Liberal winning point: 'We're not the Labor Party'
Updated
Tony Abbott spent half of his launch speech talking about his opponents. (AAP: Tracey Nearmy)
"The Labor Party thinks this is all about them," declared Tony Abbott, just seconds in to his big launch speech at the weekend.
If so, they're not the only ones.
Tony Abbott thinks this is all about Labor too.
Why else would he spend half of his speech talking about his opponents?
Why else, in fact, would he elect not to use his party's policy launch to launch any policy?
The answer lies in the barely-repressed grins that were on the faces of all who cheered Tony Abbott.
The shadow ministers, the Liberal MPs, the volunteers, the jolly Sunshine Coasters in their Peter Slipper T-Shirts - none of them can believe how well it's going for them.
After the year they've had, what delirious joy to be gathering in the Brisbane sunshine and contemplating a return to government.
And it's all thanks to the Labor Party.
The weekend has been a gag writer's dream for the Coalition.
The material just hurls itself on to the page.
Saturday's meeting between Ms Gillard and Mr Rudd, in which the pair sat side by side feigning intense interest in a map of Queensland.
In the pictures that emerged as necessary documentary proof of the meeting, all the scene needed was a copy of that morning's Courier Mail to complete the hostage vibe.
Cub reporter Mark "Lois" Latham, on the road to report on the election for the Nine Network, chose Saturday afternoon to address his first direct question to Julia Gillard, which was: Why have you complained about me working for Channel Nine?
Late last night, Nine's CEO David Gyngell apologised to Ms Gillard.
Maybe he had had complaints about Mr Latham's complaint about Ms Gillard's alleged complaint, which turned out not to exist.
But Tony Abbott's not complaining.
Neither is Nationals leader Warren Truss, who is not one of nature's comedians but who - with material like the above to work with - could not fail to score.
"This isn't government," he observed, to the delight of the crowd.
"This is loitering without intent!"
"Forget about The Bold and The Beautiful, or The Young and The Restless," offered Julie Bishop as she warmed to her discussion of Labor's recent soap opera.
"How about The Vain and The Ruthless?"
Like so many of her colleagues, Ms Bishop is having a much nicer campaign than she thought she would.
After her unauthorised staring-competition with a garden gnome on the Chaser team's Yes We Canberra (Disobediently, she neglected to tell her leader's office that she was appearing on the show. Still, she probably reasoned that it was better to ask forgiveness than to seek permission) Ms Bishop now finds herself with a small cult youth following and a reputation for good humour.
People are now sending garden gnomes to her electorate office. Who would have thought it?
Mr Abbott's other task was to defend his paid parental leave scheme.
He needs to convince some of the doubters in his own crowd that the scheme is a beady-eyed, prudent productivity measure, rather than the indulgent, quasi-socialist, anti-capitalist boondoggle that they suspect it of being.
"Paid parental leave reinforces the greatest conservative instinct of all; to have a family!" Mr Abbott declared.
So that's the most conservative instinct of all!
Who knows what effect Mr Abbott's teachings on this point will have on the Liberal constituency?
Is this his own imaginative rephrasing of Peter Costello's enjoiner to have "one for Mum, one for Dad and one for the country"?
What Liberal lovebirds will turn to each other tonight as the shadows lengthen and - their loins still a-tingling from their leader's stirring words - murmur throatily: "Darling. I'm feeling a little... conservative tonight, aren't you?"
Still Mr Abbott has a promise to keep: He's the only leader in this campaign promising "real action".
It took considerable chutzpah for Mr Abbott earlier this year to decide - on his own and without consulting his shadow cabinet - to tax big Australian companies in order to give other companies' workers paid parental leave, an entitlement Mr Abbott had always previously indicated would be introduced over his dead body.
For him now to claim it as a conservative idea is beyond cheeky.
But the crowd - high on life and loving every minute of Mr Abbott - didn't seem to mind.
In fact, you could say there was quite a discernibly conservative mood in the air.
The Opposition Leader's own conservatism was left in no doubt; two of his beautiful daughters, Louise and Bridget, sat in the front row as living testament.
(The mischievous middle Abbott daughter, Frances, was not present, but Liberal sources later denied it had anything to do with her one-time description of Dad as a "lame, gay, churchy loser". Frances is overseas. Getting her own TV show, I hope)
"I want to address a few words to people thinking of voting Green," said Mr Abbott, moving forward.
This digression earned a fairly subdued response - possibly because there were no such individuals in the house - but the Opposition Leader persisted.
"I share your concerns for the future of our country," he said, "and fully accept that we have only one planet to live on."
Mr Abbott's message for Green-leaners didn't contain much beyond the obvious and welcome clarification of the vexed one-planet-or-two question.
But he had a message for Labor voters too: "To all the decent Labor people embarrassed by the incompetent patronage machines that are the NSW and Queensland Labor governments; to everyone anxious that the NSW Labor mafia is now running the country, I say: Let's bury this era of gutless spin and give our country a fresh start where politicians say what they mean and do what they say."
The Opposition Leader set out a day-by-day, week-by-week catalogue of action you could expect from an Abbott government.
On Day One, for example - according to the press release - Prime Minister Abbott is planning to not introduce a mining tax.
And if he has enough energy left from doing that, he's going to not introduce a carbon tax.
Do things you're not going to do count as "Real Action"?
Not-doing things has a number of strategic and practical advantages over doing things.
Not doing something is often way faster than doing it.
Cheaper, too.
In campaigns gone by, the Coalition's Queensland launches have been festivals of profligacy.
Billions have been belted around in these Brisbane function centres.
Who could forget the awesome sight of John Howard with his wallet out in 2004, spending $11 billion in around 20 minutes?
This campaign launch didn't cost a bean; the closest thing to new policy it contained was the low-cost, high-moral-fibre promise to ratchet up mandatory prison terms for people smugglers.
What does it tell us about the party Tony Abbott leads?
That it thinks it can win, simply by not looking too mad.
And not being the Labor Party.
Annabel Crabb is ABC Online's chief political writer.
First posted
Comments (319)
Comments for this story are closed, but you can still have your say.
-
Gregor:
09 Aug 2010 8:09:43am
I stopped to ask a labor leafleter outside my supermarket in Warringah if he was comfortable campaigning for a party so bereft of ideas or ideals.
The gist of his response (minus the spittle) was that at least Julia Gillard is not Tony Abott.
It seems that the best the Labor Party has to offer is not being the Liberal Party and the best the Liberal Party can offer is not being the Labor Party. There was a time when they didn't have to point that difference out to us.
Grim. Truly grim.Agree (1) Alert moderator
-
BP:
09 Aug 2010 8:38:22am
"It seems that the best the Labor Party has to offer is not being the Liberal Party"
You gotta admit, that's pretty good though.Agree (5) Alert moderator
-
ItsBreathtaking:
09 Aug 2010 8:56:59am
Why is it pretty good?
If the ALP was doing such a great job for the future of this country, why did Rudd need to be repalced?
Why were there reviews needed for BER and Home Insulation? Why did the bEr money start flowing only after the end of the recession in September 2009? Why are utility prices escalating?
How much mney did NSW get from infrastructure Australia?
Why are we borrowing $100m each day? Why are the boats still coming?
Why isn't the Green Loan scheme not still working?
Where are the laptops?
Why don't we have GP super clinics and childcare centres being built? Where is the CPRS? Why doesn't Gilalrd campaign on a Carbon Tax if it is such a good idea?
Why? Answer: "Just because....." That answer is not good enough.Agree (8) Alert moderator
-
Stuart:
09 Aug 2010 9:35:35am
And you think that all these things that you're so unhappy about are the fault of the ALP?
Emissions trading: Mandate given- Abbott "executes" Turnbull and blocks bill.
Insulation bungle: Greedy employers not training staff or supervising work caused deaths and fires not ALP. Libs just score points off TRAGEDY.
All financial promises unworkable after GFC caused by right-wing politics allowed wealthy mates to steal trillions of dollars from world economy.
I could go on all day. Keating was spot on when he called them scum. Abbott, who has economic qualifications is scared to debate Julia Gillard. Says it all.Agree (11) Alert moderator
-
Pete:
09 Aug 2010 4:08:17pm
Typical labor response. Its always somebody else's fault. When are labor going to stand up and tell the truth. They stuffed up Qld, they stuffed up NSW and now the power brokers responsible for the disaster that is NSW are doing the level best to stuff Australia.
Look for all the excuses you want but at the end of the day labor have been unable to implement decent policy.Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
Arrow:
09 Aug 2010 9:40:19am
To "ItsB" - here are some answers:
If the ALP was doing such a great job for the future of this country, why did Rudd need to be replaced?
* A. He didn't - bad move by Labor factioneers
Why were there reviews needed for BER and Home Insulation?
* A. Because there were allegations of waste and mismanagement. Both reviews found that waste was present but was not high (2.7% in the case of the BER), and the programs achieved their overall aims.
Why did the BER money start flowing only after the end of the recession in September 2009?
* A. Australia did not have a recession. The BER was rolled out quickly but not instantly, of course. The initial stimulus was the $900 for spending. The second step was the BER program (and other programs).
Why are utility prices escalating?
* A. No idea. Are they escalating? Inflation and CPI are down on the long term average. In any case, utility prices are not set by the Feds.
Why are we borrowing $100m each day?
* A. To pay for economic stimulus and infrastructure that is keeping Australians in jobs and improving the country. Our debt is the lowest of any major developed economy and so is our unemployment.
Why are the boats still coming?
* A. Because Afghanistan is still in a vicious civil war, Tamils are still being repressed in Sri Lanka, and Australia is still the only country in the region with the capacity to take refugees.
Where are the laptops?
* A. They are being rolled out. Plenty of schools have them already.
Why don't we have GP super clinics and childcare centres being built?
* A. They are. Slowly, but gradually.
Where is the CPRS? Why doesn't Gillrd campaign on a Carbon Tax if it is such a good idea?
* A. CPRS is frozen because Libs and Greens blocked it. CPRS is not a carbon tax. Carbon tax is not Labor policy.Agree (5) Alert moderator
-
NightRider:
09 Aug 2010 10:55:49am
Hey Arrow - you can't just go being all factual! That's completely against the rules of all right-thinking pollies, commentators and bloggers! You must stick to vague innuendo, suggestion and sound bites please. Good golly - if people like you had your way, we might vote on the basis of actual substance and policy!
Agree (4) Alert moderator
-
ItsBreathtaking:
09 Aug 2010 1:43:07pm
Facts!!
Substance and policy!!!
Where are these exactly in Arrow's answer.
- "plenty of schools have them"
- "A CPRS is frozen because Libs and greens blocked it" - so why not take it to the people (us) now.
- BER "waste was present but not high" - oh please - exactly how many school projects were independently audited by Orgill? Or did he act only on the complaints. Just because a school does not complain does not mean we [taxpayer] got value for money..."
- "slowly but surely" - slowly yes, surely - doubtful
If the rSPT was suhc a brilliant idea - why change it? If the ALP government had doen such a good job, why change the leader???Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
Byebye Tony:
09 Aug 2010 11:33:27am
Fantastic to see the right wing propaganda being so succinctly adressed and disputed, here here
Agree (1) Alert moderator
-
Jimbo:
09 Aug 2010 11:35:57am
> A. CPRS is frozen because Libs and Greens blocked it. CPRS is not a carbon tax. Carbon tax is not Labor policy.
I read through your Labor brainwashed list and laughed. I'll just reply to this one point, to illustrate how misguided you are. The "greatest moral challenge of our time" could have been easily resolved using a double dissolution election.
Why was it not done? Because nobody in Labor party, primarily their then leader, Kevin Rudd, had the guts to actually do this.
Liberals and Greens blocked nothing. This was all achievable if Labor really wanted to do it.
PS. Having a carbon market right now would be truly idiotic. It would simply increase the prices of energy and would not change climate one iota, because we control around 1% of all CO2 emission of the world.Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
Dazza:
09 Aug 2010 12:50:42pm
How many times did workplace reform go to the Senate? More than once and Howard was too scared to hold a double dissolution, especially on his workplace reforms, and he found out what people thought in 2007. Don't go on about "guts" unless you can address all the facts on both sides of politics.
Agree (1) Alert moderator
-
Jimmy:
09 Aug 2010 3:38:21pm
The labor party already had a mandate for climate change action from the 2007 election. Why go back to the polls for another one? And what would it change if they did? Tony Abbot in all likelihood would still be the leader of the opposition and has already demonstrated his lack of respect for a mandate from the people by sinking the CPRS.
And to describe a emissions trading as "truly idiotic" when we are the highest per capita emitters in the world shows a profound selfishness that the world will be unable to handle for very much longer.
Look at it the other way. Why would India or China accept emissions cuts when the wealthy polluters (Who can actually afford to act) wont?Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
Ashes Winner:
09 Aug 2010 4:16:53pm
""Liberals and Greens blocked nothing""
Soz mate, but isn't that just a blatant lie ?
The Liberals kicked out Turnbull and the Greens helped shoot the whole thing down.
Those are the facts.
Correct me if I'm wrong.Agree (1) Alert moderator
-
chipinga:
09 Aug 2010 9:43:24am
These are valid questions, labor has promised so much, yet delivered so little.
The high school that my teenage children attend have not seen ONE laptop..period...
The 'citizens assembly' is an absolute insult to all Australians considering Labor considered the ETS 'the greatest moral challenge of all time' and Gillards now famous qoute...'to delay is to deny'...
The RSPT was 'not negotiable' now we have a new scheme in which only 3 miners were consulted...why?
The BER Gillard has appologised for...why was it not properly managed?
Pink Batts...thousands of homes declared unsafe, many homes destroyed, including 4 deaths..is that a reasonable return..?
Peter 'beds are burning' Garrett ignored countless warnings from the industry which included the unions....why?
The East Timor Solution, again is an insult to Australians and the Timorese...it's not going to happen.
The debt...its huge now, and we are odds on to see a DD reccession, how are we going to buy our way out with such a huge debt.
I can only conclude Labor will go on a witch hunt to TAX businesses, how else are we going to pay for the debt..?
There is so much that Labor has promised, yet nothing has eventuated...where are the questions on that..?
What about the Rudd/Gillard circus...we are being treated as fools..
Australia needs economic management....not clowns...Agree (2) Alert moderator
-
John H:
09 Aug 2010 11:13:26am
"The debt...its huge now, and we are odds on to see a DD reccession, how are we going to buy our way out with such a huge debt."
Huge debt? Australian Government debt is 6% of Gross Domestic Product according to the Australian Bureau of Statistics. Compared to places like Spain, Japan, the UK and the USA it is as piddle. Also If you consider debt so bad, I would likle to ask you, if you are a home owner, did you save up all the money to buy your home BEFORE you bought it?Agree (1) Alert moderator
-
Dazza:
09 Aug 2010 12:52:35pm
Who's going to provide that?? I hope you're not relying on the coalition!! If they were such good economic managers, Why did they lose the 2007 election???
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
Matt:
09 Aug 2010 1:30:25pm
Stimulus packages had to happen quickly and as such were imperfect. Labor stimulus was like a doctor resuscitating a dying patient, but in the rush, accidentally tearing his shirt. This compares favourably with the liberal response, which was to let the patient die.
Curiously though, many of the worlds best economists (e.g. Joe Stiglitz) are looking at Australia's Labor government and suggesting that it has managed the economy through the financial crisis better than any other OECD nation. These independent experts are also happy to point out that mining revenue played a small role in this and that taking the Liberal line at the time would have resulted in recession here, just as in other countries that either do (e.g. Canada) or do not (e.g. UK) have high mining outputs.Agree (2) Alert moderator
-
James:
09 Aug 2010 3:41:31pm
Actually the mining industry was a drag on the economy. during 2008 mining employment fell by almost 20%. If that were repeated across the country we would be in real strife.
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
Boz:
09 Aug 2010 9:43:41am
ItsBreathing
Firstly Rudd needed to be replaced not because he was doing a bad job but because the average Australian was lapping up the media hype that things were going wrong. Look at the American response to Rudd going. (They said how could you replace a leader that got you through the GFC without a recession and when unemployement was so low)
With your second point we didnt have a recession and if you followed things you would know the economy needed the stimulus package to prop it up. Government spending at the time was keeping economic indicators positive.
The 100 million a day is insignificant. Look at the figures our debt to gdp ratio is good.
The boat people are going to come no matter what policies are put in place. But cant you see they are less than 1% of immigrants. Why bother raising that issue??
And lastly why doesn't the Liberal party have any policy on their policy launch day .. just because.Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
PassTheButter:
09 Aug 2010 9:46:35am
Wonderful, isn't it, when the election is a choice between people who are fairly inept at delivering what you want, and a people who simply promise not to.
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
Steve:
09 Aug 2010 11:06:46am
perfect summation - full marks awarded
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
Bing:
09 Aug 2010 9:47:44am
Struth - who got out of the wrong side of bed this morning? From the above, yes there has been some mistakes - and costly ones - but hey, the only thing I remember the Liberals building in 12 yrs in government was a detention centre and even that was in Nauru....
Agree (1) Alert moderator
-
StaggerLee66:
09 Aug 2010 10:53:50am
Short and sweet Bing - well said :)
Agree (1) Alert moderator
-
petros:
09 Aug 2010 9:50:46am
Why aren't Libs in power?
Why have they struck out three times to choose a leader in slow totruous deaths?
Why don't they have any better policies to offer?
Why do they just block everything in the senate?
Why didn't they have a policy option in the recession to help the country keep rolling?
Why do they have Tony Abbott playing Mr Nice Guy?
Why don't the Libs go to wartorn countries and tell them we don't want your refugees because we are only getting a fraction of those on the move?
Why don't the Libs get an Education policy?
Why did the Libs chuck out Turnbull because of his support for climate change?
The asnwers will be Lib spin...just like your questions. but then you lot just chuck things...and people ...overboard if it doesn't please you.Agree (1) Alert moderator
-
caz:
09 Aug 2010 9:53:32am
The key thing is that the ALP team in government has done a very good job. Rudd had some difficulty communicating and effectively promoting the successes of the government in the face of a media that - bored with success - turned virulently hostile. Julia, long recognised contender to take over leadership step in earlier than ever intended and has clearly demonstrated an amazing strength of character when faced with dramatic levels of hostility from all quarters.
Reviews of programs are fairly standard practices and this last week exonerated the BER, found that it was good value for money, was largely welcomed in the community and had less than 3% in complaints ie an awesome 97% success rate.
The opposition plays on fear and loathing and dramatises issues of debt. Basic economics recognises the need for and value of managed debt to improve circumstances. A sound economy, low unemployment, improved services, genuine pension improvements, a fair parental leave scheme, major building programs in schools throughout the country... these are a small number of the results of the ALP government.
It is amazing in the context of a dramatic Global Financial Crises which Labor was able to respond to that there are nick picking criticisms of some pre election 07 plans not yet been realised..
Julia is very clear on recognising human impact on climate change. She also gets that there is a powerful force of denialists that backed Abbott's coup and blocked legislation in the Senate.
There are GP super clinics now but there won't be under Abbott's plan to cut back funding on all and sundry to pay out on a welfare for the wealthy parental leave scheme (on our household income, we would have to pay several years tax to support one wealthy woman taking six months leave of and been paid $75,000!).
Many, many sound reasons to support the ALP.Agree (2) Alert moderator
-
Enough Please:
09 Aug 2010 11:07:03am
Agreed Caz, a number of positive things that the media don't want to talk about
Labor have tried to follow the media agenda rather than focusing on the positives of what they have done
Now they are doing that they are gaining ground again. If 2.7% of BER had a problem then 97.3% didn't. That is a good outcome for Govt or private and that is what they need to talk aboutAgree (2) Alert moderator
-
Andy:
09 Aug 2010 1:10:04pm
You might like to tell the people in Ipswich what a great advent their superclinic was. They had a 24 hour Medical centre which survived because of the federal payments for after hours servicing. The ALP in their wisdom cut that spending and built a Superclinic at the Medical School over the road from the very good 24 Hour Medical centre . The Superclinic opens 9 -5pm Monday to Friday ie the people have lost their 24hour GP clinic because of the Superclinic. This is a story repeated over Australia so look more closely before you just reguritate ALP crap.
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
Think for Yourself:
09 Aug 2010 9:54:55am
ItsBreathtaking must be reading a Liberal cheat sheet- you mention every focus grouped buzzword in the campaign.
Labor spent a large amount of money quickly to avoid a recession and protect jobs. The most important thing is to keep the econmy moving- the BER, home insulation, Green Loans, laptos all did that. When you move big amounts of money quickly there are going to be a few problems, but it has been blown out of all proportion. The report on the BER found only 3% of projectes were not value for money.
Labor voted for the CPRS. The Liberals and the Greens voted against it. Its on the record.
There is only one party offering a vision- the other is just a negative force of reaction.
What does the Coalition stand for? Another war based on a lie?, lies about refugees throwing their children off boats, Workchoices, AWB corruption, credit card to their kids.
Give me abreakAgree (1) Alert moderator
-
ItsBreathtaking:
09 Aug 2010 11:32:15am
A record - we may have had the first real debate in this entire election campaign.
However, those who need to be 'given a break' perhaps should take one.
If the CPRS was such a brilliant idea - why junk it? Why not go to this campaign on the CPRS - if it is so defendible, let us decide on election day and give the government its mandate for the scheme itself. Citizen's assembly - now that is vision.
Hang on - "let us decide", that does not appear to be this government's way does it....
The BER money did not start flowing before Sep 2009 - read the report! As to the claim on <3% of complaints were received - how many were not waste? Also, how many audits of all projects were attempted by the review team?
Laptops - exactly how many schools have got them after 3 years. The promise was to not get them flowing by 2010.
If the RSPT was such a great idea, why was binned with indecent haste by Ms Gillard? Why not go to the people and make her case?
Vision - what exactly is Gillard's vision? Lay it out for me please. Someone tell us where exactly gillard will be any different to Rudd?
As to what the coalition stands for: Exactly what was the unemployment rate in Nov 2007? How much money did the Government had in the bank? How many boats were coming?Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
petros:
09 Aug 2010 12:19:24pm
you just don't get it "it's breathtaking" or you don't want o get it.
We know the boats are coming..that's global knowledge..but will Libs do about it? Only besmirch anything Labor promotes...nothing fresh...nothing to see the obvious that we are only seeing a fraction of boatpeople who are on the move.
Laptops distribution was explained plus he holding pattern.
Julia's vision is about keeping Australia on track and being practical about many issues that Libs avoid until a campaign.
Abbott has a vision...mirror , mirror on the wall how can keep up this vitriolic gall?
Now that is breathtaking.Agree (1) Alert moderator
-
Dazza:
09 Aug 2010 4:33:00pm
And again I'll ask the question and can I get an answer!! If things were so good under the coalition, debt paid off, unemplyment low, good economic management, etc, WHY DID THEY LOSE THE 2007 ELECTION???
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
Andy:
09 Aug 2010 1:11:05pm
And what a vision the ALP offers ---------- KEVIN RUDD
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
kb2010:
09 Aug 2010 10:17:28am
Couldn't have said it better myself.
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
Swinger:
09 Aug 2010 10:39:32am
Rudd was replaced because the party room tolerated his autocratic style for a period, then decided to back a leader who it though consulted better (not dissimilar to the Libs' disposal of Turnbull).
Reviews and evaluation are a sensible part of ANY government program, particularly ones that spend lots of taxpayers' money.
Borrowing was an essential part of the govt's stimulus. It's a very small proportion of gross domestic product, and far smaller than traditionally stronger economies in Europe or the US.
We do have GP superclinics. The CPRS was voted down by the Senate.
The answers are out there, but we as voters don't seem to be interested, and the media therefore feeds us the controversy instead.Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
Andy:
09 Aug 2010 1:12:14pm
So Julia consulted on her Community Committee did she???
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
StaggerLee66:
09 Aug 2010 1:57:28pm
ahh... must be the same "committee" Abbott's about to set up to look at debt reduction and the MurrayDarling.
Coalition hypocrisy!
Laughable if it wasn't so frightening.Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
teo:
09 Aug 2010 10:47:15am
Breathtaking. Thanks for repeating the spin out of the Liberal Party for us. I'm not going to vote for Labor but the Liberal party is and will prove to be as useless as the Labor Party. Why does Tony Abbott need to write his own "action contract"? An idea that is so absurd it beggars belief. Tony Abbott's plan for Australia is an empty "action contract" A contract with only four predictable and useless points in which his spending promises out are in direct contrast to his saving promise. Conservatives also just love to forget about the GFC and that it actually happened, and out of all the Major economies we came out of it unscathed...Neither party has a plan for Australia's future and will just continue the protectionist rhetoric of the last 14 years.
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
ItsBreathtaking:
09 Aug 2010 12:08:43pm
I tend to agree about the lack of vision thing with the Liberals. Howard can be accused of not building long term economic infrastructure by the end of his government - but at least he was reformist. Abbott has learnt from history - no one gets elected for a 2025 vision agenda. This does not play out in marginal seats - sorry, but that is the reality. However, what he will do is prepare the case for a substantive reform agenda in the 2013 election. Howard did this, he learnt from Hewson's demise.
The Coalition has not forgotten the GFC, in fact Costello predicted it - Ken Henry failed to see it. At no stage has the coalitions aid no to stimulus outright - why would you. But it rightly queried the scale and direction of the stimulus - why shouldn't they.
Did they block climate change legislation - no, only the "take it or leave it CPRS" version by Rudd. Even the greens rejected it, and Gillard does not have the conviction or courage to campaign on it.
So much for the RSPT headlining tax reform - it was a thought bubble. You want tax reform that was taken to the people - Howard did with the GST. Even Hawke/Keating had the conviction to take such reform to the people.
As to the protection rehtoric - ask why we protect inefficient industries?
As to vision - what do the greens propsoe? Our reality is that we depend on electricity from coal fired power stations. This can be changed, but not by 2013, not by 2020. Yes it can be by 2025 - name the marginal seat that is thinking 2025....
If you are going to critique me - fill your boots - but then don't accuse me of spin. Argue the facts, answer the questions I have posed with evidence.Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
James:
09 Aug 2010 3:48:58pm
"The Coalition has not forgotten the GFC, in fact Costello predicted it" Im sorry but could you how me your evidence for this one?
And if Costello spotted the GFC with such spectacular foresight why did he sell off large amounts of Australia's gold reserves when the gold price was less than a quarter of what it is now?Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
Sandgroper:
09 Aug 2010 5:20:35pm
Labor had a number of good ideas but frankly the implementation left me with the impression that they couldn't operate a chook raffle effectively. Ideas are fine but successful implementation is all.
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
-
-
the yank:
09 Aug 2010 9:08:39am
You can write this comment with a straight face?
Even the Australian newspaper admitted Abbott was playing it dangerously holding the opening of its campaign without one policy announcement.
The Sydney Telegraph, a welded on Liberal paper much the same as the Australian but directed more towards the low brow, didn't even feature Abbot's launching of its campaign. Instead so underwhelmed were they that they featured the Chamberlain case.
All the Libes could talk about was Labor, not their own policies and you say that it is Labor short of ideas?
Oh please!Agree (1) Alert moderator
-
Greg Kneebone:
09 Aug 2010 10:00:27am
Labor are the risk to the country if they get re-elected, surely any competent alternative government as the coalition are would address this risk and the need to eliminate the risk from a labor government.
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
Steve:
09 Aug 2010 10:27:08am
Straight from the Liberal cheat sheet. Real ideas, please.
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
kocsonya:
09 Aug 2010 1:01:15pm
"[...] surely any competent alternative government as the coalition are would address this risk and the need to eliminate the risk from a labor government."
I think that would have sounded much better if the words 'synergy', 'affirmative' and 'paradigm' were incorporated in it.Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
Dan H:
09 Aug 2010 2:46:59pm
Funny Greg, that's exactly how I feel about the Libs atm.
The only reason Abbott doesn't have any policy apart from 'Labor is wrong' is because HIS policy is archaic, outdated and far too conservative for the average voter to relate too. He's hiding it because he knows it won't go down well. He's hoping to ride out the campaign through simply 'not being Labor', and once he gets in, he'll show his true colours and haul out all the ultra-conservative policies he didn't want Australians to see.
It's sad because I'm not happy with Labor atm, but it's going to be between Gillard and Abbott. I'd rather have Gillard over a man who's being so two-faced that he has to hide his real policies for fear of reprisal.Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
Ashes Winner:
09 Aug 2010 4:26:24pm
No they are not.
We are .1% off what is known as full employment.
Interest rates are 2% lower than when the libs were throwing money at the middle classes.
We have the smallest debt in the OECD.
The economy and the outlook is very positive. Interest rates look like being stable for at least the next 3 months and jobs growth look solid.
Oops there I go again ..... getting all factual.Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
-
chipinga:
09 Aug 2010 4:18:01pm
Yank, it might come as a complete surprise to you that opposition keep government accountable and honest...they scrutinise how government are running the country...the opposition is not in government, so it is impossible to judge their policy performances...
Right now Labor are in Government and judging by the Labor advertising campaigns, they have no interest in promoting their last three years in Government...so they do what they are best at...attacking the man and not the ball..
typical...Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
-
caz:
09 Aug 2010 9:29:32am
Well, the ALP successfully guided Australia through the Global Financial Crises. It did so with innovative stimulus activity that has resulted in major infrastructure throughout the Australian community. The economy is sound and healthy. Our level of debt is moderate. We are are envy of many countries around the world.
Agree (2) Alert moderator
-
the yank:
09 Aug 2010 9:56:07am
Seems like the country and the media has a case of dementia as far as Labor's success in saving the country's economy.
Better to focus on Latham casing Gillard around or Abbott's thought bubbles.Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
Billy Bob Hall:
09 Aug 2010 12:13:14pm
The mining industry is what 'saved' the economy.
To maintain the 'Labor spending like drunken sailors' notion as being the answer to our economic problems is palpably ridiculous.
Try that with your credit card, and see how long the merriment lasts ! :-)Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
Boz:
09 Aug 2010 2:07:19pm
As you can read in the interview Kerry O'Brien had with Joseph Stiglitz (nobel prize winning economist professor)
"your recovery actually preceded the - in some sense, China. So there was a sense in which you can't just say Australia recovered because of China. Your preventive action, you might say pre-emptive action, prevented the downturn while things got turned around in Asia, and they still have not gotten turned around in Europe and America."
Stop using the Mining Company excuse!!
You probably also believe they are doing it tough at the moment.Agree (1) Alert moderator
-
luke warm:
09 Aug 2010 2:31:11pm
Oh, the mining industry saved the economy, by laying off 15% of their staff. Maybe they should have laid off more, we would have had an economic boom.
Agree (1) Alert moderator
-
Dazza:
09 Aug 2010 4:47:08pm
You know, it's amazing that in the midst of the GFC and companies crying poor, cut back working hours and laying people off, they could still find heaps of money to sponsor sporting events to the tune of millions of dollars! Where were the real priorities??
Agree (1) Alert moderator
-
caz:
09 Aug 2010 3:42:19pm
actually mining companies began sacking workers before there was any discernible hint of GFC impact in Australia... just a good excuse.... and then some were starting to fold ..ALP got this country going and through innovative programs like the BER provided employment to some laid off by the miners and achieved an outstanding level of construction in schools.
Now the miners are booming again and most have acknowledged that they have long under contributed. A few still bleat that is unfair to have to pay tax on super profits at rates lower than the average wage earner...pfffAgree (1) Alert moderator
-
the yank:
09 Aug 2010 4:25:24pm
An idustry that laid off workers by such numbers that if every industry did the same we would have had 18% unemploymnet saved the country?
We have the lowest get that lowest debt per person in the OECD. Even the Sydney Telegraph gets that point.
The myths of the conservatives like we'll find weapons of mass destruction or sure Peter I'll turn over my job to you just after this election or the next one or the...Agree (1) Alert moderator
-
Dazza:
09 Aug 2010 4:42:24pm
The mining windfall was well before the GFC and all the coalition did was pay debt, smirking about paying it off and putting nothing into infrastructure. Then deciding to give everyone a tax cut when the polls indicated they were in trouble. Being so-called good economic managers didn't win them the 2007 election and lose the PM his own seat to a former journalist, now that's funny!!
Agree (1) Alert moderator
-
-
unfoiled:
09 Aug 2010 10:00:31am
So why did we have commitee, commitee and more commitee, while fuel prices went thru the sky with out relief for four months while the Labor party were going to "put the blow torch to OPEC" and the RBA raised interest rates still! Then when the govt started to wake up they had an"inflation genie out of the bottle", they suddenly came out with"threat to national security" with no explanation. That stopped inflation dead in its tracks, hence our own GFC.......'great f...... con'.
The opposition didnt oppose the stimulus, they opposed the way and the amount Labor were spending. The implementastion of the stimus was bad , leaving businesses flogging off their stocks to make a sale because the first money was given on the 12th December, by then businesses had massive sales to try and get stock movement.
Inexperienced, incompetance has cost our country dearly and continues to do so.Agree (2) Alert moderator
-
caz:
09 Aug 2010 10:23:00am
Yup they did oppose the stimulus... can't reinvent history on that score.... the only spending they might have sanctioned would have been akin to what happened (and failed mightily in other countries) in other countries where the government fed millions and millions into the very organisations that created the GFC in the first place.
Our government was innovative, it spent money throughout the community on projects long needed and much appreciated. And guess what? We have a thriving economy and low unemployment, low interest rates, improved school buildings etc etc. And all done without the strictures of undermining working conditions for regular Australian folk - they got rid of work choices!
Abbott might be keeping work choices under the carpet for the moment but the rest of his action plan demonstrates that his is not a leader but remains a soldier of Howard.Agree (1) Alert moderator
-
Andy:
09 Aug 2010 1:18:24pm
Mistakes on ALP cheat sheet , please correct.
1.The Coalition voted FOR the first stimulus package [look in Hansard]
2. The low interest rates were the result of the Reserve Bank cutting the rates to stimulate the economy.
3. Unemployment when the ALP took over 4.2%
4. Inflation when the ALP took over 2.1%Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
Steve:
09 Aug 2010 10:31:07am
It's ironic to hear you talk about inexperience since you don't know what you're talking about either.
(a) By world standards, Australia has NEVER had its fuel prices go 'thru the sky'
(b) Interest rates have been at record lows for virtually the entire life of the Rudd and Gillard governments
(c) 'the GFC is a con' is complete crap spun by people who don't want to admit that Labor might have had a part in averting it.
'The opposition didnt oppose the stimulus, they opposed the way and the amount Labor were spending. '
Oh please. Their plan was along the lines of 'uh... well... I guess we'll, uh... spend a tiny bit less? LABOR WASTE DEBT DEBT DEBT'. Implementation was fine - it worked. Your penultimate sentence doesn't even make sense.Agree (1) Alert moderator
-
Jimmy:
09 Aug 2010 11:30:36am
The string of committees in the early days of the Rudd government was a response to being out of power for over a decade and having a right-wing idealouge run our national infrastructure, education and health systems into the ground through starvation of funding while the spoils of the mining boom were thrown away on vote-buying middle class welfare.
This is a democracy. Not a dictatorship. That's why things have to go through committees. It sucks. Its just better then any other system we have tried yet. If committees are still being created at the same rate at the end of the next term I agree we have a problem but for now this is no issue.
You say "The opposition didnt oppose the stimulus". Well I don't know about you but i would say that by opposing the second stimulus package in both houses smells like opposing the stimulus to me.
So where is the cost that is plaguing this country? Is it our unemployment rate at almost half that of the U.S(5.1% to their 9.6%)? Or is it our Debt-GDP ratio (around 7% to their 90ish% Open your eyes. Tony Abbot is an economically illiterate ignoramus who will damage this nation if allowed to get into power.Agree (2) Alert moderator
-
-
chipinga:
09 Aug 2010 10:15:07am
perhaps you can explain then, If Labor's past credentials are so good, why are Labor's advertising campaigns only attacking Abbott...why not campaign on your past 3 year record...?
...who's the fools..?Agree (2) Alert moderator
-
Otwen:
09 Aug 2010 11:04:14am
That's the point that sticks out for me with this campaign....Labour sounds like an opposition trying to win government, shades of how they used to focus on Howard from opposition...and this never worked until they were handed the free kick of work choices and a tired government.
They really need to focus on what they've done and what they will do. At the moment it's not a good look.Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
StaggerLee66:
09 Aug 2010 11:41:36am
ok - let's see...past three years.....achievements...policies.....successes.........
Interest rate
Unemployment rate
Stimulus - GFC
signing Kyoto
Industrial Relations
NBN Policy
the courage and moral rightness of Mining Tax
CPRS white paper
Apology to Indigenous Australians
Henry Review
Education
Health
there's more...but you already know that....don't you?
Each of these areas are critical in terms of policy, nation building and the country "moving forward". Don't like em?.... Fine by me....we had 11 years of your "lying rodent"....so you boys are just gonna have to take a number......
by the way...careful with that last question of yours...people may not know who you're referring to................ :)Agree (1) Alert moderator
-
Michael:
09 Aug 2010 1:18:13pm
Interest rates? Tell me what have they done to keep interest rates low? Absolutely nothing. Unemployment rate well it was good before they came into government. Health my wife has been in hospital with pregnancy complications it is no better. There is still a shortage of beds in the public system. How many recommendations did they accept and act on from the Henry review? One. The mining tax. What about all the others? All too hard. Sums their performance promised the world delivered very little. You forgot the whales. Labor promised to save them, they haven't. Little gets said about that either funny enough.
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
Graeme (the other one):
09 Aug 2010 2:33:19pm
Yet Labor have launched a very expensive ad campaign aimed at getting people to worry about Abbott. Are they ashamed of their achievements? Or just acknowledging the extremely poor execution of their programs?
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
StaggerLee66:
09 Aug 2010 4:19:02pm
Graeme, howdy - good question. The ad focus is very real, very determined and very......prescient......because we all need to be concerned if this Coalition gets in.
Labour has nothing to be ashamed of - mistakes? sure. I recall Howard having his share of those.
Poor execution? - somewhat....but then Howard/Abbott have their clumsy fingers all over a bunch of policies as well.
But you know what Graeme? If the Coalition gets in then those issues you and others raise will mean very little...and they will mean very little...very quickly.
You aren't going to look me in the face and say the Coalition, on what they have presented us thus far, and what they have NOT presented us thus far, are any less deserving of the scorn you dish out to Labour.
Politiking and ideology clash. That's it. That's what's at play here. Nothing more.
This dramatic wringing of hands, this feigned indignation, this hypocrisy, on display from the Coalition and their supporters is little more than that.
Howard, during his tenure, had ample, ample, opportunity to address a raft of issues............he chose not to.
That the Labour party are trying to pick up the baton, with all of the concomitant issues/problems should be applauded...or at least acknowledged...however begrudgingly... by the Opposition.
Again - I find the hypocrisy from supporters of a government 11 years in office with a bucketload of money and several unprecedented mandates.... simply laughable.
Anyway.......
Cheers,Agree (1) Alert moderator
-
Graeme (the other one):
09 Aug 2010 5:29:15pm
Staggers the question remains why they are so solid on the negative. Abbott's track record with all its blunders is pretty well known by now. Labor's not putting out anything new, just seems intent on bludgeoning the poor old viewers with the weight of its advertising budget.
I agree, everyone in government stuffs up all the time. Can you imagine the noise that would have been generated if Howard and all's errors had been as expensive as Rudd's? Not hard to imagine the sound of pit bulls tearing apart helpless politicians is it?
You might need to detail my hypocrisy, I wasn't watching where I was going. To a large degree government seems to be more about handling the problems they are presented with. No one seems good at long term. If they do something right they get little credit for things that didn't go wrong. The voters aren't very generous that way.
Cheers to you. A response to our last exchange didn't make it for unknown reasons. Apologies on behalf of the moderator.Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
Steve:
09 Aug 2010 12:04:34pm
And how exactly are they supposed to campaign on their achievements with 90% of the press out to deny that they achieved anything whatsoever?
Agree (1) Alert moderator
-
chipinga:
09 Aug 2010 2:53:55pm
Labor has millions to spend on direct advertising...there's a good start..
but they won't...and we all know why...Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
ABC 4 ALP:
09 Aug 2010 6:14:10pm
Paid advertisements will do it. Maybe replace the current fear campaign with positive news about its record.
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
-
Ads:
09 Aug 2010 10:15:28am
Point at one piece of completed infrastructure initiated by Rudd
...sound of crickets...
Wasting everyone else's money buying headlines for your own political gain isn't innovative. The reforms and all the cash in the bank that the Libs put there is what saved us.Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
Jimmy:
09 Aug 2010 1:05:17pm
How about any of the thousands of schools projects that are complete or nearing completion. Significant parts of the NBN are well underway. A strong case could be argued that Rudd in under one term got more infrastructure underway than Howard managed in a decade.
And please "Wasting everyone else's money buying headlines for your own political gain" may not be innovative. But it is the Modus Operandi of John HowardAgree (1) Alert moderator
-
-
Joyce:
09 Aug 2010 10:28:07am
And Labor had the compassion AND the nous to increase the Pensioner's annual income by about $30 per week.
Agree (1) Alert moderator
-
Michael:
09 Aug 2010 1:21:24pm
My parents are on the old age pension. They are no better off. Maybe by a dollar or two. All that was done was lump sums that were paid every six months were paid fortnightly. They would prefer the lump sums themselves. Not much compassion in it if you ask my parents.
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
chipinga:
09 Aug 2010 2:54:56pm
thats because they don't vote for labor...Gillard has admitted as much...
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
-
bj:
09 Aug 2010 12:23:48pm
What's so innovative about spending taxpayers' money?
When it comes to economic management, that's all Labor knows and as the evidence shows, it can't spend taxpayers' money in a responsible way.
Our level of debt is moderate thanks to measure put in place by the Coalition, which had to undo the fiscal damage done by Labor last time it was in office.
Labor, of course, opposed those measures.Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
caz:
09 Aug 2010 2:07:36pm
Cutting back spending, cutting taxes for the wealthy, redistributing wealth to the wealthy, etc does not a good economy or society make. There is a myth that people who support and come from the wealthy money makers have better economic skills. This is a fallacy, these people learn how to make money and keep it for themselves. Post feudal economies and governments- that lay claim to democracy - are supposed to be about setting up structures and services for all society.
The ALP stimulus money was spent on community projects and via distribution to the mainstream Australian public... and it worked.
The BER program has been thoroughly reviewed and found to be good value for money. Schools throughout the country have benefited. A 2.7% complaint rate is extraordinarily low for any program. Yes the review has made suggestions to improve the program (as any review should do) and Julia has clearly stated that she accepts and will implement all the suggestions. Ongoing attempts to undermine the achievements of the BER by the Coalition and their sympathisers seriously discredits their plausibility.Agree (1) Alert moderator
-
bj:
09 Aug 2010 4:58:57pm
Who said anything about the BER?
I'm referring to a decision to commit to $43b in expenditure to build a national broadband network when there's not a shred of evidence to show that the benefit would outweigh the cost.
Imagine a CEO asking his board for $43b to spend without a cost/benefit analysis.
He'd be laughed at (just before being sacked).Agree (1) Alert moderator
-
-
-
TPG:
09 Aug 2010 6:28:12pm
Branch secretary in Abbott's electorate?
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
-
john:
09 Aug 2010 8:10:39am
John Lennon's words come to mind '\
"there's allays something cooking, but there is nothing in the pot"Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
unfoiled:
09 Aug 2010 9:29:55am
Thanks to Labor the bottom has burnt out of the pot and the contents spoiled but they will add some curry and hope no-one notices.
What are Labor hiding? All they can come up with is "Tony Abbott" this and ............blaa blaa blaa.
Wonder what the true state of the budget is? Will it be like last time Labor were ousted? The deficit was much more than they were saying!Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
caz:
09 Aug 2010 10:14:41am
Amazing how, successful economy, low unemployment, extensive and welcomed school infrastructure program, dismantling work choices, etc, etc doesn't seem to get through barriers of hostile media and people who just don't want to know.
Agree (3) Alert moderator
-
unfoiled:
09 Aug 2010 10:45:14am
While children in NSW are being harmed by old gas heater in classrooms that wont be replaced soon.
The Labor party got the priority wrong!
The implementation and cost is what is wrong.
Waste of my taxes. I cant afford to waste it myself and I resent someone else wasting it for me!Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
caz:
09 Aug 2010 2:10:45pm
Individual schools made choices about what they applied for funding to do...
I certainly don't want more than four years of my taxes wasted in going towards supporting one woman of means taking six months leave.Agree (1) Alert moderator
-
bj:
09 Aug 2010 5:07:46pm
...and I thank the Hawke/Keating and Howard governments that had the stomach for the reforms that created a successful economy.
I also curse the Labor opposition from 1996-2007 which attempted to stymie all economic reform in the name of political expediency.Agree (1) Alert moderator
-
-
Good Grief:
09 Aug 2010 10:25:41am
And all Liberals can come up with is scare, spin and Labor this and Labor that, not even a policy announced at their policy launch and nothing on how they will fund anything. And what does it say about their elected leader if they have to sit so heavily on his tongue during the campaign?
Let's be honest: neither side is shining brightAgree (0) Alert moderator
-
Steve:
09 Aug 2010 10:31:26am
And all the Liberals can come up with is...
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
-
-
Peter:
09 Aug 2010 8:23:36am
Not being the Labor party is no claim to government. If it was, the Labor party can claim to not be Tony Abbott and there we are at the beginning again. I am alternately disgusted and appalled at what passes for media scrutiny these days - and I know that the political climate gives them little time to write reasoned articles but its still not acceptable. Miss a deadline - do a piece with substance.
Will someone ask a hard question that doesn't revolve around Gillards ears, man, clothes, how often or when she texted Rudd, or Latham in any way? This includes the questions directed at Tony! Ask a question, expect an answer. When they don't give it ask it again. If you still don't get an answer, report that you didn't get an answer rather then the spin they gave you.
Oh please won't someone think of the voter!Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
Ads:
09 Aug 2010 10:16:59am
"If it was, the Labor party can claim to not be Tony Abbott "
I believe that is the central premise of the Labor campaign actually - they still think Abbott is unelectable, and lets face it, they can't run on their record...Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
luke warm:
09 Aug 2010 11:24:29am
They can and should run on their record, particularly economic management. Australia came though the GFC better than most other countries, and independent economists have acknowledged that the stimulus packages contributed to that. Yes, so did the reforms of the Hawke/Keating governments (and to a lesser degree the Howard Government). And the Surplus left by the Liberals helped too, although they could have left more from the good times of the mining boom rather than waste $300Bn of it trying to buy votes.
By contrast the coalition's position on the GFC was 'do nothing' (they are trying to re-write history on that now but it's not working). With them we would have had a recession, at least 200,000 more unemployed, and a deficit - possibly as large as the existing one. What the Lib rhetoric isn't telling people is that the bulk of the deficit is caused by declining income, not the stimulus expenditure.Agree (1) Alert moderator
-
Andy:
09 Aug 2010 1:24:33pm
HAve to loive the way the ALP flunkies keep i nflating all their figures. Exaclty how amny jobs were created ? I t seem to vary from 90,000 - 450,000. Accurate as usual for this mob. As long as we get within a billion of 2 the numbers are fine.
Think what the money that this ALP mob have wasted could do .Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
ABC 4 ALP:
09 Aug 2010 6:26:32pm
Mr Swan has stated that the previous mining boom netted $80b, not $300b.
The Coalition may have left more than a $20b surplus, more than $60b in the future fund and more than $5b in the Education Fund but the Opposition screamed that it was the highest taxing govt in history and demanded tax relief.
The Coalition voted for the first stimulus package. They did not propose to do nothing.
They voted against the second package and argued that it wasn't necessary, inflationary and not sufficiently thought through.
Where does the 200,000 unemployed come from?
If unemployment is as low as the ACTU claims, why is there declining budget receipts?Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
-
-
-
Cambrian:
09 Aug 2010 8:26:55am
Yes, Annabelle, this is ALL Labour's fault. Rudd may have fouled up in his execution of policies and walked away from others, aided and abetted by Gillard and two significant others, but it was the NSW and QLD faceless men that did the dirty deed, and installed the vowel mangler. The focus on Labour would not be so great if they had a vision and some policies, which they and their leader could articulate. So far we have seen precious little in terms of Labour policy and vision. The internet filter and school chaplaincies are NOT policies and are a waste of yet more money. What we have seen a lot of is outright cynicism towards the electorate combined with a badly written soap opera. As you say things have come to a pretty pass when all Abbott has to do is crow about Labour's failings. Abbott may not be fit for government, but this Labour party is not fit for government so long as its is dominated by its intercenine faction warfare, and its cynicism towards those it purports to represent. Labour needs to become a proper party of grass roots activists who have a genuine say in the formulation of policy, not a plaything of the numbers men. When we stop seeing lawyers from no win no fee practices being parachuted into safe inner city seats , then we will know that Labour has found its soul and moral compass. Ask yourselves, do Gillard, Roxon, et al own let alone know how to read a moral compass? In the interim, I am voting Green.
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
ItsBreathtaking:
09 Aug 2010 8:49:27am
Cambrian, exactly why are you voting Greens - because of their agenda, or simply because they are not ALP or Liberal? As the greens will hold power in the Senate, you are happy with their policy platoform - increased mining tax; carbon tax, higher emission targets; and no border controls. What do you pay for electricity today? Don't cast your vote for the reason of what a party is not; vote for what it is and intends to do.
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
Peter:
09 Aug 2010 9:23:39am
Well you can certainly agree with that sentiment. However, that then takes us back to the liberals.
Vote for us, we're not Labor.
Are you saying that the only party worth voting for is Labor? Excellent. Choice made!Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
Gregor:
09 Aug 2010 9:25:09am
"Don't cast your vote for the reason of what a party is not; vote for what it is and intends to do."
A good idea indeed.
To reword the anti-Green spin, they propose to:
Share the wealth form the mining boom
Put a fair price and a cap on carbon to jumpstart innovation and move towards a carbon free economy, provide certainty to business and save costs for future action
Treat asylum seekers as human beings with dignity and not resort to vilifying people fleeing war, or waste the bulk of their campaign on one of the smallest non-issues facing the country. (I'm guessing that is what you what "no border controls", but I a bit baffled).
Neither of the major parties are campaigning on policy - all they can talk about is what they're not and what they won't do - there is no vision there. The Greens have a campaign based on policies and solutions for current and future problems, rather than just trying to rehash the 2007 election with different figureheads.
Even the sex party and family first have more coherent and positive platforms than the major parties. The major parties are treating us like mugs and have no respect, so if you want real policies and respect form a party, then yes voting Greens makes sense.
Voting Labor or Liberal just validates their patronising and insulting approach, so to quote you again "Don't cast your vote for the reason of what a party is not; vote for what it is and intends to do."Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
Cambrian:
09 Aug 2010 10:35:28am
Thank you Gregor. Neatly put. To stress the point. Greens have decent policies honestly put. A vote for Greens is a vote for substantive policies and an opportunity to say, A pox on both your houses, Labour and Liberal. It is time the rusted on vote stopped allowing themselves being taken for granted by the cynical big boys and girls.
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
unfoiled:
09 Aug 2010 10:37:10am
Vote for Labor or the Greens will cost you, because they want us the tax payer, to make someone elsa rich by selling climate change!
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
Gregor:
09 Aug 2010 2:09:49pm
Not true (a carbon tax is a price on carbon, the Turnbull negotiated CPRS is a subsidy to polluters), but if it were the alternative would be to make us all poor by denying and prevaricating...
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
-
Kieran:
09 Aug 2010 9:27:44am
yeah, vote for liberals. with the economic policy of..of...STOP THE BOATS!!
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
Ads:
09 Aug 2010 10:18:57am
As opposed to Rudd's economic policy of "burn everyone's house down to save us from recession"?
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
caz:
09 Aug 2010 2:19:06pm
seriously scrapping the bottom of the barrel with ? strange desperation ?
Yes the insulation program was undermined by some dodgy installers and there were some tragic consequences but in context... The ALP insulations program included a tightening of the guidelines and requirements and there was a lower proportionate incidence of accidents than had been the case in general installations prior to the program.
The review process has since identified many instances of dodgy wiring in people's homes that were high risk factors on their own and not related to the insulation program.
I cannot imagine that a Coalition government with its preference for business self regulation would have tightened guidelines or undertaken reviews. Oh no they wouldn't have spent the money, it would be in the magic pot waiting for the rainy day that has come and gone... and we would be in recession, unemployment would be sky rocketing....Agree (2) Alert moderator
-
chipinga:
09 Aug 2010 3:02:18pm
or the labor ETS policy as 'the greatest moral challenge of all time'... 'to delay is to deny'...
hows that one going.....
...oh...the libs did stop the boats...check parliamentary records..
from 2002 - 2007 15 boats...
under labor...from 2007 to june 2010 - 128 boats..and still counting...Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
-
Bing:
09 Aug 2010 9:49:47am
ItsBreathtaking - tells us why you are voting Liberal? As Annabel said in her article, Abbott didn't talk about policies just what he won't do. If that's your reason for voting for him, you should be questioning youself...
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
anzaan:
09 Aug 2010 10:41:43am
No policy is far better than bad policy sometimes.
So,though not a liberal supporter, I could almost vote them for NOT SUPPORTING THE INTERNET FILTER.
And if they promise not junk the RESOURCES TAX, that might as well seal my vote for them this time around.Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
kocsonya:
09 Aug 2010 1:12:04pm
"I could almost vote them for NOT SUPPORTING THE INTERNET FILTER."
Which is *exactly* why they decided not to support it.Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
-
-
Red Baron:
09 Aug 2010 9:51:29am
The grounds for replacing Rudd was grounded in the eleven years Kim Beazley kept Howard in Power.
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
guy:
09 Aug 2010 10:28:34am
Really? Can't see how Beazley or Howard are relevant.
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
-
kb2010:
09 Aug 2010 10:18:22am
Voting for the Green's is basically voting for Labour anyway...
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
YMM:
09 Aug 2010 11:19:42am
Really?
If I plan to vote greens and allocate preferences to Liberal, I can do that. I just have to number my boxes accordingly, including voting below-the-line for the Senate.Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
luke warm:
09 Aug 2010 11:34:42am
Except when enough people vote Green - then a vote for Labor becomes a vote for the Greens.
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
petros:
09 Aug 2010 12:36:16pm
Wished I'd thought of that...duh!
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
-
-
-
OLD MAN:
09 Aug 2010 8:27:07am
It is all media bubble and squeak.
Ms Gillard and Labor will roll over the Liberal s in the next fortnight.
Listen carefully to that economic buffoon Mr Hockey today at the National Press Club debate with Mr Swan if you really want to see ineptness.Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
working family member:
09 Aug 2010 10:02:41am
Ah... Wayne Swan, as brilliant at finances as he is at English grammer, who stated something "Should of went" several times in his last interview on the ABC.
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
petros:
09 Aug 2010 12:38:21pm
playing semantics does you no credit...cynicism is much sharper....of course he shouldn't have said it...get over it...twaddle stuff for a worker i'd of thought.
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
chipinga:
09 Aug 2010 3:06:31pm
The words Swan and brilliant should never be used together...
Don't believe me..check this out..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PtEyAe1QqCgAgree (0) Alert moderator
-
-
bj:
09 Aug 2010 12:27:33pm
Joe, a buffoon? Perhaps, but he wipes the floor with Swan.
There's a great video of Wayne on Youtube. A journo asks him the inflation forecast and poor Wayne is mute for 80 seconds.
Worse still, the occasion is a press conference Wayne called, so he should've been prepared. Clearly, he wasn't.
Imagine having a Treasurer who doesn't know the numbers? It's laughable.Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
Andy:
09 Aug 2010 1:29:45pm
Now there we DO have an economic illiterate - Wayne Swan . Remember when he could't appear in public to announce anything unless Ken Henry was holding his hand. He is the great mind who was holding out on Rudd doing a deal with the miners because he couldn't shift his thinking fast enough. He had just learned his lines for the BIG tax and now they wanted to relearn new lines for a smaller tax - hard work when you don't understand those big economic words.
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
chipinga:
09 Aug 2010 3:07:47pm
Swan is an embarrassment when compared to Hockey...
It showed today..Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
-
razz:
09 Aug 2010 8:27:58am
Get ready for the "cupboard is bare. We can't fulfil our promises" excuse so famiilar to us senior citizens. Phony Tony has flagged this about three times now.
How anyone could even contemplate voting for this neanderthal baffles me.Agree (2) Alert moderator
-
Amused Qld:
09 Aug 2010 8:47:41am
As opposed to the the competent and successful Labor party? Give me a break.
I find it so hard to believe that there are so many out there that can still support the circus which is the Labor party. They are a joke, have totally stuffed up every thing they have implemented and yet there are still people out there who support them. Luckily for the Labor party there are still the 50% of non thinking rusted on, who have no idea about business or economics. Much like the Labor party really. How low has this country got to go before they wake up?Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
Elvis:
09 Aug 2010 9:21:40am
I am amused, Amused. How low can they go? Well, how about the fact that Australia has survived the GFC extremely well, we have almost full employment, very low debt in terms of GDP (why do you think Abbott can say he'll get the budget in the black by 2013 - because its strong now!) and loan rates are still lower than when John lost his seat and government in one hit.
Agree (1) Alert moderator
-
Ads:
09 Aug 2010 10:20:28am
Rubbish - we have the highest debt in our history, and it was all blown in 2 years.
This country can't afford another term of amateurs like GillardAgree (0) Alert moderator
-
Elvis:
09 Aug 2010 11:17:14am
Ads - what's your preference then? A long, deep recession/depression with massive unemployment and social unrest?
Still I suppose that would help "Stop the Boats" wouldn't it.Agree (1) Alert moderator
-
Elvis:
09 Aug 2010 11:25:27am
Ads - not that you'll be interested, but the claim that Australia has the "highest debt in our history" is not correct. Not close. Given the growth in Australian trade income, the reasonable approach is to look at debt as a % of GDP. On that basis, we're not even close to the peaks of the first half of the 20th century or after WW2. And against the background of the GFC.
Agree (1) Alert moderator
-
Annie:
09 Aug 2010 12:22:01pm
Ads,
For goodness sake read proper data instead of the drivel that the libs feed you.Agree (1) Alert moderator
-
kocsonya:
09 Aug 2010 1:27:54pm
Um, less than 8% of GDP? We had much higher debts before. Of course one should not allow facts to stand in the way of some good old political trolling.
It is very hard to swallow, but we're in a much better shape than the rest of the developed word in every way. We have low debt, low interest rates, low unemployment, low inflation. All that despite what the Opposition promised... Sad, isn't it.Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
caz:
09 Aug 2010 2:26:28pm
Guess you are no worse than some of the media Ads but you are very wrong with the information you put forward.
Nope we don't have the highest debt ever.
We have a moderate debt and an economy envied worldwide. We have services, working conditions and infrastructure that better our lifestyles and our community.
Abbott and puppet master Howard want to take it all back... no thanks.Agree (1) Alert moderator
-
-
Lenyboy:
09 Aug 2010 9:27:05am
Some facts to contemplate. Australia is in a better position than any other developed country after the worst recession in 80 years, because a government had ths guts to spend money that was uselessly sitting in the bank to save jobs. There were some ripoffs by individuals and companies in the stimulus plans, but visit a local school which now has a new hall and see how appreciateive they are. If Abbott was in charge during the global economic crisis Austrlia would be in recessions with an unemployment rate nearing 10 percent. But that would have been right up dear old Tony's alley as it would give him the perfect chance to reintroduce his draconian workplace rules. Look who was in the audience at his launch. A formere Pm who presided over the best economic circumstances Austral has ever had and left us with the worst education system, hospital system and infrastructure stalemate in history. Also prominent was that champion of fair play and a fair go for the worker, Clive Palmer. No wonder he supports Abbott - it will make him richer and put ordinary Australians where they belong, doing what they are told by teir bosses. Abbott is as dangerous as Mark Latham and not as smart.
Agree (1) Alert moderator
-
Andy:
09 Aug 2010 1:34:51pm
Go read your history before you prattle on with ALP fallacies. Pay off $96 billion ALP debt in less then a decade then cope well with the Asian financail crisis withourt resorting to debt and deficit just to name a couple of hurdles the last government coped with.
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
-
Kieran:
09 Aug 2010 9:34:26am
Nobel prize winner Joseph Stiglitz thinks labour are economically sound. the liberal party seem like children who cant get there way. just oppose everything and then come up with more excuses to oppose when they are found out to be wrong. i guess you'll call Stiglitz a latte lefty sent from beyond by Kim Jong Il to destroy small business and serve pensioners cat food.
Agree (1) Alert moderator
-
Rob1959:
09 Aug 2010 9:43:39am
Obviously Amused Qld youre another of these people from the right who have lived the last several months in a bubble and missed all the Nobel laureates lauding how effective and efficient and world leading the response to the GFC was. You can't help it can you but to deride anything Labor has done! And dont start the waste and the debt dribble either we all know that the Government had to borrow to stimulate and keep people in jobs, the waste would have been the 12 % unemployment we would have had under a coalition government and the loss of infrastructure again under a coalition government.
Best RobAgree (0) Alert moderator
-
anzaan:
09 Aug 2010 10:55:31am
Are you sure about your facts?
12% unemployment? Really? where did you get that number?
I won't debate the fact that stimulus was needed at that time , only because I don't know exactly how things might have gone had the stimulus packages not been rolled in.
And I'm inclined to believe the government did the right thing at that time instead of waiting.
But I find the mindless quoting of economists and other experts very very irritating.
Did the Nobel laureates do a thorough study of Australia economy and its state at the time of the crisis? Did he factor in China factor? Did he do his homework before offering his opinion? And oh, did he predict the crisis before it hit the globe?
Lots of questions but not that many satisfactory answers.Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
caz:
09 Aug 2010 2:30:33pm
Do you prefer to rely on quotes from the media who like to dramatise all and sundry into a desperate crises fuelling the fire of deliberate misinformation from the Coalition?
Agree (1) Alert moderator
-
-
Anne :
09 Aug 2010 10:23:09am
Hmmmm.
Didn't a nobel prize winning economist have something to say about the govt's credentials ?Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
Andy:
09 Aug 2010 1:35:52pm
Did he predict the GFC???
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
-
Mofo:
09 Aug 2010 10:24:20am
The labour party supports all the working class people. Liberal will just give control back to the large corporations so that they can maximize profit, pay no tax and make the working class people suck for their money and pay higher tax. Within Rudds term there have been more education help payments and pressure on big companies to stop monopolizing and hence all the negative media against labour. Now to just break liberals hold on the media!
Agree (1) Alert moderator
-
Annie:
09 Aug 2010 12:19:59pm
Amused:
You will surely WAKE UP with a big bang if the libs get in.Agree (1) Alert moderator
-
-
salo:
09 Aug 2010 9:11:16am
Not only will he claim not to be able to fulfil his promises, he'll revert to the policies he really believes in: no action on climate change 'crap', parental leave 'over my dead body', harsh IR laws, pandering to big tobacco etc.
Agree (1) Alert moderator
-
Steve Jabiru:
09 Aug 2010 9:41:41am
The Labor party kept me in business the Liberals will send me broke, it is that simple.
Agree (2) Alert moderator
-
unfoiled:
09 Aug 2010 10:34:57am
You are not the only one still in business but alot are just hanging on and alot have have already folded. Our income is down half like alot of ppl we talk to. Hanging on by the finger tips hoping for confidence to be restored. Havent felt confident since early 08!
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
petros:
09 Aug 2010 12:41:11pm
You must have experienced the depression to talk like that...or maybe you realise we're operating a great deal better than any other western country. Live a little sport.
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
Billy Bob Hall:
09 Aug 2010 12:16:13pm
Some 'business' if you were relying on rorts. How long did you think the rorting would last ?
Time to up-date your 'business plan' sir.Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
kocsonya:
09 Aug 2010 1:29:59pm
Do you think R&D is rorting? Wow.
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
Billy Bob Hall:
09 Aug 2010 4:18:35pm
R&D into 'global warming' is definitely rorting.
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
-
-
Steve:
09 Aug 2010 10:21:03am
Razz, where exactly do you think governments get their money from? It either comes from a combination of responsible taxation and spending or it must be borrowed. Where do governments borrow from? They borrow from international financial markets. Look at the recent Greek experience of having the EU reluctantly bail them out. Governments cannot defy the financial laws of gravity.
By the way, I am rapidly approaching retirement age, and yes--I will be voting for 'this Neanderthal!Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
-
Joseph:
09 Aug 2010 8:37:57am
One correction to "Not doing something is often way faster than doing it. Cheaper, too."
Maybe cheaper now, but it will cost us all more in the long termAgree (0) Alert moderator
-
Geezer Bandit:
09 Aug 2010 8:38:20am
I've voted Informal all my voting life and I'm not going to change now.
I'm just waiting for the Informal Party Policy launch with my water skis at the ready.
That's what it's all about isn't it? Mucking about with words?
I'm not religious, so I can't vote for a party that has an abbott and two bishops in it.
My farver voted labor all is life and so av I.
Seriously, though, I live in a safe Liberal seat, and intend, along with many others to vote green in the hope that those votes will flow on to labor and shake up the complacency in this neglected electorate.Agree (1) Alert moderator
-
John O:
09 Aug 2010 9:14:17am
Why don'yt you just vote ALP to start with? Or don't you understand the way preferences work? Or is it just a look the Greens polled x % statement? Waste of a vote.
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
luke warm:
09 Aug 2010 11:48:28am
In safe seats, the only wasted vote is one directed to the safe incumbent. Safe seats and rusted on voters are the enemy of democracy and representative government. If more people were prepared to put their sitting member last (particularly in safe seats) governments would start becoming responsive to the people who elect them rather than large corporations and trade unions.
Why put Greens in front of Labor? Because if enough people do, a Green gets elected. Even if not enough do, if Labor has to rely on preferences it reminds them they need to lift their game.Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
kocsonya:
09 Aug 2010 2:15:15pm
Because funding depends on the primary vote.
Not a wasted vote at all.Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
-
DanDare:
09 Aug 2010 9:38:07am
Geezer,
glad your giving the Greens your primary vote, but your preferences will only "flow on" to Labor if you give them your second preference.
The only exception to that is in the senate, where you can vote a 1 for a party to allocate your preferences for you above the line on the ballot paper. I never do that, I like to know where my preferences are going thanks.Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
caz:
09 Aug 2010 2:39:30pm
As I understand it from Geezer's comments, the seat is safe Liberal so he / she won't be effecting an actual change in likely elected candidate but will be making a statement in the way the preferences are put. Might not change the outcome of the election but does get analysed so may be of some contribution. Fair enough I think.
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
-
-
rb:
09 Aug 2010 8:41:00am
With this morning's Newspoll showing that Labour is pulling ahead, and Abbot's popularity slipping, you must be enjoying all that egg on your face Annabel.
I look forward to your insight on why the Liberal Party is actually falling behind.Agree (1) Alert moderator
-
Lewis of The Hills:
09 Aug 2010 9:57:54am
A primary vote of 38% is pulling ahead? A national 2pp is meaningless as governments are form by the party with the most seats.
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
Paul:
09 Aug 2010 10:07:36am
A little harsh i think RB, Annabel is as close to the middle on politics as is possible and shows uncommon objectivity in the vast majority of her posts.
As much as i would like to see the ALP continue the good work of the last 3 years I am not going to put to much emphasis on one poll, especially one from new ltd.
People dont seem to realise how well Australia is travelling but when you view Australia from the outside and in a global context the ALP should be returned with a bigger majority. Just goes to show the power of rupert.
It was also fun to see the Peacock has returned from OS to put his shoulder to the wheel for the conservative cause, bet his return ticket is dated 22/8/2010 [1st Class of course, why not we are paying for it and he doesnt even live in Australia].Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
caz:
09 Aug 2010 2:43:16pm
well, mostly agree there Paul but Annabel does seem particularly harsh towards Julia at time....
so Peacock out there too.... this election is starting to make me think of zombie movies ... "Night of the Living Dead" stuff...Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
-
chipinga:
09 Aug 2010 3:25:01pm
It would be nice if it were that simple...Labor is in trouble in QLD, (many marginal seats, with the Nielson polls showing a big swing against labor) NSW, WA and look like losing labor held seats, and a marginal seat for Solomon as well..!
Gillard is still sweating bullets...believe me..!!Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
-
Helen:
09 Aug 2010 8:41:27am
I have to say I am liking Tony more each day, he is taking the moral high ground and area where Julia seems to be void and baren.
Having survived the BlackSaturday bushfires myself, it was a pleasanr surprise to see him here making an announcement that would aid Victorias fire fighting efforts.
Somthing our own state government cant seem to do.
Thank you!Agree (1) Alert moderator
-
Stuttgart:
09 Aug 2010 10:10:46am
How peculiar that you would feel that way. Personally I was disgusted that any politician would have the nerve to go "pork barreling" in an area so recently devastated by tragedy. Then again, after seeing how Mr Abbott has made so much political mileage and tried scoring so many points off the loft insulation tragedies I shouldn't be surprised.
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
Felipe:
09 Aug 2010 11:42:38am
Pork barreling is a labor election commitment. Just wait how they will do it in the marginal seats like what Mike Rann did in SA. Labor's 3 years in office have offered nothing to this nation instead it had wasted money by the billions, borrowed money by the billions. Embarrassed the country overseas by their neglect of Japan, Korea, Indonesia . . .and on top of that labor think our national security is not important sending their juniors to the national security meetings. If not for the leaks we the people would not know about it. What other secrets do this labor government have. It is very very scary.
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
Annie:
09 Aug 2010 2:04:44pm
Felipe:
Libs secrets, how they are going to finance all their promises, which they haven't declared yet!!!Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
petros:
09 Aug 2010 2:39:04pm
Felipe Labor learnt from the Libs..they're experts at pressing the flesh with wads of notes....oh...it was slight of hand...sorry all the rest of us missed it. Or are you watching from outer space?
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
-
-
petros:
09 Aug 2010 12:44:24pm
You don't like Julia do you Helen? The pittance Abbott whined out is nothing. it's a state matter anyway.
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
-
jaycee:
09 Aug 2010 8:42:01am
First.. thank you Annabel..for getting back on track...The Liberals launch was full of personality but empty of substance...but then this whole election for the liberals has been "swipe and hype"!....WE do not need to go into policy here, they havent been finalised or costed, purely core and non-core...Listening to the promise of getting down and getting things done....a month or so after the election, that is "Tony's to lose"...the memory sprung to mind (and the younger ones will not know of these) of those street-spruikers in the late sixties. mostly of a cockney descent, but adapted for Australian conditions, they would hold "chocolate-box auctions", where the spruiker would hold up a big box of Swiss chocolates and announce proudly that he "was not going to ask two quid for them not even ten bob..but you can have this big box of fine Swiss chocolates for....ONE BOB!!"...Does anyone else remember them?..of course a "dummy" in the gathering crowd would throw a "bob" to the spruiker and then a plainbrown bag with bulky "mystery boxes" would be offered for auction. The crowd, suitably prompted by a sprinkling of "dummys" would start a fevered bidding!....You get the drift......Well, yesterday; same auction, same theme, same swindle...only the kitty in the middle wasn't for "bobs" or "dinas"...it was for votes! Start your bidding!
Agree (1) Alert moderator
-
Felipe:
09 Aug 2010 11:51:46am
I was watching Sky news broadcast on the Coalitions election launch and saw a "campaign alert" on the screen telling the viewers about Gillard's news conference. This is the labor party, no respect and is doing whatever it takes. I will not vote for a party that is lead by fakes and has beens. How can anybody support labor when all it did in the last three years is spend and waste billions on all their promises and stimulus. Never ever admitted or given the previous government any credit for keeping us risk free from recession. Labor are made of spin and lies and look at how Gillard lies without blinking. Gillard is an economic ignoramus what she has is a background in socialism and communism/marxism. Voters beware.
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
Annie:
09 Aug 2010 2:09:54pm
Felipe,
Have a look at The National Press Club viewed on ABC to-day.
I am a Labor supporter and I felt embarrassed for Hockey. He has no idea how to run a school raffle far less Australia's Economy.Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
-
-
Tommo43:
09 Aug 2010 8:46:18am
Gillard on "no sport unless you attend school" is an ugly, bullying way of approaching a difficult problem. It stands a strong chance of making many situations a lot worse with the possibility of youth suicide being at the end of the trail. Positive reinforcement must always be the first call before such negative reinforcement is carefully explored. You got this one completely wrong Ms Gillard
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
salo:
09 Aug 2010 9:09:17am
It supposes that all truants are so keen on sport that the threat will change their behaviour. I think we'd end up with a group of uneducated fatties if this policy is brought in.
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
Leigh:
09 Aug 2010 9:17:38am
Yes Tommo, because telling everyone their "special" and having no consequences for poor behaviour has worked so well till now
They need an education and denying them something they love to get them in the classroom is a good idea. In the same vein as no dessert until you've eaten your vegies.
Having said that, I'm still voting Liberal for the first time in my life.Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
ItsBreathtaking:
09 Aug 2010 9:19:48am
Its just more of the nanny state approach under this aLP government. Internet filter, alcopops, and cigarette packaging - why do we need to think or take responsibility when the government does everything for us.
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
Steve Jabiru:
09 Aug 2010 9:27:30am
A few years ago in Arnhemland they tried no school no pool.
This was a huge success, so much as they are implementing it in other places, the attendance rate climbed significantly, the kids love going to the pool, seeing as most of the water holes are croc infested.Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
kimworldwide:
09 Aug 2010 9:42:45am
Tommo, any incentive to attend school is good. Work ,then you get reward. If they don't get schooling they could end up on the dole,and then Mr Abbott will send those 30 years and under off to fill jobs where they are needed.
Agree (1) Alert moderator
-
Lehan Ramsay:
09 Aug 2010 9:47:40am
Kids who don't attend school regularly are less likely to be in sports teams. Which doesn't necessarily mean that they don't like sport. It depends on what they'll be doing instead of sport. If it's something to help with their studies, perhaps they'll develop an interest in track and field.
Agree (1) Alert moderator
-
Chase:
09 Aug 2010 9:54:17am
Because punishing people for doing the wrong thing is 'bullying'.
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
anzaan:
09 Aug 2010 10:29:35am
This laughable policy is sounding like factional bullying tactic from the labor party machine. Its sad that the tactic has crept in as government policy.
AS for the policy itself, I don't think Julia understands what she's doing, its the same ignorance she displayed when setting up that laughable myschool website.Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
Gregor:
09 Aug 2010 2:22:06pm
"Gillard on "no sport unless you attend school" is an ugly, bullying way of approaching a difficult problem." "the possibility of youth suicide being at the end of the trail"
That's a bit of a long bow isn't it?
As a teacher you learn that the best way to motivate someone is to get them to want to do it. To get kids to want to come to school, you have to get them into the school before you can show them the value and interest in learning. It is hard to positively reinforce something that doesn't exist, and I don't agree that providing an incentive based around a (minor) negative outcome is negative reinforcement, except of behaviour that is damaging to the student.
In schools with an anti-academic culture, kids see it as a badge of honour to avoid class or muck up. If sports are what motivates them to attend, and eventually behave, then it is a useful tool to providing an equal footing for everyone.
If sport is the main motivator it is a good place to start, and if the program is successful it can be expanded to other areas.
The only way you can guarantee failure in this area is to stick to the current situation, which isn't working.Agree (1) Alert moderator
-
-
Anth:
09 Aug 2010 8:53:35am
Are people's memories so short?
All this campaign really proves is that Abbott has studied his Liberal history. In 1993, Hewson went to the people with the most comprehensive policy scheme in living history - and went down in a screaming heap. Three years later, Howard - loser of the "unloseable" 1987 election - had a convincing win in the 1996 election by doing exactly what Abbott's doing now. He presented a small target, made few if any policy announcements, and focussed on the government.
The Labor Party, in 96 as in 2010, was left floundering for things to rebut, because the Liberals simply didn't give them any material.
I think Abbott is mean and despicable, but he's not a fool.Agree (1) Alert moderator
-
Elvis:
09 Aug 2010 9:16:32am
No, Tony is no fool but he is John Howard in budgie smugglers. He doesn't need to espouse his policies - a quick history revision will show where a new Coalition (aka Conservative party) government will go.
Agree (1) Alert moderator
-
Ads:
09 Aug 2010 10:28:45am
Where will they take us?
Reduced debt?
Actual competence in government?
Away from internet censorship?
Away from wasting $43b on a project that will be out of date before its even finished?
Away from taxing our greatest export earner because you have a deficit to cover up and you're out of ideas?
Seriously, after the farce that was the ALP attempt at governance, I'm staggered anyone still supports the ALP right nowAgree (0) Alert moderator
-
petros:
09 Aug 2010 2:46:25pm
Ads you aren't a true believer anyway...so go! Doesn't matter where because your vote will be with all the other mis-readers of today's situation. You think that Abbott will tell you anything before the election...he's been told to shut up. Labor has been upfront but the likes of yourself and elements of the media manhandling the truth as an opinion piece has sought to topple Julia...but you'd be happy with that.....or am I wrong?
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
-
-
Gweneth:
09 Aug 2010 11:22:01am
Well I think he is. They have lost it. To win this they needed to hold the lead in the polls. They haven't. Whatever leverage they wanted to get out of flogging the Rudd/ Gillard horse has played out and now they are left with nothing.
Annabel has summed it up really. They don't have anything to offer.
It is going to be up to the Young Liberals, and some post on this site, to pull the oldies aside and tell them quietly that the time of the neo-con is over. In a post GFC and climate change world the corporate greed mantra will not cut it. They need to tell them what they cannot bear to hear after a lifetime of sniggering and patronising - that the Greens were right about the environment all this time.
And they are going to have to tell them to step aside and let a new breed of leader take over and remake the party from the bottom up. They need take down the adored portraits of Howard and sigh and put them in the spare room and then decide what they stand for: are they conservative or liberal?
I only give this advice because, while I am a long time lefty, I really think that Australia deserve a genuine alternative government in opposition to make our democracy really work for the benefit of all.Agree (2) Alert moderator
-
petros:
09 Aug 2010 2:49:10pm
Now that is an astute comment. Libs are playing old cards and they are played by old leaders.
major parties make things tick...not the snipers....Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
-
-
Steve:
09 Aug 2010 8:57:31am
"Not-doing things has a number of strategic and practical advantages over doing things. Not doing something is often way faster than doing it."
Actually, there are times when not doing something is not only faster, but better than doing something. Take, for instance, the months leading up to the invasion of Iraq. While GW Bush was assiduously putting together his Coalition of the Willing, there were plenty of calls (mostly coming from left-of-centre) for the world to do nothing.
I think that the real danger in the modern world lies in government by panic. I am old enough to remember any number of life-ending crises that the world and its nations were stampeded towards finding a solution. First it was nuclear winter, then global warming, then climate change, and now perhaps back to global warming. Or the GFC. Or illegal immigration. Or this or that. The problem is that when people look to government, particularly big government, to solve their problems--real or perceived--then there is a diminution of personal responsibility and initiative. Governments are then led to believe that any solution is better than doing nothing at all. BER and the home insulation tragedy come to mind.Agree (1) Alert moderator
-
chris:
09 Aug 2010 8:58:22am
Anyone who wants to check Crabb's credibility can find the speech and find out how much Abbott talks about Labor.
By my count it's 900 of 3300 words or about 27 per cent. The whole basis of this article is a falsehood.Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
Gregor:
09 Aug 2010 9:35:29am
On that count the liberal party's great policy launch had more than one on four words devoted to the other party.
Add in ad nauseam repetition of the four "action" points (all about not doing, rather than doing), periodic praise of Joh Howard (the guy who lost his own seat 3 years ago?) and a phobic focus on less than 2% of immigrants, and it isn't a very flattering or heartening look at a party that wants to govern. The emperor may have no clothes, but neither does the prince in waiting.
Where is the policy? Why do the parties keep giving each other a free ride? Is it just because there's so little difference between them (their main points being they are not each other, not why they are not each other) that not even they really care who gets in?
I've said it before and I'll say it again.
Grim. Truly grim.Agree (1) Alert moderator
-
Lehan Ramsay:
09 Aug 2010 9:48:50am
That would be 23 percent falsehood, wouldn't it? What's the going rate these days?
Agree (1) Alert moderator
-
Bing:
09 Aug 2010 9:53:00am
Think you are wrong Chris. I watched it and it was Labor bashing pure and simple. And to think channel 9 had to reschedule the footy programs to accomodate Abbott's garbage. Sheeeesh....
Agree (1) Alert moderator
-
caz:
09 Aug 2010 2:53:55pm
Not even a footy follower but agree with you there Bing.
Agree (1) Alert moderator
-
-
Chase:
09 Aug 2010 9:57:35am
Twenty Seven percent is a lot. Especially since you've only searched for the word Labor and haven't included all the things he has said about Labor.
Agree (1) Alert moderator
-
guy:
09 Aug 2010 10:30:31am
I think you proved Annabel's point and shot yourself in the foot, chris.
Agree (1) Alert moderator
-
caz:
09 Aug 2010 2:57:29pm
Thanks for checking it out chris and proving the opposite of what you seem to intend. 27% would be a great big waste and was a great big tax on the time available to get the coalition 'message' across.
Agree (1) Alert moderator
-
-
John:
09 Aug 2010 8:58:52am
Is Tony Abbott fit to lead? He has already proven he can lead.
*He alone pre-empted what would happen in the Copenhagen talkfest and stopped an emissions taxation scheme that Kevin Rudd wanted to impose on us that the rest of the world didn't want.
*He has unified a team which 2 other leaders were unable to do and launched an immediate opposition.
*He led the uncovering of the Labor spin and ineffective government showing the Canberra Press Gallery how to do their job.
*It was his leadership that caused Rudd's drop in the polls and his eventual downfall.
*He has already led previous effective portfolios and was a popular minister .
*He is completely in touch with the electorate being a volunteer fire-fighter, life saver and worker with aborigines because he wants to, not just for spin.
* He started and leads his own movement for charity.
*How has Gillard demonstrated she can lead?Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
Xylophile:
09 Aug 2010 11:04:12am
He pre-empted the Copenhagen outcome? Not really. He smelled blood. What, do you think he would ever take any other position? He doesn't believe that humans are responsible for climate change. No surprises there. Hardly visionary or a leadership issue.
OK, so he unified a team. But that's because of political savvy. Being the leader of a wolf pack doesn't mean that you are kind to lambs, or battlers as we call them.
Labor spin? Of course he has none of his own, does he?
Rudd's undoing was at his own hand. He was an autocrat. Had he relied more on his team, he would still be our PM. This had nothing to do with Tony at all.
Led effective portfolios? Hmmm...and was part of the leadership team that took our young boys into Iraq to lose their lives...and at what expense to the taxpayer? How about being part of the team that was at the helm when AWB lost us billions?
Completely in touch with WHICH electorate? The gay community? Women who want control over their own reproductive future? People who believe that climate change is real and caused in part by human activity? Remember the NT intervention...that paternalistic policy that was imposed without consultation of his beloved Aboriginal constituency? This guy is in touch with the electorate of 1955.
No doubt Mr Abbott has some stirling personal qualities. I'm sure he's not a bad person. But as a man who has the backing of billionaires, millionaires and big business as his grass roots, I just wonder whether we are looking at someone who aspires to be a Catholic benevolent despot rather than a representative of all Australians on the world stage.Agree (1) Alert moderator
-
Annie:
09 Aug 2010 2:25:51pm
Xylophile:
Excellent words.Agree (1) Alert moderator
-
-
Annie:
09 Aug 2010 2:22:19pm
John
*How has Julia (please) demonstrated she can lead*
The answer......everyday.Agree (1) Alert moderator
-
-
John from wollongong:
09 Aug 2010 9:08:02am
Regardless of your political beliefs you have to admit Tony Abbott gave a masterful presentation of Liberal Policy. How Oakes could say that the only Prime Ministeral performance came from Kevin Rudd defies all the senses. I thought only ostritches burried their head in the sand.
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
granny:
09 Aug 2010 10:53:48am
A masterful presentation? Are you serious? He spoke as if he were addressing a bunch of six year olds - maybe that is why you were impressed? Are you really six?
Agree (1) Alert moderator
-
kocsonya:
09 Aug 2010 2:25:32pm
"Liberal Policy"
What, exactly, is Liberal Policy?
I'm probably weak in the mind, but however hard I tried, I could not figure it out yet. I understand the "Labor bad, Coalition good" bit, but I couldn't find anything else.Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
-
jusme:
09 Aug 2010 9:08:54am
tony tony tony.
vote for you cos you're not labor?
why only go halfway mate?
next speech REALLY make an impression by saying:
vote for me cos i'm not hitler. c'arn.
now THATS persuasive.Agree (1) Alert moderator
-
Chase:
09 Aug 2010 9:58:10am
Totally agree.
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
-
John from wollongong:
09 Aug 2010 9:13:20am
Something weird is happening with opinion polls. Are they being rigged? People don't change their opinions two to three times a day. If the polls are being rigged then the electoral commission should intervene.
Also some interviews of politicians, of all persuasions, are allowing the interviewee to stick to a script regardless of the questions asked and the electoral commission should consider these as a political advertisment.Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
Bing:
09 Aug 2010 9:54:42am
Electoral Commission get involved - what for? They are OPINION POLLS - not bloody electoral fraud. What a waste of money getting the commission involved would be.
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
Lucy:
09 Aug 2010 10:09:19am
John, they don't always ask the same people.
It's a random sample, mate, and carries a polling error.Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
Xylophile:
09 Aug 2010 10:55:29am
Beyond the machinations of polls, there is the plain and simple fact that this election will be determined by the marginal seats. If the polling were to be balanced out, then they would ask more questions in those seats and fewer in the blue ribbon ones.
I think that at the end of the day, it will boil down to one question and one question only: When you wake up on August 22nd, do you want to call Tony Abbott, "Prime Minister Abbott" or not. I shudder.Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
lukemac:
09 Aug 2010 1:58:21pm
If Abbott is PM on the 22nd the sun will still rise in the East.
Unless of course Labor was needs to do something to make it rise, then its anybodies guess?Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
Xylophile:
09 Aug 2010 6:51:43pm
And it will be the shortest Prime Ministerial term ever. If he thought he could obstruct the Labor party, just wait until the Labor party and the Greens stand in his way. I almost delight in the perverse wish that this comes to pass...just as a matter of justice.
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
-
-
guy:
09 Aug 2010 10:32:44am
John - the opinion polls are small sample of the whole electorate. Each time they take a poll they take a new sample, not go back to the same people. In fact, the 'swings' in the opinion polls have been small and they are more than likely a close estimate of how the voters overall are thinking.
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
Jess:
09 Aug 2010 10:52:53am
More to the point - who cares what people think day in, day out. Fair enough if it needs to be said every week or so in the election, but there's a new poll every day and has been for months prior to the election being announced... There's only one poll that matters so how about some REAL news until that one's done!?
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
-
dr no:
09 Aug 2010 9:14:41am
The grabs I saw were hilarious - with Tony the Chaser really have some serious competition.
Why on earth have they brought out John Howard - the single most devious deviceive character
in living memory ?
At this rate they'll be luck to still be the oppositionAgree (0) Alert moderator
-
Frank SPAGNOLO:
09 Aug 2010 9:16:33am
I sudder when I think of Gillard representig me as Australias Priminister overseas . She has no WOW factor like Maggie Thatcher had. Yes Gillard is a women but she has no sex appeal , and for me worst of all she doesnt even speak clear Australian. She has a reputation for back stabbing Rudd .....third world politics.....how can anyone trust her?
3days after her election NSW union bosses were at my work demanding we become a union shop ! God only knows what will happen if she wins office.Opps sorry God, Gillard doesnt even like you.
Abbot is a YOUTHFUL leader he speaks Australian.Abbot has a vision is professional and human. He for once will bring youthful ideas to Canberra. Abott is fit healthy he surfs, rides a bike and swims..mmm it could be said he has more sex appeal than Gillard .Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
Gregor:
09 Aug 2010 11:25:48am
Kellie Tranter summed this up well on the drum. see http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/stories/s2976056.htm
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
ProtoCol:
09 Aug 2010 11:32:54am
Fascinating, Frank. Please explain what sex appeal has to do with politics.Agree (1) Alert moderator
-
Kocsonya:
09 Aug 2010 6:51:11pm
Well, Cicciolina put her, um, uncovered bosom on public display in parliament, to demonstrate that (unlike her colleagues) she has nothing to hide... It didn't have significantly more actual political content but was a helluva lot more entertaining than watching, say, Joe Hockey shouting in question time.
Politics these days is pretty much about public entertainment (and backroom deals, as non-public as possible), sex appeal has a place there.Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
-
-
Opinion:
09 Aug 2010 9:17:03am
In this article, Annabel Crabb seems to delight in her negative commends on Coalition's key figures. In the interest of fairness and a demonstration of ABC's true balance reporting, I wonder if she would care to replicate one directing at the Labor Party. Please don't tell me they are all angels.
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
guy:
09 Aug 2010 10:33:58am
Just read some of Annabel's past articles and you'll see she enjoys poking fun at both sides. Or, won't see, if you've got blinkers on.
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
caz:
09 Aug 2010 3:07:12pm
Think it was well past due that their be some critique of the coalition. Have been much miffed at the extent of Annabel's digs at Julia and the ALP to date.
Agree (1) Alert moderator
-
-
Andrew:
09 Aug 2010 9:23:15am
All Labor do is talk about Tony Abbott. Regarding the "no week end sport for truants" policy, what do week end sports organisers have to do with school education? I was a tenpin bowler and I couldn't imagin my tenpin bowling organisers having to decide whether I should be allowed to bowl or not because of my school attendance. This is totally ridiculas. Also for some kids their week end sport is the only thing that gives them a feeling of accomplishment, so why double wammy them by taking their sport away from them. Dumb idea.
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
guy:
09 Aug 2010 10:34:58am
Each side is running a negative campaign. Neither has much positive to say. It's very hard to see what either stands for except 'we're not them'.
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
lukemac:
09 Aug 2010 2:01:27pm
No true, Liberals are running adds regarding what Tony Abbott will do as PM, so are Labor.
Labor has given up talking about their record and what they can/will do, its all about T Abbott.Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
-
guy:
09 Aug 2010 10:35:01am
Each side is running a negative campaign. Neither has much positive to say. It's very hard to see what either stands for except 'we're not them'.
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
-
Peter Smith:
09 Aug 2010 9:26:39am
I am really angry with this election. At heart I am a socialist but something profoundly disturbs me about Labor. This government is incompetent and callow. It does not care for the interests of ordinary battler but that of the the labor aristocracy, the trade unions. What is worse, they have come to believe their own propaganda about Abbot and rely on this as a lazy way to slide into power. I will have no qualms voting Green and I find myself increasingly attracted to preference the Libs if for no no other reason than they are not the rabble that Labor has become.
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
Xylophile:
09 Aug 2010 10:53:19am
You can't do that, Peter. If you vote Green and preference the Libs, that's like saying "I want the world to change for the better, and if I can't get my person elected then I'll vote for people who don't believe a single thing I do." I'm afraid you are going to have to rethink that strategy and opt for the lesser of the evils. I'm the same boat. Pity we only have one oar!
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
YMM:
09 Aug 2010 11:58:23am
Of course he can. He can vote however he likes.
But there's a better way. You can vote one way in the House of Reps and the other way in the Senate. That way you can have an incompetent government in office, but they can't actually do anything because the Senate blocks everything.Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
Xylophile:
09 Aug 2010 12:28:58pm
My point exactly, YMM. We'll be back to the voting booths within a year if the Libs take the House and the Greens control the Senate. Mexican standoff.
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
-
-
caz:
09 Aug 2010 3:12:55pm
Well it is quite unusual for someone claiming to be socialist to be so anti unionist... stranger still to support a move further to the right by preferencing to the coalition.
And there you are using language and arguments that match so well with the coalition philosophy. Curiouser and curiouser.Agree (1) Alert moderator
-
Peter Smith:
09 Aug 2010 7:38:04pm
Trade Unions unfortunately have come to represent the interests of a labour aristocracy. What happened to the Unions of old that represented the working class, the poor and downtrodden masses? Labor is no longer a socialist party...money for school chaplains & Mary Mackillop, performance pay for teachers etc. are all symptoms of a once great political movement that has lost its way. Labor needs to learn the lesson that it can't become a pale imitation of the Libs...in effect do anything to keep power for the sake of power. The Greens represent a new socialism based on sustainability, social justice and an equitable society. Anything less is a fraud.
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
-
-
emily:
09 Aug 2010 9:33:30am
The most frightening thing - and not really mentioned - is the resurrection of John Howard, proud of 'his boy'. Is this the Prime Minister who lost his seat in the last election? Then he calls Julia Gillard a failure. Would a Coalition Government be more of the same, ten years ago?I hope not.
Agree (1) Alert moderator
-
Ads:
09 Aug 2010 10:32:54am
Howard was PM for over 10 years - what success has Julia had?
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
kocsonya:
09 Aug 2010 2:32:00pm
Franco was a dictator for 11 years. Even more successful than Howard. Maybe instead of turning Australia into a republic, we should turn it into a dictatorship. What a success story that could be!
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
-
Andy:
09 Aug 2010 1:40:09pm
The ALP resurrected KRudd who was such a failure they had to get rid of him six weeks ago
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
-
Enough Please:
09 Aug 2010 9:34:14am
The only line in this article that is worth reading Annabel is that Abbott didn't mention one policy at his launch,
That is what you should be writing about not a Gossip column, you're better than that
Remember when you were a political journalist and not a Home and Away cloneAgree (2) Alert moderator
-
kimworldwide:
09 Aug 2010 9:34:38am
Annabelle , so you are a reporter for the soap opera. You did raise a couple of questions that perhaps you should ask Mr Abbott and yourself,then you could have something worthwhile to report.Why would he spend half his speech attacking the opponents? Why would he elect not to use his party's POLICY LAUNCH to launch any policy?Rather than the answers lying in the' barely-repressed grins of all who cheered', it could be he doesn;t want to talk about details. He could have explained the policies pledges so far. Little things that Australians may want to know. Costings on policies he has put forward. Where all his cuts are going to be. Perhaps he could have explained how his calculations were done,showing that cutting the mining tax is a saving.
Agree (1) Alert moderator
-
ItsBreathtaking:
09 Aug 2010 1:14:04pm
Sorry Kim - would write a more comprehensive reply to you, but have been swamped by the deluge of detailed 'moving forward' - 'found our way' policies presented by Gillard. Once I finish reading the detail about the school attendance and sport policy, I will get back to you. Hang on, might have to delay that as I read the 'offshore processing' policy with East Timor. At leastwe know what Abbott is aiming to do on day 1, week 1, month 1 - and who is cabinet will be if elected.
Tell me if I missed somethng with regard to Gillard/Swan's transparency. Why is she not rpepared to indicate who will be foreign minister, finance minister, and industrial relations.Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
-
Robert:
09 Aug 2010 9:39:39am
The liberals are like a balloon - full of hot air but empty when pricked.
At some point you have to stand for something, you have to present a vison, back it up with policy & costings, and more importantly, you have to hold true to it. Abbott's flip flops on climate change, workchoices & paid parental show a falseness that in the end the punters are awake to. And given the latest polls it seems that they smell a rat. I sus[pect with 2 full weeks the leberals shallowness will be exposed even more.Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
Andy:
09 Aug 2010 9:42:08am
The only answer the ALP politicians and their advertising have for Australia is "Tony Abbott" . The ALP have a dismal record they can't run on and are bereft of any original idea between them. Pity help the country if they get reelected. Rmember a ote for the ALP is a vote for Rudd the Dudd.
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
Xylophile:
09 Aug 2010 10:51:05am
Dismal record? I hope you enjoy your day at work, Andy, because if Abbott had been at the helm during the depths of the GFC, you might not have had a job. We have low unemployment, terrific economic growth, low interest rates and will be out of debt in two years. Now what exactly is dismal about that?
I bet that every other OECD country wished it was in as "dismal" a condition as Australia is, and that's because of what the government did and how quickly it did it. Read Joseph Stiglitz' statement about that. An American Nobel Economics laureate who recently said that the reason that Australia is in the position it's in is because of the actions of the government. Open both eyes, mate. You'll get some perspective.Agree (2) Alert moderator
-
Andy:
09 Aug 2010 1:42:40pm
I am a public servant. We have grown exponentially under the ALP. The only growth industry the ALP knows to how expand.
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
lukemac:
09 Aug 2010 2:05:13pm
Out of Debt in two years?
Really, someone doesnt know the difference between Surplus and debt!
It will take years to pay back Labors debt, three years time they will stop borrowing money!
BTW we had record low unemployment and all the other things you point of before Rudd and his train wreck took over, thanks To John Howard and Peter Costello.Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
Xylophile:
09 Aug 2010 4:39:40pm
It's just incredible that bright people, as you apparently are, can be so foolish. How can you be so vociferous about "Labor's debt" when you know fully well that it would never have been the case if the financial world had not imploded.
What you call "Labor's debt" saved our collective butts. And to keep things in perspective, the total debt incurred by Australia...that is the whole country...is less than half of what AIG, and insurance company racked up. Meanwhile, we are sailing along as the envy of the developed world.
Get real or at least try getting honest before espousing the complete bull faeces that the Coalition is spewing at us. And considering the state of the rest of the world, we are still pretty close to full employment here. The unemployment rate that you blindly attribute to Howard and Costello was as much a result of China's boom as anything that they did.
And please do keep in mind our entry into the Iraq war, where your beloved Liberals followed a moron into a costly war...without scrutinising the threadbare evidence. AWB? Shall we keep talking about waste now? What did the Iraq war cost in real Australian dollars? Perhaps you should crawl back under a convenient ledge and hope that this all passes over unremembered along with the other one-eyed Liberal supporters.
Watch now as Tony has to get pugilistic....the polls have sagged and now we'll see him without the sheep's clothing. The Coalition is going to lose.Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
-
-
Gregor:
09 Aug 2010 11:21:39am
The only answer the Liberal politicians and their advertising have for Australia is "Rudd/Gillard" . The Liberals have a dismal record they can't run on and are bereft of any original idea between them. Pity help the country if they get elected. Rmember a ote for the Liberals is a vote for Howard.
Eerie how that works, isn't it?Agree (1) Alert moderator
-
-
Anne T:
09 Aug 2010 9:46:04am
Have to agree BP. Gillard at her worst leading Labor at its worst is still light years ahead of Tony at his best and the Coalition at their best. Tony Abbott forgets that the world exists. He doesn't have a world view because he does not understand that Australia is placed in the world. In his microscopic and myopic view, he is superman who can blithely ignore international laws and agreements and champion bogan Australia.
Agree (2) Alert moderator
-
Andy:
09 Aug 2010 10:37:39am
No one represents bogan Australia better the Gillard with her 'gunnas' and 'wannas ' for 'Austryia'. The ALP want to governm minutes of your life more like North Korea the a democracy. At the under Abbott the internet filter is GONE.
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
-
Chase:
09 Aug 2010 9:48:51am
Labor should be re-elected on the way it handled the GFC alone. Why is it the non-issue of 'boat people' (run!) ranks higher than the fact we've got one of the worlds strongest economies?
Agree (1) Alert moderator
-
Warlock15:
09 Aug 2010 10:18:47am
I totally agree Chase, and if anyone is interested in hearing what one of the world's best economists thinks of Mr Rudd's handling of the GFC, please insert the link below, into your browser. It is a transcript of the interview between Kerry O'Brien and Professor Joseph Stiglitz. Why Julia Gillard's Media Advisors have not put this up in lights right around Australia just amazes me, because it's the best publicity the Government has had.
http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2010/s2965891.htmAgree (1) Alert moderator
-
kb2010:
09 Aug 2010 10:21:58am
And the strong position Australia had before the GFC was due to the Liberals.
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
Xylophile:
09 Aug 2010 11:51:35am
A chimpanzee would have been successful as China boomed and we exported our soil. Let's get real here.
Agree (1) Alert moderator
-
Lukemac:
09 Aug 2010 6:36:54pm
So your saying Rudd and the gang of four wasted billions because we survived the GFC thanks to China.
Thanks for clearing that up!Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
-
-
Lewis of The Hills:
09 Aug 2010 11:01:52am
Because the people are starting to wake up to the fact that it has been one of the world's strongest economies for the last 30 years.
It is foolish to ignore the enviable set of circumstances the Australian economy was in GOING INTO the GFC. $22b surplus, zero government net debt, rock solid banking system, mineral wealth with China at our doorstep.Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
Xylophile:
09 Aug 2010 11:53:03am
And as I recall, John Howard - powerful as he believed himself to be- did not move China to the geographical position it occupies. We got the dirt, they want the dirt, our dirt is the closest, and that's just dumb luck, not Howard's genius.
Agree (1) Alert moderator
-
Lewis of The Hills:
09 Aug 2010 1:18:22pm
And as I recall, we are refuting Labor taking full credit for Australia's mild downturn... fail to see your point in this context.
You really should move on from your hatred & resentment of Howard for being PM for nearly 12 years.Agree (1) Alert moderator
-
-
-
-
Greg Kneebone:
09 Aug 2010 9:54:09am
All spokespersons for the labor party, from the leader to the non political, display a degree of anger in their responses, sometimes a lot, this is a sign of not handling pressure. The pressure is not caused by a concern of their failure as a government ut concern for their chances to be reelected, this is very much a sympton that their real concerns are with themself, not with their responsibilities as a government.
The coalition are cool calm and collected, no doubt a sign that they are not feeling the pressure, they also are thinking clear enough to have developed a plan of what they will respond to if they get elected. This is showing clear thinking and confident leadership of the country if they are elected.Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
kimworldwide:
09 Aug 2010 10:29:51am
Greg, Labor may show frustration (you see anger)because Australians have become so dumbed down they don't see more than the headlines.Mr Abbott says they have a plan, but no detail, facts and figures. Ask about costing, what are they going to cut? How do Mr Abbotts policy spendings look on paper, and not just in slogans? Its all in the detail.
Agree (1) Alert moderator
-
caz:
09 Aug 2010 3:24:06pm
Well frustrated with the ludicrous media coverage and substance less spin and rhetoric of the coalition - certainly.
I think you credit your coalition comrade with a greater generosity of spirit than they demonstrate. Perhaps they could start by acknowledging the many successes of the Labor government including the recent exoneration of the BER.Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
-
GP:
09 Aug 2010 9:55:58am
It was truly amazing to see the Liberal party walking around as if the election has been won. They have started celebrating. The usual gags and jokes and the "Sarah Palin buzz from Julie Bishop. It appeals to the base but turns off the swinging voter. As for policy they have none. How long before the media starts to focus in on that. Can they fly under the radar until the election? No mining taxes (That keeps the billionaires happy), no boats (though no idea how they will actually be achieved), It is easy to say NO. Set up a security committee that already exists. Read the Henry report and maybe implement it, but not what and when. Where is the vision?
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
Andy:
09 Aug 2010 10:46:02am
Of course the Security Council exists. Abbot promised that a coalition government would treat it seriuosly and attend meetings IN PERSON and not send their chief of staff or body guard to represent. This is where all the sensitive issues of us and our allies are discussed and should not be treated in an arrogant cavalier way as RUDD/ GILLARD do.
Gillard/Swans/ Rudds economic vision from the Henry review was to sit on it for seveal months and then implement things that Henry voted against like the increase in superannuation. They have never released the modelling of any of the recommendations. They have hidden them for us. Abbott said he would release all the modelling etc to promote community and business discussion before adopting what is feasible all with in 12 months. Juxtapose that with Gillards 150 person committee to help her decide what her Green policy MIGHT be!!!!!!!!!Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
granny:
09 Aug 2010 11:01:48am
I don't know how the Libs would be able to stop the boats, because that action is illegal.
Agree (1) Alert moderator
-
-
lukemac:
09 Aug 2010 9:59:28am
A number of times its been said during this election, where is the vision, where are the big ideas?
I'd say we had a guy last time who had big vision and ideas full of hope and promise. He was so poor at the basics and lacked direction, he got knifed by his own party.
The real issue this time is good governance. It not sexy, it doesn't make people want to dance in the streets, but good governance is fundamental. Without nothing gets done and what does get done need to be done over to fix the mistakes of the first effort.
I'll take good solid governance over big vision and big spending this time for sure.Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
Xylophile:
09 Aug 2010 10:43:34am
If you recall, lukemac, the guy was knifed first by the No You Can't opposition, led by the one-vote winner, Tony Abbott. Rudd's climate change legislation was torpedoes by Abbott, not his party. The vision was there, but the political will to call a double dissolution wasn't.
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
-
Algernon:
09 Aug 2010 9:59:48am
Abbott says were not the Labor party. Heck they're not even the Liberal party anymore.
Agree (1) Alert moderator
-
polls apart:
09 Aug 2010 10:26:04am
Knockout line, Algernon. I love it :-)
Agree (1) Alert moderator
-
Xylophile:
09 Aug 2010 11:53:59am
Agree, Algernon! Malcolm Fraser and John Hewson agree with you too.
Agree (1) Alert moderator
-
-
BLZBob:
09 Aug 2010 10:00:45am
Abbot says that workchoices is dead, buried and cremated.
Then suddenly howard is resuscitated, exhumed, extinguished and rehydrated.
Where is workchoices now?
Just waiting it's turn.Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
kb2010:
09 Aug 2010 10:20:44am
That's just scare mongering.
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
caz:
09 Aug 2010 3:28:00pm
actually funny.. thanks BLZBob
One can't help but think, however, that whilst Abbott might actually honour the commitment not to bring back work choices during a first term, he is bringing back all the foundations that Howard got in place during his first two terms.... hmmmmAgree (1) Alert moderator
-
-
Xylophile:
09 Aug 2010 10:46:27am
And without any official costings, you just watch Abbott's grand Paid Parental Leave scheme get lost if they are elected.
You can't change the spots on a leopard, and though they'll call it something else, the principles of WorkChoices, which were, "either you do what I, the employer say or you have the Choice to work somewhere else," will come back like Lazarus.
Perhaps they should also bring back GW Bush so that Howard and he can resurrect a campaign against imaginary WMD's?Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
caz:
09 Aug 2010 3:32:21pm
I have to say, I hope the coalition parental scheme does get lost. Supporting one high income woman for 6 months will use up years of the tax contributions from us humble wage earners. That makes me feel ill.
Fully support a boosted baby bonus.. all mothers get it and a safety net base parental leave. Over and above is the business of employers.Agree (1) Alert moderator
-
Xylophile:
09 Aug 2010 7:01:26pm
Agreed, Caz. But that's the Liberals in a nutshell. Help the battling $150,000 earner, but raise the minimum wage? Not on your commy socialist unionist life!
Labor's policy, though not terribly generous is at leasty fully costed and ready to go.Agree (1) Alert moderator
-
-
-
-
Ronaldo:
09 Aug 2010 10:01:01am
I think we are beginning to see the old Liberal ideology of,"Born to Rule" rearing its head.
There seems to be a degree of Hubris creeping into the Oppositions attitudes.
Mr. Abbott is being very well advised to lock down and play safe.
As an issues voter I still haven't determined who I will vote for but I am beginning to form an opinion. I think The Prime Minister is being sorely tested in a way the opposition leader hasn't, and for sound reasons, the Government has not shown itself well in this campaign. However it has shown the mettle of the PM and I'm beginning to think the Government will get a second chance from me.
Are we to believe Mr. Abbott has changed, or is it a return to the former government which made us unhappy enough to replace them in 2007?Agree (2) Alert moderator
-
Andy:
09 Aug 2010 10:49:25am
So you believe Rudd has changed and he now believes in all of Julia's frightful non decisions. Get a grip. To resurrect a leader you thought so toxic 6 weeks age because Gillard is now toxic beggars belief. If you saw it in a soap opera on TV it would stretch credibility.
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
Andy:
09 Aug 2010 10:52:35am
Such mettle she runs Foreigh Minister job in hand to beg her TOXIC predecessor to return. That is not leadrership. If she believed she was right and Rudd was wrong she should have the intestinal fortitude to back up her decision. She gave in to the threee big miners. Under pressure she goes to water and nearest compromise to protect her ample backside.
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
Annie:
09 Aug 2010 2:52:51pm
Andy;
Watch a repeat of Lathan attacking the Prime Minister.
What a great lady our PM is, handled herself beautifully.Agree (1) Alert moderator
-
-
-
Jill Storch:
09 Aug 2010 10:05:05am
How about a bit of indepth analysis of the alternatives in a Lib Gov? Abbott as PM and Julie Bishop, Foreign Affairs representing us at internationsl forums? I think not perhaps!
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
Xylophile:
09 Aug 2010 10:47:26am
And I can't wait to see Abbott with leaders of Muslim countries, considering that as far as he is concerned, Australia is a "Christian" country.
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
Joyce:
09 Aug 2010 10:48:04am
Vote for an Abbott, a Bishop, a Tuckey?
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
-
Malcolm:
09 Aug 2010 10:06:33am
Policy launch you say? Must have missed it, all I saw was no policies and the usual emphasis on right wing wing conservative drivel.
A display of arrogance and cynical belief that the Australian public are xenophobic conservatives longing for the 1950s.Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
Ads:
09 Aug 2010 10:12:27am
More anti Tony bile Annabel?
As for the 'lack of policy announcements" well some of us like that. You see there was a guy called Kevin, who announced a policy or program at every press conference - and now we're looking at almost a generation of debt.
I'd be happy to get professionals in, rather than the amateurs we have now.Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
Gregor:
09 Aug 2010 2:26:46pm
"now we're looking at almost a generation of debt"
3 years.
Yes, almost a generation (low birthrate notwithstanding...)Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
-
kimworldwide:
09 Aug 2010 10:14:11am
The Headline is so ridiculous. You think it is a WINNING point to say you are not the opposition.Really? We are talking about someone running our country ,not winning big brother. Your headline should have said,'Liberal Point- we are not Labor'. Now that is fact.
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
Hector:
09 Aug 2010 10:24:22am
Unfortunately, Annabelle, according to the latest polls the liberals have had it it. They've peaked too soon; used up all their ammunition: the miners, Nauru, Howard, Oakes, Latham, Labor wars, etc, etc. The only one left to turn to is Ivan Milat! Looked like Abbott was always unelectable.
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
polls apart:
09 Aug 2010 10:24:56am
To an extent, Annabel, your piece appears to be informed by polling. Well I think I have detected something interesting. The opinion polls are erratic because people have worked out that by misinforming pollsters, they get back to good government and see an end to spinmeisters. I think people deliberately, although perhaps subtly, give incorrect information to polling processes knowing that by doing so the party machines that sweat upon these polls, will be out of business. No longer will pollies and backroom boys and girls be able to manipulate the will of good people with trickery, they'll actually have to rely on the prosecution of their beliefs and policies.
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
Good Grief:
09 Aug 2010 10:27:39am
This is one election where voting will be by default even more than usual!
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
chipinga:
09 Aug 2010 10:28:54am
Labor always takes Australia into debt...
like the old saying..
History always repeats itself...and we never learn from history...Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
Helvi:
09 Aug 2010 11:34:17am
Chipinga, dead right there, you had Howard, yet you want Abbott...and what's more you would get even less with Tony than with Johhny.
I never thought that was possible.Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
-
The Count:
09 Aug 2010 10:29:47am
Annabel, I'm usually a fan, but your inability to differentiate between the decision to have a family and the decision to fornicate reveals a lamentably juvenile perspective. Please try to put more thought into your analyses - we need insight and informed commentary, not gags!
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
Mike:
09 Aug 2010 10:30:55am
Abbott says today, that he is the underdog, that's because todays polls show him slipping. If one compares it to his speech yesterday, it was all cockiness. He virtually spoke as if he was already elected! What utter hubris for Scott Morrison to even travel to Nauru to do a deal even before being elected. This clearly is an insult to the voters since no one had given them a mandate to do so. Also who is funding this trip, is it the tax payer? The campaign was not about POLICY, but more STAND UP COMEDY. Not a good impression for a party trying to look an alternate government.
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
goffa:
09 Aug 2010 10:33:21am
The bright green elephant in the room which blows its hooter every time a new poll is announced is Mr Thirty Something percent!
The people don't like the Mad Monk because they can see straight through him. Obviously this includes many loyal liberals as well.
It reminds one of the famous saying - You cannot polish a T**d but you can sprinkle it with sparklies. And that is about the substance of the Liberals campaign.
And why don't the media latch onto this very simple and very telling statistic and examine it like they do every other nuance and subtlety. THis doesn't include the Murdochcracy of course, they are too busy sprinkling sparklies.Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
Maria Altmann:
09 Aug 2010 10:37:19am
The thing that amazes me most is that the ALP has done a pretty good job. No government is perfect. It is the people in the administrations that really make the difference to the way policies work-out on any government. In Australia, administration departments and their industry partnerships, lack true scrutiny.
As the opposition trys to paint the ALP negative. It must be recognised that the so called Gov. debt is 6% or less then GPD. Amazing that the Opposition would have us panic. Amazing that we would bother to panic.
The ALP I hope will win another term. They do have some things to finish - given the policies being pushed are not short-term and, we as many Australians voted for these "progressive" polices. Broadband being but just one of them. I don't want to see the Oppositions cuts... cut all this out. I want to heckle the ALP to push through harder.
Thank You - ABC.Agree (1) Alert moderator
-
Joyce:
09 Aug 2010 10:42:55am
What a meaningless phrase 'Real Action' is. What, and who, IS 'real' - or unreal for that matter?
Examining the nuances, rather than staring at the binaries would improve a Party's and a voter's understanding of the issues concerned- I'm almost certain.Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
Dave in Australia:
09 Aug 2010 10:59:41am
No they are the Liberal Party. Did we not vote last election to do away with their policies and ideals? They come to us with piecemeal policies and no plans just talk, tokenism, and media spin. Australia can not afford another four years of a Liberal or Labor government.
Abbott and Gillard along with their parties have thrown piecemeal policies at voters. They are playing political football with the future of Australia and treat our economic, environmental, and social standards of living with contempt. Are they really there to represent us or are they there for themselves and their deep pocketed donors and party heavyweights?
The underdogs in this election are the Greens and other minor parties and independents who struggle to get their messages heard.
Labor and Liberals have lost their way and have had too many opportunities and yet they are seeking another.
This election voters have a choice between more of the same talk, tokenism, and media spin from Labor and the Liberals OR they can make their voice heard and vote for Greens and other minor parties and independents who have short, medium, and long term plans for the future of Australia and are willing to take strong bold positive action to achieve better economic, environmental, and social standards of living for all Australians.Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
PaulD:
09 Aug 2010 11:00:28am
I can't wait for the election to be over so all the party faithful pushing their respective barrels in these coments will go and crawl back under their rock for another 3 years.
As for Abbott's lack of policy - he seems to be promising a more competent, frugal government. Howard could competently implement a policy, but slipped up on the frugal side with all that middle class welfare and pork barrelling.
Rudd promised so much, but proved to be not terribly competent in delivering his promised policies.
I tell all the rusted on ALP voters I know that an election loss could be the best thing to happen to the ALP in years. The NSW and Qld style of running the party would be rejected, and the ALP strategists responsible would be run out of town.Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
chris:
09 Aug 2010 11:04:23am
When Crabb says noone in attendance was thinking of voting Green, I guess that means she was watching on television.
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
TechinBris:
09 Aug 2010 11:15:55am
Lets get this right, the main thrust of the Coalition in this election is that they are not Labor and their leader is not Gillard. The main thrust of the Labor Party is they are not Liberal and their leader is not Abbott.
Seems to me that nullifies the big two out and inconsequential as each other if you follow what their campaign rhetoric says. What is left? Greens? God forbid...Family First? Sex Party may be fun.Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
Simplemightbesmart:
09 Aug 2010 11:17:22am
Could someone please explain why the Coalition should have great big visionary policies when the bank account is more than empty? In household terms doesnt this sort of debt mean the big plans are put on the back burner until bills are paid off and finances under control?
It seems as clear as day I would think and I for one, would much prefer to see a Prime Minister or opposition leader be moderate in their big promises than cry saviour, only to let us all down (again).
Perhaps Mr Abbott's apparent simplicity is a little smarter than we all think.... I suspect he does not plan to sicken our nation with empty promises that have too often, left us all disillusioned and cynical.Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
mundo:
09 Aug 2010 11:20:18am
'and its all thanks to the Labor Party' oh really Annabelle?
Don't sell yourself short.
It's all due to the Labor Party AND the media's pathetic failure to provide decent grown up scrutiny of Abbotts exaggerate, exaggerate, exaggerate tactic at the core of his Go Negative strategy.
The sad thing is you think it's all about you.Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
Andrew:
09 Aug 2010 11:20:42am
This launch succinctly displays that the current Coaltion are the most policy free, vaccuous,and shallow outfit that the Conservatives have ever put forward - and for them that's saying something.
Unfortunately they have been aided and abbteted by an equally shallow (and of course bias) media who have decided that the epic efforts of the Labor Govt in avoiding a recession and all the long term social and economic benefits that brings, should be ignored and have instead focussed on such pivotally important things as whether Julia rang Kevin in hospital and if not why not?.
It would make great copy - for New Idea that is. In the mean time we have the Opposition Leader swanning around the country virtually unchallenged with barely any costings on his promises, and not be asked to account or explain his well established, and on the record, phiolosophies and stances on a wide variety of issues.
Even by the low standards our commercial media sets for itself, the banality of it's 'reporting' of this election has reached it's ultimate nadir in terms of of integrity balance and honesty.
It is nauseating and beggars belief to imagine Tony Abbott as our Prime Minister .Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
yys:
09 Aug 2010 12:12:20pm
Andrew
I'd be more worried about a Labor Party that has failed to function with dignity and decorum while in office and has not paid enough attention to administration.
Sacking a PM so close to an election, pretending to kiss and make up with Kevin, New Julia, old Julia, Policies that appear at campaign time and disappear in government, (greatest moral issue of our time now only warrants a talk fest), reviews like the Henry report put in the too-hard-basket
New Idea? More like the Labor (Rudd):Gillard government that have No Idea of how to govern.
You have the chief of Swanning in your camp and he is struggling to justify why the BER timing doesn;t match with the time when we needed the stimulus spending, yet is meant to be part of that programme. Leigh Sales showedthe weakness in Mr Swan s economic plan on Lateline the other night.
I would hate to think that Labor would slide back into office
They slid in last time with little scrtutiny of policies, now we can see them as they are. All talk - no actionAgree (0) Alert moderator
-
petros:
09 Aug 2010 5:51:17pm
Yet you want us to accept Libs policies which aren't available to scrutiny....and it's ok for them to slide in? You are illogical or ignorant.
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
-
-
occa:
09 Aug 2010 11:22:48am
What I can't understand is how there is no discussion of Foreign Policy at all in this election campaign. With the US and Isreal threatening to attack Iran, the tensions in the South China Sea and between North and South Korea one would have thought one of the candidates might have made mention of their party's policy.
Around the world many commentators are remarking that we stand on the verge of WW3, and if this eventuates our future as a nation will be under threat.
Let's not forget that the Liberal Party has led the country into two illegal , and losing, wars in the recent past. This alone, surely, should preclude them from Government.Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
Lee:
09 Aug 2010 11:33:28am
Through my eyes, there is no difference between the fibs and fabs.
The last election, the fabs promised the world and gave us the moon....
This election, the fibs are promising the world and the fabs I have no idea what they are promising?
So, who should i vote for? There is the queens, sex party and the anti-australia socialist alliance.... no thanks.
Yep... this election every vote is a donkey vote... no matter who u vote for, u get a donkey.
If it wasn't for the twenty dollar fine, i may not turn up.Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
RodJ:
09 Aug 2010 11:42:22am
Your articles Annabel, continue to tell us more about you than your pet (or assigned) project, Tony Abbott. It's clear that you despise the man - but why should we the public have to keep you in a job to hear it? If I am not mistaken, you are a public servant now and your job is to serve us - not just Labor voters Annabel, not with your version of spin.
To accuse the Liberals of being "all about Labor" in their launch is deliberately misleading on your part. This is the Opposition being all about the Government - the same as for any other time in history, regardless of which party is in government and which is in opposition. It's the Opposition party's job to be all about the government!
I resent your obviously biased analysis. Do you really think you are going to get away with using basic and dumb subliminal lines like "said Mr Abbott, moving forward"? Are we expected to believe this is an accident? If you want to bait us with this pitiful crap, get a job with the party and resign from the public service, where you are not doing your job properly anyway.
Please ABC - replace her with someone who will report what's going on rather than what influence they want to infuse. Have Barrie Cassidy escort her to the carpark and delete both of their security passes.
I'd be curious how many other voters out there have been persuaded towards the Coalition or Greens (well not really Greens as their votes are essentially Labor vote), as a result of media Labor biases. It's intriguing!Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
Bruce:
09 Aug 2010 11:44:54am
Wonderful article Annabel!
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
Huge:
09 Aug 2010 12:14:24pm
...hey Crabbers.. you are a Gillard supporter everybody knows that,,stop pretending and come out!
My opinion is that to be "merely not Labor" is a giant step in the right direction..I want my kids to be able to afford living when they leave home...do you have any kids Annabelllllllle?Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
Pilliga:
09 Aug 2010 1:05:14pm
Hey Huge: Check out Tony Abbott's real opinions in his own words on the video advertisement on the Getup website. I bet you will never let your kids watch it!
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
-
John:
09 Aug 2010 12:36:35pm
Annabel, I heard a comment on Sky News to-day and I wonder whether your readers could comment.
They said that Labor were sandbagging marginal seats ie putting in Independents to suck some of the votes away from the Coalition and then giving Labor preferences. They also said that is the way Labor won the SA Election.
Is this true? If so, do you think that this is the proper way to find out who the people really want to run the countryAgree (0) Alert moderator
-
MJMI:
09 Aug 2010 12:54:36pm
Of course Abbott is focussing on Labor. His advisers are probably telling him not to allow anyone to think about his potential front bench with stars like Kevin Andrews (Haneef), Philip Ruddock (Cornelia Rau) Bronwyn Bishop (aged care disasters) Julie Bishop (can't actually think of anything she has done, right or wrong). Their achievements were as low as Labor's but with much more individual vindictiveness. Howard's gone but that's about all I can see in their favour.
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
Grasshopper:
09 Aug 2010 1:07:06pm
Funny isn't it - Labor camapigns on not being the Liberals, The Liberals campaign on not being Labor, and the Greens campaign on not being either of them.
To my mind that makes the Greens twice as good as either of the others, but of course double nothing is still nothing.
*sigh*Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
smarteye:
09 Aug 2010 1:40:43pm
A word on one of Abbott's core election promises - 'Stop the Boats!' In the words of a formerly dis-endorsed Liberal candidate "Please explain?" Is it her constituency that Abbot is playing to here? Increasing penalties for people smugglers is all very well but how do we catch them? Is Tony going to swim to Indonesia, cycle around until he finds one, then run to the authorities with the extradition papers? 'Boarder Security'! When was the last time one of these boats made it to our shores without a Customs or Navy escort? What do we need securing against? Are these people going to throw their excrement at us after being stuck on a boat for 10 days? This is seriously a non-issue. I would have thought a Christian would have treated these people with some sort of compassion instead of using this as an excuse to play tough guy with a nod and a wink to the bigots and rednecks. I don't have the policy answer (neither does either major party) but I know the answer isn't a shanty-town on Nauru (or East Timor) for people who have already suffered enough
Agree (1) Alert moderator
-
Trudy:
09 Aug 2010 2:05:46pm
So much to read, but there is no susbstance. Nit picking and negative commentating about the Labour...which seems to be the "flavour of the month" is what is making it so difficult for Julia. give her a go! Kevin should swallow his "whatever!!!!" and get on with getting along with eachother...and show some real passion with the "fight of our lives" campaign. Time 's running out...and we haven't reminded "THE PEOPLE" the VOTERS that Liberal is just mouthing and producing NO costed Policies...Kevin is correct with his assessment that He....the r'Abbot will just slide into the new TOP JOB,,,,by default.Surely the VOTERS have more common sense...
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
ItsBreathtaking:
09 Aug 2010 4:43:07pm
No costed policies - are you sure that none of the coalition policies have already been submitted? Do you recall the aLP submitted its 2007 costings 12 hours before the ballot.
Who will slide into who's job? Can you remind me exactly how Julia got to be PM, and why?
Can you explain to me exactly what Julia [either of them] stands for if anything? What is her vision?Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
-
jeffbaby:
09 Aug 2010 2:33:01pm
For some time now, both in Australia and the US, the conservative agenda has been "NASTY". It inolves never accepting the right of other than the conservatives to ever govern the nation. It also involves constant opposition, not just to policies to which they are philosophically, but opposition to everything. Oppose, oppose, oppose. Kill, kill, kill. Attack, attack, attack. Its an approach that Oppositions don't have to pursue but it seems that in this modern era they don't want to admit that the GFC and Iraq, a gneral failure to address climate change etc, had anything to do with them or their supporters. In fact, they never refer to these things and deny for example that the GFC should have had any effect on Australia at all. In Australia, Annabel is finally right. The Linerals do not have any policies other than being NASTY all the time. After all Labor does not have a right to rule, to save the nation from 10% uneployment they would have had under the Liberals. Just as they didn't have the right to introuduce Medicare or Legal Aid in times gone by, both fought tooth and nail by the Liberals. Australia deserves better than a NASTY campaign by the alternative government.
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
Pun:
09 Aug 2010 2:39:28pm
If the Liberal-National coalition believe that the electorate want the country's government policy decided on the basis of who has the best gags, or that government is stand-up comedy, they must be joking.
( "The weekend has been a gag writer's dream for the Coalition" )
or, if they are serious about gags passing for policy, they can take up residence in the nearest entertainment venue and spare the taxpayer the time and money needed to maintain the Parliament in Canberra and pay the golden handshake when they retire.
And I wouldn't waste my money paying the ticket price for some of the lame gags used on the weekend.Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
Moz:
09 Aug 2010 2:47:57pm
I disagree; Tony and the coalition have got some policies:
1. "I'm all in favour of paid maternity leave as a voluntary thing. I'm dead against paid maternity leave as a compulsory thing. I think that making businesses pay what seems to them two wages to get one worker are, almost nothing could be more calculated to make businessses feel that the odds are stacked against them. So, voluntary paid maternity leave, yes; compulsory paid maternity leave, over this Government's dead body, frankly, it just won't happen under this Government." Tony Abbott July 2002
2. The Howard Government's industrial legislation, it was good for wages, it was good for jobs, and it was good for workers. And let's never forget that." Tony Abbott March 2008
3. Climate Change is absolute crap." Tony Abbott October 2009
4. "My instinct is to extend to as many people as possible the freedom and benefits of life in Australia. A larger population will bring that about, provided tht it's also a more productive one." Tony Abbott January 2010
Tony Abbott's policy positions are clear, or am I missing something?Agree (1) Alert moderator
-
StaggerLee66:
09 Aug 2010 4:50:57pm
Nice work Moz -
Clear, cogent, succinct and UNDENIABLE.Agree (1) Alert moderator
-
-
Brian (devonport):
09 Aug 2010 3:36:28pm
A bit frightening watching the LIbs Campaign Launch to see John Howard alongside Senators Abetz and Brandis on the front row.
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
Kyle:
09 Aug 2010 5:16:05pm
Mrs Bishop, Labor does represent a soap opera; they have characters, a storyline and plenty of twists. The Liberal party represents a critic. Yes, it's easier to criticise than create, and you are quite good at it, but it's job of the public to decide what is good and what is bad.
You'll at least have to table a script before you get more than one star from me.Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
Carol B:
09 Aug 2010 6:53:15pm
Annabel, really - Warren Truss, are you joking. He kept giggling at his own comments like a halfwit. He thought he was so clever - stay in country QLD Warren, they think you are great like the giant peanut! Good luck!
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
djaef:
09 Aug 2010 7:33:04pm
The Coalition is bereft of one thing, and it's not policy, it's ideals. They have none. They have a false sense of moral superiority; they think the "conservative" position is the correct one; they think that surpluses are good in and of themselves and care not one iota for governments actually doing their job to provide infrastructure and ongoing reform to society and the economy. The Coalition think they can just go into 1950s cruise mode and the world will be good. Bark (or dog whistle) about the boat people, whine that the climate is fine and we don't need to do anything, carry on as if surpluses are the only thing that matters, even despite a GFC, complain about ANYTHING AND EVERYTHING, and hope that some of it sticks. And of course some does. This Labor government has made mistakes. But they are a government with a direction and some ideals behind them, and that's more than I can say for "we're not Labor" Abbott. The saddest thing is that this country almost deserves Abbott in government...
Agree (1) Alert moderator
Comments for this story are closed, but you can still have your say.
Search ABC News
News Just In
- Sick woman pleads with Gillard over PBS costs
- Premier's office block in white powder scare
- Rents stagnate in June quarter
-
Coalition says sorry for Malu Sara election ad
-
Team-mate 'confronted' Lovett after rape allegation
- Slime moulds explain irrational humans
- Rudd campaigns on Palm Island
- Brain scan may help autism diagnosis
- NZ farewells fallen soldier
-
Mining boss warns again on tax impact
-
50m barge washes up on Gold Coast beach
-
Baillieu denies tax haven claims
ABC Analysis
- Liberal winning point: 'We're not the Labor Party'
- Mad Hatters of the campaign tea party
- It seems the real Julia needs the Christian lobby
- Keating, news and that vexing right to know
- Seceding where others failed
- Forget gender and policies, it's all about Gillard
- Give me liberty or give me...
- Tracing the political 'arc of disappointment'
- Labor look out for the Rudd factor
- The iPad is no laptop
- The Palin tease
- Labor policy make-up melting in political spotlight
- iPhone 4 arrives in Australia
