? My view is that you’ll find that the answer to that question is the same as the answer to the question of why this “Alliance” concept cannot work.
Now that I’ve attempted – yet again – to tell you what my motivations are, I again request an explanation from you of what your political motivations are.
I know what your motivations are. I don’t care about them. They are not at issue. What is at issue is the practical reality, substance and potential for realisation of what is, at best, a kernel of a political idea (a paradigm changing one, btw). My apparent frustration with this isn’t just with you; it’s not personal. It’s just that whenever I read political waft it annoys the hell out of me because it contains so much emotional manipulation without any rational bedrock. When I read various Party policy statements it sounds like a mix of corporate aspirational agenda statements and stuff Derek Zoolander might say. In fact I can’t help but read half of it in a Derek Zoolander voice:
Derek Zoolander Party – Edumacation Policy
JMS – Once the terms of agreement are negotiated by the various party participants, they work together with their assorted progressive policy frameworks so their combined might can prioritise implementation of each policy for the common good.
See, I wasn’t able to read that other than in Zoolander voice. Sorry.
Oh, and Tim Jones is on the phone….something about negotiating with progressives not being as easy as it sounds ….
Jennifer Meyer-Smith
Bill and Tanya will visit where they think they can be of most benefit to other candidates so it could well be the Electorates you memtion.
Shorten has indicated he will try to visit the majority of Electorates .
Now I answere you question, will you answer mine .
What earthly benefit is an “Alliance” with the Greens when they represent 0.66% of the H.O.R [1 in 150}
It may well be the one they deal with {hopefully not !} is NXT
Where do I start?
Good to see ByB, you won’t stay silent on my comments. I invite robust debate. I wonder if you have such gusto with viewpoints coming out of the neoliberal camps of the LNP or the Right faction of Labor?
Your happy little comment about Tim Jones gives me some insight into you. Interesting that you would bring that comment in considering you allege to support a coming together of Labor and Progressive micro parties. I don’t hold much hope for Progress if you would make such a cynical observation.
I’m not anti any “United Progressives Party”: haven’t I been saying that over, over and over again. My central crime in YOUR eyes is that I dare to advocate for the Alliance to include the existing major parties of the Greens and Labor. I advocate the Alliance because let’s be REAL, we need immediate change with wiping the LNP off the map.
BUT that is not enough because a neoliberal Labor alone will be Disaster #2. Institutional change starting with purging the political system which Christian Marx is reflecting on in the other thread, is fundamentally and urgently needed.
cornlegend,
Labor needs the Greens because Labor lost its Conscience.
This is defined as follows:
1) the environment conscience hence the attack on the Great Barrier Reef and the air and the earth with Labor’s desperate hold on the coal industry;
2) vulnerable people on Welfare. Labor has kept its neoliberal back turned to people on Newstart and single mothers taken off extra family supports; and
3) vulnerable people in desperate need of asylum and suffering in detention.
Have I answered your question now?
NO,
The Greens would contribute 0.66% of the HOR so why should the Greens have more political sway then Wilkie 0.66%, Katter, 0.66%, Palmer 0.66 % McGowan 0.66%
As I said earlier , the Greens represent ! member in a Chamber of 150, so other than Labor giving them undue influence i some sort of coalition, where is the benefit to the ALP.
If you think ALP caucus and its MPs are going to sit and be lectured to by Bandt you are sadly mistaken
What you are saying is Labor needs Bandt is it?
There is some slim hope NXT could pick up 2 or 3 seats and that would make them the 3rd force in the HOR and relegate Adam back to the corner with the other 0.66 %ers
cornlegend,
you missed the key word: Conscience.
Those other pollies on 0.66% have various levels of credibility of course and some have appeal for the Alliance. The Greens have more diverse appeal than most of them and are likely to grow their 0.66% outside of strict electoral divisions.
If there is a hung parliament, those major parties who claim there is no way they’re negotiating with the Greens will have to negotiate with the Greens. It’s not rocket science. Abbott was’t going to negotiate with anyone else either. We all know how that turned out. So it seems rather ridiculous for people to keep insisting that there won’t be any deals.
Jennifer, 0.66% is hardly a conscience and Labor could well do without the Greens snipinng.
With Greens, conscience = promise anything with no worries of ever having to deliver
Athena
WHY,? If it is a hung Parliament, then the 0.66% could either support or oppose Legislation and the Minority Government could just negotiate with the Independents,Green, and probably NXT for support on specific Legislation
It would be messy but workable and if it waas a hung Parliament the GG would invite on side to form Government
At this stage it is not clear whether Di Natale would jump into an LNP/Greens alliance as he has indicated he might do.
Still, whether they wished to deal with LNP or LAbor they are still only one MP in a House of 150
Bill, Tanya, Albo, Vic, QLD and S.A.. Premiers and Tassie rank and file have all said no deals with Greens and they will be held to that
JMS,
And the dance continues …
Where do I start?
I believe popular wisdom would have it – at the beginning.
Good to see ByB, you won’t stay silent on my comments. I invite robust debate.
Excellent. It’s how ideas gain substance and form [tautology alert].
I wonder if you have such gusto with viewpoints coming out of the neoliberal camps of the LNP or the Right faction of Labor?
Ah, yes, robust debate.
Your happy little comment about Tim Jones gives me some insight into you. Interesting that you would bring that comment in considering you allege to support a coming together of Labor and Progressive micro parties. I don’t hold much hope for Progress if you would make such a cynical observation.
Cynical? It was nothing of the sort; it was entirely apropos. You think the fact that the Australian Progressives shit-canned their own progenitor is not relevant to a debate regarding the practicalities of negotiations among “progressives”? I beg to differ. I think it is, in fact, quite instructive and illuminating.
“you allege to support a coming together of Labor and Progressive micro parties.”
Um, I allege no such thing. I assert it as a natural and inevitable feature of political pragmatism and practice. People of similar minds will vote together on issues where the similarity of that mental concordance reaches blah blah blah. People who agree will vote together. I do not agree with any sort of formal alliance between Labor and anybody, not merely because it’s not possible from the Labor perspective – Constiutionally – but because I’ve yet to see any meaningful delineation of how it might benefit Labor over and above the aforementioned natural results of people agreeing on something.
I’m not anti any “United Progressives Party”:
I don’t care.
haven’t I been saying that over, over and over again.
I don’t care. I didn’t ask for your personal opinion on the merits of such a thing. I asked for your view on why it won’t/hasn’t happened. I suggested that the answer to that question speaks to the issue of whether an “alliance”, of the nature you propose, is a meaningful concept.
My central crime in YOUR eyes is that I dare to advocate for the Alliance to include the existing major parties of the Greens and Labor.
Again, I could care less about your daring-do. Dare all you want. I dare you. For me your “central” crime is that of not listening to anything said to you regarding the practical reality of any such “Alliance”. You just won’t listen. It’s not that you merely disagree, it’s that you want to pretend the things said to you don’t exist, which is why you carefully avoid them, for the most part. My pivotal point with regard to that is the enormous scope of policy diversity that ALREADY exists in Labor.
Indicative of that sensory rampart is what you said to Cornie, only part of which I’ll use to illustrate:
Labor needs the Greens because Labor lost its Conscience.
This is defined as follows:
3) vulnerable people in desperate need of asylum and suffering in detention.
Labor needs the Greens for that, eh? Really? You really want to make that argument, because, you know, only the Greens could possibly introduce humane and progressive asylum seeker policy ideas into the rubric of Labor views on the subject. Oh, wait….
There’s a Victorian, Qld etc version of this group. But yeah,Labor needs the Greens to introduce them to progressive ideas. Sigh.
I advocate the Alliance because let’s be REAL, we need immediate change with wiping the LNP off the map.
There we go with the aspirational crap again. I get it. We all get it. What I want to know is what aspect of this “Alliance” is going to help achieve that end. Specifically.
You want to risk losing centrist Labor votes to the LNP or conservative indies, or PUP, potentially by the thousands, by having Labor form a formal alliance with the Greens and single agenda micro parties, some of whom who have pretty whacky policy ideas? You want to risk that? You know you would most emphatically be risking it, right?
I’ll say this one more time, just so it’s clear: the Labor Party is NOT a progressive party. It’s far too diverse to be considered that. It has a strong progressive dimension, but it has many others. Being a unionist, for example, does not mean you’re a progressive. Anyone out there who thinks that is insane.
The Labor Party cannot even begin to contemplate a formal alliance with a rat-tag bunch of relative nobodies that will likely do them more political harm than good. I’m sorry, but that’s the pragmatic reality. That does not mean, of course, that Labor ought not be willing to publicly agree with progressive ideas expressed by other parties. But even then, caution has to be their constant companion.
If the various “progressive” parties and indies want to become a more meaningful political force in this country they have to do so on their own merits, however hard that may be. The Dems did it for a while (until they stuffed it up); the Greens continue to build upon their efforts. These micros and indies cannot expect to gain influence by being political remoras on the Labor Party shark. It can’t happen (in the formal sense being touted).
BUT that is not enough because a neoliberal Labor alone will be Disaster #2. Institutional change starting with purging the political system which Christian Marx is reflecting on in the other thread, is fundamentally and urgently needed.
Then the Greens and micros and progressives and “sane” indies should immediately join the Labor Party and bolster their progressive ranks and get the job done like that. Simplzzzz.
cornlegend,
Labor has lost its conscience. Or, was that NOT obvious to you.
Therefore, Labor needs the Greens because they have a Big Conscience and they promote Progress and Reforms.
Backyard Bob
After Di Natale declared he wouldn’t mind being a Health Minister in a Labor Government, Bill Shortens response was,
“Tell him to joint he Labor Party then “
Jennifer Meyer-Smith
you ducked the question again, how is Bandt going to do that
Jennifer,
Le’ts go back to square one and I hope you will answer that
You do realise Adam Bandt is the ONLY Green at present who could help either Party if it was minority Government?
Cornie,
After Di Natale declared he wouldn’t mind being a Health Minister in a Labor Government, Bill Shortens response was, “Tell him to joint he Labor Party then “
Which is the response Di Natale deserved.
While I am, as I’ve noted many times, a somewhat disenchanted Labor voter, based on the slide into comparative conservatism of the Party in recent decades, I nevertheless tire of the vanity of so-called “progressives” telling Labor that they need said progressives to “save” them from themselves. They have no capacity to do any such thing. They have nothing to offer Labor that Labor doesn’t internally already offer itself.
I do agree Labor needs an intervention of sorts, but that must come, indeed can only come, from within its own ranks, whatever the nature of the political force driving it (external or internal).
BYB,
agree, and I have had enough of this foray
ByB,
well that was an eye opener! I’ve never seen you come out so stridently in support of Labor.
I acknowledge my weaknesses in not knowing all the electoral practicalities. Those practicalities may be impediments to a clear step into a happy ever after Alliance but they don’t need to be insurmountable barriers.
I would not want the Greens, or the Progressive Micro Parties, or sane Independents to join the ranks of Labor because the same will happen to them that happened to Melissa Parke and Peter Garrett. Their fire gets fizzled by political pragmatics.
The best hope for Aussies to have a strong, diversely representative, compassionate, progressive and reformist Alternative Government is to keep them as separate entities from Labor but have them prepared to work together now with preferencing each other and later in a working Alliance.
Strange as it might seem, cornlegend,
I am trying to do my little bit to help Labor because I want Labor to be the Labor of its beginnings: the party of the people. It has always been better than the Liberals and the National Party and that’s why it’s important not to let it slip further down the slope of conservatism.
There is vibrant community engagement happening that is wanting institutional reforms and progess. Labor needs to allow this positive wave to cleanse itself because Labor has allowed itself to become conservative in its approaches to a wide spectrum of policy areas.
“There is vibrant community engagement happening that is wanting institutional reforms and progress. Labor needs to allow this positive wave to cleanse itself because Labor has allowed itself to become conservative in its approaches to a wide spectrum of policy areas.”
Jennifer, the LAbor Party is home to a broad spectrum of ideas and philosophies,and I have regularly had my battles within the Party.
The Party needs to appeal to a broad cross section of the community ranging from the Left, and centre of the community
Believe it or not, most out there could consider themselves to be centrist or moderates and unless the ALP can hold that ground them it is doomed.
That is not to say decent policies cannot come from those you conceive to be “right”
Gonski, NBN,NDIS, $100 increases to aged pensions, The Apology, a price on carbon and a whole raft of other policies came to fruition under what you deem “right”
If you take a hard look at the Greens they are full of platitudes but do not appeal to the voting public.
After 30 odd years of existence 91.4% of the voting public still will not accept them.
I’m quite happy to be a member of the ALP and work for change from within
I don’t agree with all their policies, bu do with the vast majority of them .
I can leave, but what would that achieve?
In my opinion, both the Greens and Labor are behaving stupidly. To suggest they would rather have another election than co-operate with the Greens is unbelievably childish on Labor’s part. For di Natalie to say “never say never” about a coalition with the Libs is deliberately inflammatory and an abrogation of Greens supporters’ wishes.
I just want to send them all to time out to think about things. You do not have to like the people you work with. You do not have to always agree with the people you work with. But to actively work against each other sends us back to the Rudd/Gillard division that cruelled progressive voters’ wishes last time.
I am sick to death of the lot of them and their petty squabbles!
And I get sick to death being told Labor should cooperate with the Greens and their demands, all for one vote.
Well said, Kaye Lee.
I rang Di Natale’s office in Melbourne and asked to have my message sent through to him that he needs to say in NO uncertain terms that the Greens will NOT be preferencing the LNP. I was clearly told that they are not.
cornlegend,
it is not one vote. It is the thousands of voters in the community and it is the potential thousands more Labor will win when they stop being obstinate.
JMS,
I have heard di Natalie say they wouldn’t preference the Libs too but I have also heard him say “never say never” about an alliance with the Libs to form government.
http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/never-say-never-skivvyswathed-richard-di-natale-open-to-coalition-with-the-liberal-party-20160308-gne4vu.html
cornie,
If Labor can’t or won’t co-operate with the representatives that the people elect then they don’t deserve to form government. This irrational hatred must end. I understand your reservations but anyone worth electing should be able to negotiate with whoever is elected just as Julia Gillard did. You are shooting yourself in the foot AGAIN!
Those with a strong allegiance to a party seem completely unable to understand what progressive voters want.
Kaye Lee
I have no opposition to the ALP working in alliance with some Independents and Micros, just over the Greens sense of entitlement
Windsor, Oakeshott etc were fine and I hope Windsor gets re elected .I also support some of the Micro parties and, along with campaigning for Labor over the next weeks, will be doing my bit for some of the aligned Micros/Independents from the Melbourne/Sydney tactics meetings.
“Those with a strong allegiance to a party seem completely unable to understand what progressive voters want.”
I’m more concerned about what the average voter wants and spend about 4-6 hours daily campaigning and doing just that .
Sometimes you can become blinded to real community issues and feelings if all you do is listen to so called”progressives”
“I have heard di Natalie say they wouldn’t preference the Libs too but I have also heard him say “never say never” about an alliance with the Libs to form government.”
Di Natale also clearly said that an alliance with the ALP is much more probable. On another occasion he said he couldn’t see an alliance with the Liberal Party within the next 10 years. Putting it in context, he’s leaving open the possibility that one of them might change their platform in a way that is palatable to the Greens and when they do, he’ll work with them.
“I have no opposition to the ALP working in alliance with some Independents and Micros, just over the Greens sense of entitlement”
Translation: Sense of entitlement = They disagree with my views or I don’t have any valid reasons for rejecting theirs.
“I’m more concerned about what the average voter wants and spend about 4-6 hours daily campaigning and doing just that .
Sometimes you can become blinded to real community issues and feelings if all you do is listen to so called”progressives” ”
So what does the average voter want?
I am sure that the Greens ideals and Labor ideals are much closer than the Libs and Greens. I am very disappointed with both parties.
The Greens have purposely targeted the seats of sitting Labor members who I admire. Why choose Albenese and Plibersek who have both fought in their own party for what the Greens want? They didn’t win the battle but at least they kept the argument live as have several backbenchers and Senators. It is up to the people to make the right side of the party know that we prefer humanity to political expedience. It was also SHY’s preferences that elected Bob Day.
Likewise, Labor stalwarts are people who never forgive and who find compromise antithetical. This is a view I cannot share. I disagree with lots the Greens have done just as I disagree with lots Labor have done.
I want Labor to win government and I want them to listen to us about their asylum seeker policy and their sycophantic eagerness to spend kazillions on what used to be called defence but which now is getting to look horribly like strike force capability. This “national security” crap needs to be put in perspective!
Isn’t the ALP targetting Bandt’s seat?
So, this is where this issue ended up?
As is often the case, the last post from Kaye Lee comes closest to expressing my sentiments.
” United we stand, divided we fall”, is the theme for today.
A minor quibble with the last sentence, though and it relates to what is required, given that so many people have different ideas on what constitutes adequate policy. I guess I have in mind, having just come from the Guardian the headlines have Turnbull again playing wedge with the topic:Labor is too harsh for the Greens, but Turnbull is braying about Labor being “soft” on refugees, presumably because non-rightist ALP folk are nauseated at current extremes and the sadism/irrationality elements, but unsure of what would satisfy the Greens and refugee advocates that would be spat by the rest of the public.
Here is a typically cautious take from Lenore Taylor: http://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2016/may/16/bill-shorten-labor-greens-australian-election-2016-analysis
Athena,
Adam Band is being targeted from all sides from what I see. Why are the two progressive parties putting unaligned progressive voters in this position?
KL,
maybe you could ask them yourself. It seems unfathomable to me too, as though they’d rather hurt each other than beat the LNP Degenerates.
This is where the people closest to those on the inside of both Labor and the Greens should take responsibility and stop the carnage that is going to help Malcolm Muck and his LNP parasites stay in government, if we are not careful.
ON Bandt, it was a former Labor seat.
KL,
As an individual you are entitled to hold whatever view you wish, however, as a party member I am entitled to put forward views within the Party as I see fit.
I do intend to bring a spokesperson up from Tassie and move in my branch, similar to the Tassie rank and file decisions
“RANK and file members of the Tasmanian Labor Party have said “no deal” to any future power-sharing agreements.
The issue of minority government was put to the party’s state conference yesterday and members voted in favour of a rule change that said the party would “not enter into a power sharing or coalition arrangement with any other political party where a member of that political party holds a ministerial or any other position within the Cabinet”.
In the event of a hung parliament, the parliamentary party would not form minority government unless the ALP membership agreed.
The ALP is hoping it has distanced itself enough from the Greens to win back traditional supporters who turned away during the last term of Labor-Green state government.
This is in keeping with the stated views of Shorten. and Premiers Annastacia Palaszczuk, Daniel Andrews, Jay Weatherill as well as other senior ALP MPs
cornlegend,
You have just completely lost me then. I hate glory hunters. I hate the “my way or the highway” attitude. If that is what you want Labor to be then I want no part of them.
I would also add that Tasmanians have not done well in their choices in the past so why you would follow their lead is beyond me. Perhaps you can explain why Lisa Singh has been relegated to an unwinnable position? Too progressive for the party’s liking?
Kaye Lee
“You have just completely lost me then.’
I don’t believe my aim was ever to “win” you
Then what the hell is the aim of your campaigning? To show the “purity” of your undying support for Labor or to win more votes from unaligned progressives?
“or to win more votes from unaligned progressives?”
why trot this “progressives” bit out
There is more to this big country than alleged “progressives”
This election will be won or lost by ordinary voters out there who don’t give much thought to politics other than at elections
“This election will be won or lost by ordinary voters out there who don’t give much thought to politics other than at elections”
Indeed. They will be electing the government they deserve.
Obviously the ALP isn’t interested in capturing the left vote.
cornlegend,
you are a good working class man. I’m using language that I think would identify with where your loyalty and passion comes from.
I also understand that passion and that’s why I still cling to Labor steering left in the water. It’s easy, as the tide pushes you one way or the other to be pushed off course, but belief in your cause keeps you on course.
Unfortunately however, it’s not just about you and the party faithful Labor any more. It’s about a spectrum of people and parties who also share the belief of wanting the best for Aussies. YOU need to share that perception so that your cause can grow with the amalgamation of other worthy people powered causes.
Athena,
I suspect you’re correct about some despite my desperate attempts to save the blinkered Labor apparatiks from cutting the Left loose.
Such selfishness makes me puke as bad as the LNP. Both are destructive to the general sense of national identity. They must have misunderstood the lesson that a society is assessed on how well it treats its most vulnerable. Labor’s exclusion of people on welfare and in detention has painted them into the doomsday books like the LNP.
Kaye Lee,
I have respected you for quite a long time now but your responses @7.23pm and @7.34pm bolsted that attitude up a level or two.
Jennifer Meyer-Smith
Where do I start?
“it’s not just about you and the party faithful Labor any more. It’s about a spectrum of people and parties who also share the belief of wanting the best for Aussies.”
I’m quite happy remaining one of the “Labor Party faithful” and will be out there supporting that Party every day.
The wonderful thing about politics is that there is a diverse range of Parties out there that people can support and in my opinion good on them for joining up, doing the hard yards and trying to get their views across and their representatives elected.
I do get a bit jaded about some who support and vote for one party {a party that allegedly represents their views} and then spend most of their waking hours trying to tell another Party what their thoughts, views and direction should be.
If they are so all knowing, and so absolutely correct in their assertions then why is their party not in a position to make real change in Government and get enough representation to not bepend on brow beating other parties to their way of thinking .
I am quite at peace with myself standing or falling on the results of the election.
If Labor can convince enough people that overall they have better policies to best address their perceived needs, and that of the community, they will win and I’ll be fine with that .
If however the LNP win again, I will accept that the people have spoken, and be that and the obvious resulting policies on their heads.
If the Greens, PUP or even NXT were able, in thir own right to form government, my opinion would not differ
I personally, or my direct family don’t suffer too much from LNP policies but lots of friends and people I care about do.
You said, ” it’s not just about you and the party faithful Labor any more. It’s about a spectrum of people and parties who also share the belief of wanting the best for Aussies.”
I hope that broad spectrum of people are also willing to accept The umpires {voting publics} decision and stay firm to their beliefs in their plethora of minor parties and Independents that they may chose to support,and not start to apportion blame to Labor.
I guess I am in a better position that some in that if the results go the wrong way {as far as I;m concerned} Me and the wife will do what we did in 2014 {Abbott} and head of the view the wonders of Greenland Canada, Alaska for half a year and escape the inevitable for a time at least.
So Jennifer, you go on campaigning for whoever you like, I will mantain my membership, stay true to my beliefs, do all that I can for the election of an ALP Government and see where it ends up.
If you think you need an Alliance, there are plenty out there to collect up, Greens, NXT,PUP ,Katter all the micros, Independents
etc, and go for it, leave Labor out , you know, that terrible lib/lab flip flop lot, because surely you wouldn’t want those to corrupt the purity of your ideals, or is it just the history and the votes you want?
I chose my Party long ago and and I’m accepting of whatever voters decide.
Time for you to select yours, get behind them and also be willing to accept the electors decision
Has Labor done enough ?
Internal polling is saying NO, in the critical seats it needs to win, but increased numbers where they aren’t particulary needed
Personally , all I had do is, hope and keep on campaigning and live with the result.
I wish you all the best in whoever or whatever ultimately grabs your fancy and hope you campaign hard for them, who ever they may be
July 3 will answer our questions after the Australian people have spoken
This Green hating depresses me, I always thought they were ideal partners…
Hear, hear Helvi
cornlegend,
you know my views.
Jennifer Meyer-Smith
Actually, other than the Meyer-Smith Alliance, you have flip flopped between about 6 who you’d vote for, if not more, and I seem to remember you were considering standing for ODD
How did that go?
Oh-oh cornlegend,
looks like your gloves are coming off!
Van Onselen is a total leftist dickhead. The smirk on his face makes me sick. Why Australia is stooping so low as to have a so called political journalist of this poor caliber I can’t understand. He should be removed from our TV.