Dear Henry,

I think most of what you say is well-reasoned. However climate change is more important than economic management. You can't drink money. Water is just the most obvious manifestation of the problem. And Howard has well and truly painted himself into a corner on this issue since he won't sign Kyoto. This is a debate where symbolism counts. You can tell that Malcolm Turnbull isn't convinced that not signing Kyoto is good policy. Indeed, it is bad policy. Indeed, a backflip on that issue could clinch it for Howard.

The bottom line is that this election campaign pits a seasoned fabricator who is reknowned for it against a cleanskin who looks the goods. I think you were right when Howard said he was being sincere about the election being difficult, but your prediction is wrong. A 1% swing across the board will unseat Howard: this time he's going down.

Why change the government? Because economic prosperity is not the only issue, and in my view not even the most important issue. Matters like declining personal integrity, inhumane treatment of individuals (David Hicks, Cornelia Rau, boat people, etc.), neglect of education, and slow response to environmental issues are all characteristic of this government.

And anyway, our only chance to keep the bastards at least moderately honest is to throw them (whatever party) out of office every so often and remind them they are not born to rule.

Labor may not do as well at managing the economy, but they might do a few things that make me feel proud to be an Aussie.

Let's return to the Westminster system with one side of politics alternating with the other to provide a result thaet goes towards satisfying all. If Kevin Rudd can keep his team of people standing for election under some form of universal control than I think that John Howard will lose the next election - people are getting tired of him and his synthetic morality.

Henry's makes a couple of presumptions with this piece. These may be 'economically prosperous' times, but the real measure is how people feel. The sense, in Australia and elsewhere, is the inequities wrought by market economics have swung too far.

The federal government's ideologically-driven IR legislation has provided yet more proof that the Liberals under Howard are a party of "punishers and straighteners" (to use Keating's language).

Excessive executive pay, long working hours, the growing encroachment of work on family life, a lack of accountability in public life and a sense that morality comes second in everything to making money all make a nonsense of the claim that Howard has improved Australia. (not to mention his scapegoating of minorities and ugly dog whistle politics that panders to the most base prejuidices of the community)

In any case, the economy has performed well DESPITE his governance, not because of it. A monkey could have run Australia these past 10 years and the economy would have boomed.

Indeed, where Howard has intervened, it has generally been disastrous - the halving of the capital gains tax on investment property fuelling an unsustainable housing boom and a frittering away of the proceeds of a once-in-a-lifetime commodities boom on middle class welfare, to name just two examples.

A change of government cannot come soon enough.

Economics is the very reason we should not vote this government back in. For they have made economics god. Anything is justified - war, torture, removal of rights, mass deception - if it helps the financial powers improve their position.

This policy has produced great economic statistics (actually many experts would say "moderate", compared to earlier decades), but at the same time introduced injustice (goodbye "fair go") and a certain meanness into the Australian psyche.

Yes, perhaps Mr Thornton, in his typically uncritical homage to Howard's policies of "prosperity", might like to reflect on the observations made in the SMH recently by the always astute Ross Gittins about how "prosperity" equates to an outsourcing of risk from the corporate to the household sector.

http://www.smh.com.au/news/ross-gittins/risky-business-but-not-for-the-boss/2007/01/30/1169919337040.html