Classic. Another example of the hope of Labor's minions that Labor will 'change it all' after the election.

Let's tell them something they'll swallow so we can get elected ...and once elected we'll change focus onto all those things we didn't tell the people about during the election.

a good thing this person is at a center for policy development, would be a danger to herself and others if in a center for policy execution.

i wonder if she gets paid for writing down her wishful thinking?

Well of COURSE Labor needs to develop a new style. Heaven help us if they continue on with more of the same approach of the last decade.

I hope and pray that they’ll change a great deal after they win the election, starting off with the formulation of policies to end expansionism.

That is; cap population, strive for a healthy economy that doesn’t have to be continuously growing, and gear everything that can possibly be adjusted towards a genuinely sustainable platform for the whole country.

I hate to even begin contemplating what would happen if they don’t do this, and with great urgency!

Surely Miriam Lyons is working hard on how best to achieve this policy shift ??

Very good.

Loved the 'flea imprisoned in a jar' analogy.

My article "Can Labor bring about a just society?" at http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=6395 of 24 September may also be of interest.

---

Naomi Klein's "The Shock Doctrine" (RRP $32.95) is essential reading to understand what is going on now in Australian politics. It is almost impossible to praise this book too highly. Even though neither Australia nor New Zealand are covered in detail in this book, one can easily extrapolate from the examples of Bolivia in 1985, Poland and the USSR and South Africa, in order to imagine how parties like Labor, which supposedly represent the less wealthy have been transformed by the remorseless efforts of well-funded right wing think tanks (including the Centre for Independent Studies) into servants of the world's rapaciously greedy and selfish elites.

Having said that the choice we face at th elections is still very important. If Howard were to win, then any hope we now have of being able to achieve good, accountable and democratic government before it is too late will have been lost.

So, whatever you do, be sure to put the Liberals last on your ballot forms.

For further information about "The Shock Doctrine" see:

http://www.naomiklein.org/shock-doctrine
http://www.naomiklein.org/shock-doctrine/reviews
http://www.naomiklein.org/shock-doctrine/reviews/advance-praise

Ah the usual socialist drivel

As for “Once it has learned to limit itself, the flea can never escape the jar.”

I thought that was one of the central edicts of socialism, no one is allowed to develop or learn to leap higher than the rest, in case they make the other fleas look inferior.

So “Could a Labor government escape the Liberal's legacy”

Well should they come to power, let us consider what they will inherit, a balanced budget, running in surplus with high employment and a buoyant economy

What “legacy” did the liberals inherit from the last labor government back over a decade ago

Near economic ruin, high unemployment, a government budget running at billions a year in debt.

That is what Keating left for the liberals.

Now the liberals, through sound and prudent management, having turned the economy around – the legacy (should the floating fools put the socialists back into power) which the socialist spawn might inherit is a gift, compared to the blight they left behind them last time ( a bit like the corruption and incompetence which the pompous git, Whitlam left).

As for “to mimic the command and control style of its predecessor, and instead focus on collaboration, adaptive policy-making and citizen engagement.”

I hate to say this but whilst the socialists remain in the pocket of their union masters, expect nothing other than incompetence, union influence peddling and economic stupidity.

Ludwig "Miriam Lyons is working hard"

The notion of a political analyst in a socialist thinktank, "working hard" is an oxymoron

Dear all,

Just in case Keith or others interpret my hope that Labor will escape the narrow worldview that currently constrains thinking on both sides of politics as a desire for them to break their election promises, I should just clarify that I mean no such thing. Even though I think some of Labor's election promises are badly thought out and unsustainable, we need to build the integrity of the democratic process more urgently than we need to reform any particular policy.

However, I think it's important to remember that this election is really about a small (albeit growing) group of swinging voters in marginal seats - both major parties are focusing most of their attention on trying to buy off this group of people and have taken the majority of people who have already made up their minds for granted. (Many of our recent elections have had this quality to them, and I think it has a lot to do with why so many of us have become disengaged from politics.)

It is for this reason that we get an election debate that focuses on tiny shades of difference: will people on $38-100K a year be 2-13 dollars better off under Liberal than Labor by 2013? (source: http://andrewleigh.com/?p=1661) Do we want a 'commitment' or an 'obligation' from developing countries before we sign Kyoto?

Dull, unimaginative, and so very distant from the real debates we need to be having about Australia's future (I'm writing another article for OLO on the debates I think we should be having instead).

So yes, while I do hope that Labor will keep faith with the minority of voters who will actually decide this election, I also hope that they, or indeed the Coalition if they win, start pitching some better products to a much broader demographic. Or better still, start treating us a little less like a target market and a little more like citizens.