You hit the nail on the head at the end of your article. Everyone knows that it is the resources boom that is making Australia rich so it really doesn't matter who runs the country. I am a parent and IT'S THE CLIMATE STUPID!

...or perhaps the people have realised that Howard will do or say anything to get re-elected and after eleven years they've had enough?

"The economy IS the environment, stupid".

Voters understand now that the two cannot be separated. And they can see how the Howard government is grossly neglecting the challenges for our children of dangerous global warming and peak oil. The Howard policy of minimum disturbance to established industries and offering purely cosmetic illusions of change (e.g. in the Shergold Report) means that this government is taking no meaningful action to prepare Australia for these coming great dangers. The coalition leadership just don't get it, because they don't want to get it. They fiddle while Rome burns.

Meanwhile Labor is building a far more credible policy stance in these areas, though it still has a way to go. That's why voters are turning a deaf ear to all of Costello's boasts of how successfully the government is managing the Australian economy. Voters know this is a false prosperity, generated by a government of future-eaters (cf. Flannery). We the voters are not stupid. We just know when we are being stupidly led.

What many voters already know is that the current strong economy owes a large debt to Labor! Reform of the financial system was not a Howard initiative but one that Keating and Hawke implemented. The coalition likes to tell us that they are responsible for Australia's economic well being and, at the same time, it demonises Labor as being incompetent economic managers. But this is something voters have come to expect from the Howard government - blame Labor although it has been out of power for a decade.

The new found 'green' credentials of the Howard government is yet another example of the sleazy way that they approach policy. It is only because public opinion about climate change is so strong and so far out in front of government thinking that they have changed their tune. If they could get away with it they would have continued along the lines of "business as usual" with catastrophic outcomes for future generations of Australians. A "War Crimes Tribunal" for environmental crimes sounds like a good idea - I hope my children are still around to implement it.

Workplace relations is also a huge concern for Australians. Howard has set back industrial relations years because of an ideological belief that the only important future for this country is an economic one. Wrong! Not everyone wants to live in a McMansion and drive a BMW.

We used to be considered, by the international commmunity, as a fair and reasonable player on the world stage and our ideas and support were sought after because of this reputation. Gone...with the Howard government.

Howard just doesn't get it - he might be approaching the dubious statistic of the longest serving Prime Minister of this country but it can be argued that he will go down in history books as being the worst and most divise Prime Minister that this country has endured.

My take on this is that the electorate has a more sophisticated view on economic 'management' than the politicians give them credit for. There is bipartisan agreement that the Hawke/Keating reforms of the 80s (most notably floating the $A) set up the macro-economic framework under which Australia has enjoyed 16 years of prosperity.

Sound macro-economic policy in the modern global marketplace boils down to the maintenance of an independent inflation-fighting central bank, responsible fiscal management and a philosophical committment to free trade and investment.

Australia has led the world on these fronts and there is absolutely no difference between the major party groupings on the issues.

Secondly, I think there is an innate appreciation now among voters that the boom of more recent years has been overwhelmingly driven by external factors - namely the China-driven boom in commodity prices and a synchronised global growth cycle.

Thirdly, with the macro-economic debate now non-politicised (despite the desparate attempts by the Coalition camp to pretend there is disagreement), voters are focusing on the quality of growth, as opposed to the quantity.

Rights at work, work-life balance, the availability of high-quality free public education, a properly functioning health system and environmental concerns are all economic issues.

More importantly, prosperity should not be an end in itself, but a means to an end. Our prosperity gives us choices about the society and the world we want our children to live in.

This is why arguments over macro-economic management are falling on barren electoral soil. After a decade of visionless, small picture politics, people are aching for a government that will broaden the debate beyond quarterly GDP data to the real economy - the one we live in.

“It’s the economy, stupid”. Yes but what economy? The one spruiked by Costello, the experts and big business? Or the one felt in people’s pockets – their household debt, their rising mortgages, their fear of imminent sacking? ‘Full employment’ might be a joy to the Government and the complacent commentariat. But if you have a tenuous hourly contract, or get called in casually only when it suits the boss, ‘full employment’ is a sham.

Newspoll figures show: 68% say Coalition’s IR changes would make no difference to their vote and 52% say Labor’s policy made no difference to their vote. But flip the coin. An awful lot of people will vote on respective IR policies. And what % of votes need to swing for a change of government?

Tim Grau is right, however, to argue that IR is not the sole reason for the troubles facing Howard’s government. The ‘It’s time’ factor, climate change and the environment, the negativity of the Government will all play a part. But wait – there’s more! Much more!

There’s the growing understanding that Howard et al have consistently lied and mislead the voters – children overboard, Tampa, Iraq, interest rates, wheat, university fees, David Hicks, never-ever GST, non-core promises, etc.

The sell-out on Qantas and Telstra (and the Snowy – if he could).

Me-too policy-on-the-run syndrome: national water scheme, broadband.

Policies we fear: uranium, further secret IR ‘reforms’, school funding, invasion of privacy and loss of civil liberties in the name of 'security'.

The should-have-been policies that haven’t: Indigenous health, reconciliation, renewable energy.

The rorting and arrogance: party political advertising at taxpayer’s expense, Lib fund-raising at Kiribilli House, Howard’s private dining-room.

The ‘culture wars’: the wedge politics on multiculturalism and race, stacking the ABC Board and intimidating ABC news and current affairs, politicising the public service.

Sucking up to Bush and Howard’s inability to work with the next US President.

And dare I say it, there’s Howard’s age. People ask: who will really be PM if we vote Howard back in again?

It’s not just the economy or WorkChoices, stupid!

I've voted Labor in the past few election but I'd vote Liberal if Costello was PM. I dunno what that makes me.

My take is similar to those above but I'd add that every new election a new set of young voters roll up with their ipods to the polling place (and probably wonder why they can't vote on-line). These people have 'never had it so good' all their matureing lives and possibly presume it had always been thus. My father talked of rationing, 'so what' I always thought. New voters are concerned about the environment (in greater proprtion than older voters), soon peak oil will ping loudly on their radars and they have a far more sophisticated view of internal relations that we (I'm 52) probably give them credit for. When they regularly communicate with people anywhere from Iceland to Iran via Myspace the 'reds under the bed' type mantra doesn't wash.

On IR, again the bad old days of union power are history largely to the young turks in the union movement. New job seekers (and their parents) will look beyond the 'this creates more jobs' mantra to 'what will be the effect on my (or my kid's) job'. When Workchoices was introduced I always thought that this would be the sleeper. Howard's biggest mistake was to introduce it a year too early. It may not be enough to tip the govenment out yet (rememeber '69) but it'll begin the spill of seats

I think in general there is a move away from placing the economy as number 1 priority. I think this is partly because we've had it good for a while now, but also because philosophically the human race is beginning to question the mantra we have been fed for a long time now, that the secret to a happy life is excessive consumption and the acquisition of material wealth. The 80s saw the peak of this mentality and it plateaued in the 90s. Nowadays people are working extremely long hours, sacrificing time with family and leisure to climb the corporate ladder and maintain or increase their standards of living. I think people are sick of it, and are waking up to the realisation that happiness and money rarely have a positive correlation, but that free time is the ingredient they've been looking for.

Tim, in your article you differentiate between the attitudes of "It's the economy, stupid" and "It's the workplace, stupid". I think essentially they're both linked. Anyone with an ounce of understanding of economics can tell you that the WorkChoices legislation is fantastic for the economy, and will probably help it boom. But I think people are now questioning the social price we will have to pay for that. I think people are also questioning the environmental price we're paying for this trend of 'economy as number 1'.

I'd also go so far as to say that this isn't just an Australian phenomenon, but the philosophical shift is occurring all across the world.

Despite the many pontifications on the economy, environment etc the essential fact is almost always overlooked - and is that John Howard has never won an election. The last prime minister to actually 'win' an election was Bob Hawke. Labor has generally lost via a series of electoral disasters and leadership difficulties. The fact is that Labor always gets more votes than Liberal, and generally more votes than the coalition combined. The so-called 'massive' swings required for a Labor victory are really fairly small actual numbers of voters. The new IR laws simply disadvantage more people than they advantage, hence those small numbers could well be realised this time around, providing of course that Labor does not self destruct as it has so often in the past.

Good times as long as you don't look too closely at the downward trend pressure on real wages or the staggering growth in foreign debt and the "banana republic" level of our current account deficit, all this in a time when we have the best ever commodity prices, still over inflated asset prices, capacity constraints caused by systemic under investment in infrastructure, and declining school leaver numbers lowering unemployment.

Will it be John Howard leaving Labor with an economy in need of an overhaul again as he did in the early 1980s ?

As Keating would say Howard and Costello are all tip and no iceberg.

Westernred asks....."Will it be John Howard leaving Labor with an economy in need of an overhaul again as he did in the early 1980s ?"

In all probability the answer is yes! Despite his rhetoric and lies, John Howard is no better manager of the economy than is Labor. It all depends on how the world's economic credentials are traveling at any given time. At present, Australia is riding on the back of strong export wealth which in turn pushes up the stock market, but as history has repeatedly shown, this will not last. Were it not for the fact that computers now act to prevent fast falls on World stock markets, we would have seen a major correction just last week as investors began to bail on the US market, but that situation won't hold forever.

All that is needed to topple the economy of Australia or the world is anything from a meteor or thermo-nuclear strike, the realisiation of the end of cheap oil, or perhaps (in Australia) due to Workchoices, mums and dads simply having to pull out of the stock market for financial reasons and the whole economy ship will flounder. Some say it's well over due already.
My concern is that Labor will take the prize, the market will fall over due to the usual causes and Howard will scream at the Australian people......"See! I told you so! Labor can't run the economy!"

Might be better to let the lying little bugger back in, but without control of the Senate, until the excrement finally hits the fan.
Perhaps people are finally waking up to the fact that just because Howard makes statements about his credibility, it doesn't necessarily mean that it's true. His past record is testament to that fact!

Damn clever to sell off public assets under the guise of paying off foreign debt and saving money on interest payments, and then have the cash flow out of the country as dividends to foreign shareholders instead.
This is one farm that we will never be able to buy back.

I also see from todays newspaper that the number personal bankruptcies in Sydney this are almost double the annual rate they were when Howard came into power.

Likewise, the figures for unpaid overtime, homelessness and suicide are also having a "boom" time.

The old adage of "living in a society, not an economy" is coming true for an increasing number of people and those people who told us about kids overboard and WMDs are reaching their use-by date.

As for Costello being an alternative PM, he's trying to be a Keating clone when it comes to his performance in Parliament but stands for nothing in particular beyond his attempts at the personal denigration of his opponents. Politically gutless as well.

Extra extra read all about it. Unions out and about telling there members about the ramifications of the Industrial Relations laws.
Govt. in blind panic, realising how wide and deep the ACTU campaign is. 'Its the Workplace stupid', is right on the money.Howard can tell people they have never had it so good. However those working know thats not true.Its the Workplace stupid and the ghost of Stanley Bruce.

These posts just show that people will hold to their dogmas no matter what the evidence shows. I mean to try and give Mr Keating and Hawke credit for our prosperity now is laughable. And to think that many consider religion as a dogma. You might not like the current Government but to deny the changes they have made has made the States rich (through GST) they have reduced unemployment by reforming the labour market and got more people into private home ownership than ever before. Hopefully if their are not enough to remember how Gough sent the country broke (public servants received 5 wage increases in a very short period of time) then at least remember the world's best treasurer Mr Keating. Why do you think Mr Rudd is keeping Mr keating a long way from himself?

Tim,

Excellent article.
the Australian economy boom is based on many factors with the main two are: Intl commodities boom and globally low interest rates.
None of these factors can be credited to the Liberals. In addition, voting labour will have no influence on global factors.

Greed and corruption have become a deeply embedded cancer in our system of government under Howard’s stewardship as Australian Prime Minister. It’s becoming difficult after a decade of the same old wedge politics and the same old blame game to see the glorious potential that Australia has to offer our people and the world.

Can we pause and reflect on the heights that we could have attained by now if our PM had a passion for building the capacity of our talented scientists and artists? Where would we be now if he had a burning desire to establish mainstream renewable energy and vigorously pursued the ideal of a cohesive Australian society?

As we contemplate the lead up to the next Federal election, is it a fair call to say that we were mislead at the last election with outrageous lies to become embroiled in a continuing civil war in the middle east, immediately after becoming implicated in Australia’s biggest ever corruption scandal. Our government stands accused of being implicated in the illegal rendering of Australians to brutal torture overseas. Budget surpluses from the mining boom have been wasted on infomercials that are tinged with propaganda and party political fundraisers at the tax-payers expense.

Enough is enough! Let’s end the corruption - out with this tyrant. Maxine McHugh, I’m counting on you.

runner says: “These posts just show that people will hold to their dogmas no matter what the evidence shows. I mean to try and give Mr Keating and Hawke credit for our prosperity now is laughable.”

No matter what the evidence shows!

9 June 2007 The Australian's Editorial:

“The Weekend Australian has for many years lavished praise on the reform legacy of the Hawke and Keating years. The period from 1983 to 1996 transformed the way Australia does business.”

Such lavish praise from a conservative newspaper. Must have had some evidence. This is their list of credits due to Hawke and Keating:
• floating the Australian dollar
• deregulating the banking sector
• winding back import tariffs
• opening the Australian economy to global competition
• driving a wave of competition at a state level
• introducing enterprise bargaining to boost productivity growth and
• introducing compulsory superannuation.

The Sydney Morning Herald, 9 May 2006: “Over the past decade Australia has been able to withstand the 1997 Asian economic downturn, the US recession of 2000 and the worst domestic drought in a century and to maintain growth of more than 3 per cent, along with declining unemployment. This could not have been achieved without the economic reform process which began with the Hawke government in March 1983 and has been continued by the Howard Government after March 1996.”

runner, even your beloved John Howard and the reviled Keating give due acknowledgement:

“During his speech to the Liberal Party Federal Council on April 13 last year [2002], the Prime Minister said that he was "prepared to give credit to the former government for a number of changes that it made". He mentioned specifically "the deregulation of the financial system and the floating of the dollar". Interviewed recently on Channel 10's Meet the Press (November 3, 2002), Paul Keating praised Peter Costello for keeping "the tone on the economy" and for moving the budget to surplus.” (The Age 11 March 2003)

“...[People will hold to their dogmas no matter what the evidence shows”. Whose dogma, runner?

Then there are the 2 million people directly affected by welfare to work "reforms" who have to take any job offer.

Are they going to vote for John Howard?

FrankGol

Your extremely selective cut and pasting which paints Hawke/Keating as the causes of economic propserity today is deceiving at best. Of course over 13 years of Government Labour made some good decisions and some bad ones. You criticize the Howard Government for selling Qantas and conveniently forget who sold the Commonwealth Bank. You also ignore that the States have become rich via the GST and IR reforms that have employment rates at record levels and the unemployment rate at record lows. I am not sure if runawake feels it is a good or bad thing to insist people work rather than sitting at home watching TV whilst collecting the dole. I am not sure what State Frank lives in but when we talk about rorting the system the State Labour parties have been found to be openely corrupt. Just look at the goings on in WA and Queensland. It is a bit rich to compalin about the Federeal Government advertising when the only way State Labour Premiers get rid of their ministers is when publicly humiliated by the press. I am not a great fan of Mr Howard as you indicate although I see him head and shoulders above Labour.

It is ill planned IR reform and people in private enterprise both small business and it's workers feeling the pressure of Globalisation.

I'm having serious doubts about John Howard pulling a rabbit out of his hat at the next election and Labor with it's present bunch of not talent wonders will do for Australia what Carr/Iemma has done for NSW.Wall to wall Labor both State and Federally will destroy our economy.

Runawake - good point(s)! The much vaunted employment figures is yet another abuse of statistics by the coalition. Of course more people are employed if you shift the goalposts. Many so called 'full time' jobs are short term at best and are largely held by desperate people who are working under a constant threat of dismissal - see the ABC 'Four Corners' program re Telstra. Another term has entered the common lexicon, that term being 'permanent part-time'- an oxy-moron if ever there was one. The notion of a job with 'security and a future' has disappeared to be replaced by a job with no security and short term at best - all this to compete with overseas workers on next to nothing wages and to satisfy the doctrinal blood-lust of a two bob back street Sydney solicitor- a 'quid pro quo' for any number of insults and rejections. The Howard government has directed and presided over the greatest employment debacle in Australian industrial history, all allegedly in the name of efficiency and competitive edge in a deliberatly created so-called global economy, and in doing so has thrown out any number of babies with the bathwater. Throw the little mongrel out! Onya Maxine!

"Voters can see that climate change is real. In the last week, the last month and last year, voters have experienced or seen drought, cyclones, water restrictions, melting ice caps and record summer temperatures."
Rudd's concern about 'climate change' is full of holes and will last as long as the election campaign.
For instance why would you appoint a national Petrol Commissioner because petrol so expensive if you believe CO2 is the driver (no pun) of 'climate change'?
He certainly hasn't shown much concern about CO2 in his personal choices.
Rudd's commitment to 'do something' about climate change is as unrealizable as Bob Hawke's "No child shall live in poverty by 1990", made during 1987 election campaign.
The difference is that Bob was probably genuine.
Rudd is a different political animal altogether. His big advantage is that he is plausible (in the pejorative sense of the word).
Beware the 'Michael Rimmer' of Australian politics.

Howard has been out-witted and out-feared this time round. An exaggerated fear campaign on WorkChoices and the mother of all fear campaigns, climate change will do him in.

I suspect that the perception of arrogance on the part of Howard and his ministers is a significant factor.

They have begun to look like they think they own the place, taxpayers money is seen as theirs to do with as they wish, private religious views are imposed on others where possible and the spin has got so old that many are ready for a different set of spin doctors who maybe will pretend to serve us for a while before they start being to obvious in their feelings of superiority.

The worry is that like state oppositions the federal coalition won't learn from their mistakes. In opposition, they will be busy shuffling the chairs in the expectation of the time that the stench from Labor gets so bad that they get another crack at ministerial leather.

R0bert

For the record. It was Howard and the Libs. who campaigned in 1983 on financial deregulation and IR reform. The ALP under Hawke and Keating opposed these reforms.Their subsequent conversion to modernisation and deregulation is well documented.
Hawke and Keating spent most of the '80's fiercely opposed to privatisation; then turned around and sold QANTAS and the CBA. Go figure.
Keatings IR reforms went beyond Liberal Party policy of the times.
Howard and the Libs supported the floating of the dollar(I can't remember whether the Libs. were there first or not).
Keating went further and faster than Howard would ever have done in the '80's; and we owe him for Super and for a courageous response to Mabo. We owe him for the makeover he gave the ALP, dragging it out of pit as he did.
Howard, for all his prevarication and dissembling is still recognisably the same man as he was in the early '80's. The ALP today is light years from the party it was in the early '80's.
A question from the dis-illusioned to the still 'rusted-on'- how does it feel to blindly(or not blindly) champion, on behalf of the ALP, policies that were proudly Liberal policies 5, 10, or 20 years ago?

Quarry Economics

Based on an argument by Dr Arthur Gibbs, academic and consultant government economist.

It’s the economy stupid, might really relate to the truth about the Howard Dynasty and the spin and subterfuge that describes a government that when it took over in 1996, it was warned by the IMF that reforms were expected, first up in the banking sector.

But before you could almost blink an eye, the Reserve Bank of Australia was granted independence from government, with the other banks not long after freed from oversight and government control of their activities.

So began Howard’s introduction to the Corporate Culture, meaning that Big Biz would decide the future money means of his government.

This meant of course, that the newly elected Australian government, without any mandate from the people, gave away the money half of the policy-making machinery it had been elected to use on their behalf - and then by relinquishing control over the remaining banks, further gave away the power to rein in the troublesome foreign debt, caused by Australia neglecting its own former innovative and rising secondary productive infrastructure - so sure of itself about the seemingly future bottomless Chinese and Indian demands for Aussie metallic pitstocks.

And so as time went on the foreign debt has risen despite the huge profits from the quarry-stock shipments of iron-ore, the minus mark reaching close to one half trillion Yankee dollars, Costello’s much praised about Future Fund battling to keep in line.

The down side of all this, according to Dr Gibbs, is that our nation is left only one blunt and ugly weapon to cool down an overheated economy.

And unfortunately that interest rate weapon could be already under the tough scrutiny of the International Monetary Fund.

There is only one implication or conclusion we can draw from last night's news that MP's are about to vote themselves a nearly 7% pay rise (I thought inflation was under 3% Mr Howard so how could the Remuneration Tribunal make this "independent" decision?).

That is that all you Party barrackers are suckers. Suckers. Give yourself an uppercut and wake up before you are working the fields for the new Austrlain Ruling Class. MP's. Or perhaps you already are given the way you support every single thing one Party does or says.

If you must be so one eyed and barrack regardless then do it for sport where it doesn't matter.

DavoP you truly need a better understanding of the subject 52% of voters have said they will not change the way they intend to vote.
In truth along with the true swinging voters we have very few who do not vote one party or the other.
Just think what a crimson mess we would have if we all voted for independents, truly think.
We would be like some real basket cases in the world ruled from day to day by headless direction less coalitions.
Get involved in the party nearest to your views and work for change but you will die waiting for another type of government.
As a start if you favor winning sides get to an ALP Branch and be part of the removal of a worn out old tell any lie government.
I want some like Arjay to remember the posts they put here one year after Rudd leads a good and popular government even higher in the polls.

you're onto something, davo, don't listen to belly.

we don't need parties, we need citizenship. assemble as many mates as you can, talk to them about democracy, when they're all fired up, provide a bag of empty beer bottles and drive to canberra, with the intention of throwing those beer bottles from the visitor balcony at any mps in the chamber. only empty bottles, mind, i'd hate to think those pollies caught full ones for personal use.

We all know that Howard retired government debt by selling government owned assets to overseas organisations. The government of Singapore owns more of Australia than the Australian government does. The Singapore government controls Defence Department communications and will control communications in the bush.

Meanwhile Australia's foreign debt has ballooned, our interest repayments are double our exports. This ballooning debt has been undertaken by the Four Pillars [Westpac, ANZ, NAB, Commonwealth Bank] to fuel the housing boom. It's one thing to borrow to build a factory, but residential real estate is dead money.

Like the USA we manipulate the statistics to gloat about the low unemployment rate while there is a marked increase in working poor as casuals get insufficient hours to earn a living wage. Workchoices has exacerbated this trend.

I would like to know where the ABS buys its petrol, food or pays its mortgage to, to calculate no increase in CPI.

Now all Australians have to do is wait for the foreign debt to be called in and we will see the house of cards that is the "robust economy" collapse.

As the author says, the electorate will vote Howard out because of his economic performance over the last decade.

runner

You say that my "extremely selective cut and pasting which paints Hawke/Keating as the causes of economic propserity today is deceiving at best".

Which part is deceiving? The list of Hawke/Keating achievements listed in the right-wing Australian, or the summary by the Sydney Morining Herald, or the speech by John Howard in which he paid tribute to Hawke/Keating? Are these sources what you call "laughable"?

Have you changed your mind in the face of evidence from a variety of sources - even Howard - that Hawke and Keating made significant economic achievements or should we agree with you that some posters, in your words again, "hold to their dogmas no matter what the evidence shows"?

I would say that many voters don't care who is responsible for the state of the economy, they just know they're not getting a share. It's the big end of town that is profitting, while everyone else is getting squeezed.

A strong economy doesn't mean more jobs when corporations are laying off full time staff and work is going off-shore or turning into casual/part-time positions, at least that's what they see. And when the politicians get up and spout about improvements to the unemployment rate it looks like selective accounting.

Voters are at the pointy end of government. They know how hard it is to get in to see a doctor, the waiting lists in hospitals, how long they have to wait for ambulance, police and fire service responses. They know how the public schools are deteriorating and how expensive private schools are. They are the ones catching buses and trains, stuck in peak hour traffic (yes I know, "that's State not Federal", but they don't care) and seeing changes in their work places.

God forbid that Labor gets in because, booga booga, the nasty unions will git ya, if the terrorists don't. If Labor gets in the economy will collapse. Booga booga. They see Liberals as being in the pocket of Business and the US (or even US Business).

Don't think for a minute that Labor are that much better, but we know what life under Howard and Costello will be like. More of the same, if not worse. People want things fixed, not to be told its all going well.

The point is are voters more scared of losing what they've got and not being able to pay the mortgage and credit card bills they've been suckered into?

Everyone knows Australia blindly follows the UK and USA, the good trends as well as the bad ...... but I was surprised when Hilary Clinton's website resonated with me
see http://www.hillaryclinton.com/issues/middleclass/ which says

America's middle class is under siege and ready for a change. People are working harder and longer for less and less.

Corporate profits are up. CEO pay is up. Wages are lagging. Household debt is soaring. At the same time, health care, energy, and education costs are rising. Last year, more people went bankrupt in our country than graduated from college.
. . .

If you're a worker who can't organize for fair wages and safe working conditions, you're invisible. If you're a grandmother who has watched this administration try to privatize Social Security and dump piles of debt on your grandchildren, you're invisible. If you're a mother who can't afford child care, a kid who can't afford college, a family that can't afford to get by on the minimum wage, you're invisible.

well, we're all agreed: australia needs citizen initiated referenda. we'll get them when a few recalcitrants finally admit that all our problems were created by pollies.

since pollies are in complete control of oz, who else can be responsible?