From what we’ve heard of Rudd, cabinet meetings were of no import whatsoever; Rudd spoke, and that was the end of it. Commentators are asking: “Will Australia ever return to cabinet government?’

We have had presidential style government since the days of Hawke, Keating, Howard, Rudd, and we don’t really know anything about Gillard, except for the fact that she now has Rudd, the very man she deposed for ‘losing the way’, taking an active part in getting the ‘lost’ Labor government back in. As someone said just this morning, he still seems to be the PM, and is certainly acting like the PM.

Very interesting is Rudd’s reported remark that “migrants means more housing needs…which helps create employment in the construction industry”.

What did Bob Birell say a few days ago on OLO about immigration policy in Australia – something about a ‘dog chasing its tail’.

Community cabinets are a pathetically transparent attempt to fool people into believing that a federal government really cares about regional Australia. If Abbott is our next PM, he should get rid of them; and it is to be hoped that we get a cabinet in Canberra that will actually have a say in what happens to Australia.

I wonder how many centuries you would have to go back in history before finding a king who had as much unfettered arbitrary power as these modern Prime Ministers have. When we arrived at one whose powers were unrestrained as a matter of constitutional law, they would have been greatly restrained as a matter of technology. It is doubtful that our society has ever been under such absolute, arbitrary and idiosyncratic personal rule by decree as now.

In fact, though monarchs were nothing but protection rackets, the case under democracy seems worse not better. At least with a monarch you might fluke a good one occasionally, and he had a personal interest in not running down the value of what he had received. But the democratic process in its very nature selects only those with the most expedient and short-term view, the least principled, the habitual immoralists and liars, the greatest consumers of capital. They wouldn't understand a principle if it slapped them in the face. The two parties form a single parasitic ruling class that has far more in common with each other, than any of them have with the productive class that they exploit to pay for their inflated salaries, perks, privileges, and powers.

The main claim of them all is that they stand for the common interest. But the election is clearly showing that virtually the one thing that all Australians have in common is their view that the process is thoroughly unsatisfactory.

The first step to reform is to reject as absurd and abusive the claim that this utterly anti-social process represents a greater social good, or knows what's better for people, than people.

Are we spoilt brat Australians or do we have some depth to point the knife with some critical analyse to where it belongs.

Firstly, I tell you, Howard government did nothing over the decades of his power to improve critical issues socio-economic from the bottom-up and “that the Rudd government has put issues of access to the physical premises well and truly on the map”. The main . Critically serious over sight of the Howard Government is that it spent almost nothing on "infrastructure' and or "welfare" less you consider sending the military into the NT a valid way to solve a problem?

If you look at what was achieved today by the Advocacy group GetUp!, in the High Court concerning the over-turning of Howard's 2006 Electoral Roll changes and that "the full bench of the High Court declared certain parts of the Electoral Act unconstitutional," you see that "community" is the way forward, however. Community itself needs to re-learn the skill of advocacy, at local levels. There is a fatal culture occurring in many local communities and it has a lot to do with the ways power is held by Local Councils. Especially in less populated regions where "silo culture" is rife.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/08/06/2976083.htm?section=justin

The ALP made enormous headway, against the odds during its first term. Notable is that Rudd, [as did Gillard with Industry on WorkChoices], had the courage try and challenge government "Administrations".

Note I said challenge the "Administrations". Telling them they needed to become more transparent and stop telling government only what it wants to hear [Stop the false reporting]. I.e., In the simplest terms, the task was to make the public service genuinely serve the interests of the wider economy and society, after decades in which many government agencies had become increasingly managed for the purposes of serving themselves.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/breaking-news/rudd-wants-sweeping-reform-of-public-service/story-fn3dxity-1225769254411

More below in para's below

http://www.miacat.com/

Like Multi-Nationals and Mining companies, the public servants rose in denial as if they felt they were being threatened. Difficult territory. How do we change Australia's Administrations?

I say think about it... if every unemployed person who is being dumped into "disability" categories be it through Centerlink, Housing, and in social services generally because public servants and NGO fail to challenge themselves on policies allocated to support the various marginal groups, what the hell can the government do without risking its own seat. It is serious what is happening in the welfare sectors. No one wins like this.

The public service turns on government as soon as they are attempt to point the finger at any department. Society itself thinks working in groups for change is radical. People - especially critical thinkers are labeled "difficult", trouble-makers, stirrers"... unhelpful names and culturally stigmatised. Isolated from mainstream. "Don't rock the boat" perceptions win where there is so much apathy or low understanding.

That's I feel where "community" comes in, only without numbers... voices and action no policy makes a difference with mainstream departments. Alone, the task burns out the few [including people like myself] at ground level, who do write to the local paper, try to use mechanisms, tools in community education, start groups that try to influence... talk to Members, social staff, Local Council.... stand for community.

Community itself needs more access to resources, else... it is pointless saying community education can do what it can do.

Good article, for the detail Chris Lewis. I hope my thoughts about where we need to put focus helps.

http://www.miacat.com/

Labor talkfests, community cabinets, citizens assembly, peoples forums, are all a waste of time and money that achieve nothing except to replace the circus as the time honoured means of taking the plebs minds away from reality.

I've said it elsewhere and I'll say it again:
"Citizen cabinets"- just a nice PR stunt to pretend the government cares, while ensuring to keep CIR off the table.

Otherwise, the plebs might start getting ideas about 'accountability' and hit the brakes on the gravy train.

Ditto agree. Cabinet govt has all but disappeared in Oz with executive powerinjust a few - Rudd had four. And we call it a representative democracy and we invaded two countries to get them to take it. If it were not so tragic it would be a joke. But as someonesays her, we only get what we deserve so get involved and live outyour values.

In the USA they have “town-hall meetings”, where the citizens have opportunity to express their individual view and politicians listen.

In fact in Dallas Texas, the Dallas City Council have to face strident views from citizens and the whole proceedings are broadcast too.

I had presumed that was the intention of community cabinets, not just a vehicle for the dissemination of government propaganda.

Obviously I was wrong.

Rudd, Julia and their Union Bosses know everything and do not need to heed the view of the electorate.

Stern,

Interesting comments.

I think community cabinets would be more effective if televised. I am sure that this would minimise a govt's desire to dominate them if exposed on tv.