Ken: Opinions differ, but this source suggests a $100 million mining industry 'warchest'.

see: http://www.abc.net.au/worldtoday/content/2010/s2943169.htm

Others say more; but even though - as you say - the main campaign was pulled as the government backed down - the damage had already been done.

Chris: You suggest there's 'only' a $20 billion gap between the level of Labor's and the Coalition's proposed stimulus. (ie: the the Coalition would have gone into debt too, in the context of $180 billion versus $200 billion) That in of itself undermines the Coalition's posturing on debt; it demonstrates clearly that they were engaging in a 'fear' campaign, playing loosely with the facts.

Yes there was some waste; but when you consider the above context; you can sense something of the real perspective. And you have to balance against the drive to get the stimulus 'out there' as quickly as possible.

What profiteering on the back of the BER program shows, though, is that perhaps we should establish some kind of government-owned public-works authority; one which doesn't have profiteering as a motive in the first place. Yes it's against the 'common sense' of the age we're living in; but considered on its merits I think the idea has merit.

Tristan,

The figures that came out were that the mining industry spent $7m on advertising. The hundreds of millions was speculation by a journalist. The correct figure has been in the media from before the election, and I find it difficult to find an honest motive for you ignoring it.

Your claim that the ABC was biased against Labor because it focused on the leaks (which demonstrated that Labor was more about spin than substance), is somewhat naive. The Libs strongly asserted that Labor's campaign was more about spin than substance, and this "proof" was a lot more than a side issue.

It is incomprehensible why anyone would prefer the liberals over Labor, but it is precisely because their credibility is shot, and while your article tries to put a positive spin on it, the reality is that only after a couple of years the public have shown Labor the door.

Tristan,

with all due respect, distorting the truth is a habit of many politicians from all sides.

As for you defending the waste, you should know better. Take the HIP, the four deaths could have been avoided. The Rudd govt gave little consideration to warnings from the CFMEU. If you are true to your Labor values, then give them heaps rather than rely on your team sport mentality.

And i am sick to death of leftists telling me that progressives only come from the left. I am passionate about the issues as well, and I can tell you that good ideas and decency has no political alignment. In fact, the biggest bs artists and hypocrites I have met indeed come from the left, although many on the left are a lot better than i will ever be in the contribution they make to society.

Remember good ideas and good argument will appeal to all people from all sides of politics. While we all have our own bias, we can all be stimulated to think, as long as the argument is good enough.

sure, loyalty is important, but I was disgusted by the home insulation scheme. I am disgusted about the four deaths that may have been avoided with a bit more foresight and listening to key players.

That is why I wanted to support an alternative government to give them a go

Chris; yes home insulation was handled awfully by the government. But if there was already insufficient regulatory oversight, then it's reasonable to suggest that what really happened is that accidents occured in the context of activity of an unprecedented scale. But yes - Labor was in government: the Rudd Labor government was responsible.

But there's also the question of whether those referring to the home insulation charities - whether they were really about accountability; or capitalising for their own political gain.

If you wanted to talk about culpability - responsibility for injury and death, we could refer to the Howard govt's support for the war in Iraq: and the horror and tragedy that has been reaped as a consequence.

But I'm not throwing accusations at you personally. In fact I see your engagement with the conservative parties has having potentially positive ramifications. From what I've seen of your writing here at OLO. you seem to have a moderate social justice agenda. And if any of that rubs off on the Conservative parties, that would be a good thing.

Tristan,

I would not give the time of day to anyone that did not believe in a better world.

All i am saying is that no one has a monopoly on truth or the 'right' way given that any emphasis on compassion also must give adequate attention to competitiveness. In other words, it is not just about how the world should be, but how the world is.

Tristan,

I also stated in Quadrant that going to war in Iraq without a UN mandate was one of the worst decisions ever by liberal democracies