The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Turning taxes into spin > Comments

Turning taxes into spin : Comments

By Graeme Orr and Joo-Cheong Tham, published 23/5/2007

It's time that government use of ads for political ends was reined in.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. All
Stating the obvious really. Not reigning in. Stopping. No taxpayer funds for any Party political activity. None.

Don't forget though all governments today do it, use our money to try and tell us how winderful they are while we miss out on services.

I must say the Howard government's advertising on cancer, which exceeded the money spent on research etc on cancer, is the bottom of the barrel.

No more, not one red cent.
Posted by pegasus, Wednesday, 23 May 2007 8:44:24 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I tend to agree with you Pegasus; I hate it when they waste our money.

Some government ads could be legitimate. For example, reminding us not to drink drive. Letting us know about total fire bans.

There are important information opportunities that the government fails to inform us on.

They failed to inform the public that the census last year was compulsory. The little nicey feel good promotions just explained that the census was nice, and it was for nice people.

They also fail to remind us about water waste, please don't fill the pool, we are really serious this time, and so on.

They didn't inform us on traffic problems caused by the QMII and the QEII this year. They will not inform us sufficiently about the disruption caused by APEC. For example, they will de-scramble our phone systems in Sydney, the traffic will again ground to a halt, but of course: are too lousy to give us a holiday so that we can stay out of the way. So we have this mess.

Meanwhile, more adds on how "wonderful" their economy is. Wonderful for some, but not for all. Yes, I agree with John Howard, they risk being annihilated due to their own arrogance.

Anyway, moving right along to the post-Howard years, I agree with Andrew Bartlet. Information for public is important, but it must be agreed from bipartisan approval. That way it is not just a waste of money to promote a political party.
Posted by saintfletcher, Wednesday, 23 May 2007 11:01:44 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
"Honest?" john is perplexed at the Australian electorate turning its back on him and his party. Maybe, other than his and his parties constant lies and their total arrogance, it is his what could be seen as corrupt use of tax payers money to prop up his lying out of touch liberals. So there is no Parliamentary backing for the new "revised fairer?" workplace laws - so much easier to ignore and forget them should these clowns be re-elected and ,knowing the honesty of these liberal politicians that would be sure to happen.
Then there is the total disdain and utter contempt howard has for all us voters shown, once again, by him trying to bribe us to vote for him. And sending the latest leader of the nationals into Queensland with their proverbial 'brown paper bag' will just re-kindle the memories we have of Joh's nationals and their 'brown paper bags' howard could not have made a better choice as brown paper bags and national party politicians go so well together eh? Regards, numbat
Posted by numbat, Wednesday, 23 May 2007 11:31:54 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
"Democrat senator Andrew Murray has gone further in a bill proposing that only ad campaigns with bipartisan approval be allowed in the last six months of a parliament."

- why just the last six months?

Under what circumstances would legitimate government advertising not receive bipartisan approval? If those circumstances arise then that can become a point of difference at the following election.

R0bert
Posted by R0bert, Wednesday, 23 May 2007 12:49:07 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Okay no taxpayer funds for advertising (though how we would be informed is an interesting question) but no funds to the political parties either, especially union funds which have always given the ALP an unfair advantage - or place a strict monetary limit on what can be spent on all these activities and insist that the media gives equal coverage to all groups as well. Giving the minor parties the same amount of media space would really have the big ones worried.
The other interesting question would be "at what point do government information campaigns become political advertising?" They all do it - South Australia's Rann had an extraordinary tax payer funded media blitz just before the last election.
Posted by Communicat, Wednesday, 23 May 2007 2:00:34 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
another cat belling discussion. subjects will advance on local member, cap in hand, and "humbly pray": "please sir, could we have less theft, corruption, lies, and waste of taxes?: local member replies, "there, there, gummint is too complicated for you lovable but simple subjects, leave it to us professionals, we'll take care of you."

and then? then nothing. you vote for the other mob and a year after they get in, you can't tell them apart. year after year, same old story and you never catch on.

the reason pollies are such crooks is, ozzies are such mugs. why should they change?
Posted by DEMOS, Wednesday, 23 May 2007 4:07:08 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Communicat, you know that the Liberals may not have union funding but they have corporate funding. They virtually own the shock jock at 2UE, they have their old boys club with Murdoch, Packer and the usual Liberal backers as well as the Melbourne club.

Don't harp on about the poor dear old Liberals.

This victim politics from the Liberals is the last gasp.

Howard saying poor bloody me, "we will be anihilated" aaaawe diddums.

And poor dear Hockey. "No body loves me because Julia Gillard is prettier than me". aaaae, poor ugly little thing.

Is this victim politics really going to work?

They must be really desperate now.

Why should we feel sorry for them as they squander more of our money on their publicity?
Posted by saintfletcher, Wednesday, 23 May 2007 6:24:21 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
In the NSW election in March and the Victorian election in November 2006, the incumbent state Labor Governments blitz the populous with a series of "public service annnouncements" about all the wonderful things the government was up to. "Drough Proofing Sydney" is one that sticks in my mind, despite virtually nil policy in the area of water supplies for a decade.

This was unfair and unethical. The Liberal opposition (who have their own advertising blitz, albeit not publically funded) crowed a bit, but since their federal colleagues behaviour was no better, their hipocracy kept them pretty quiet. That left the minors (the Greens and Dems), who used what little media time they got, but the issue never really got out there.

This has to be stopped, and neither major party will do it. It suits them too well.
Posted by ChrisC, Wednesday, 23 May 2007 9:31:02 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Communicat, I wrote "no funds for any Party Political activity". Not what you think you read or wanted to read.

Government advertising is always appropriate for real information. Note both Parties abuse this, big time.

I agree, no donations either, from any source. Including taxpayer reimbursement for the big 2 for their campaign costs. Why should we pay for that?
Posted by pegasus, Thursday, 24 May 2007 3:31:47 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
But Saintfletcher apparently thinks it is okay for the unions to spend $25m on propping up the ALP.
No political advertising - oh delicious thought!
Posted by Communicat, Thursday, 24 May 2007 4:07:10 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Communicat it is a delicious thought for no political advertising; though you saying that it's ok for the Liberals to be funded by Big Business, but its not ok for Labor to get assistance from Unions seems unfair.

States and the Federal Government should have transparent mechanisms available to oversee Government advertising. Andrew Murray should push for continuous vetting of Government advertising by a bipartisan committee.

The Coalition Government has come unstuck through their squandering of $55 million in their misleading advertising campaign about "Work Choices".
Posted by ant, Thursday, 24 May 2007 7:09:45 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy