The laptop for every student will be very interesting, particularly now that Julia Gillard has announced after the election that the whole deal with be on a ‘rebate’ basis. This means that the schools or parents will have to put up the money and buy the things, then wait on the Government and red-taped bureaucrats to be recompensed.

Then there is the unmentioned matter of who will supply, and pay for, the necessary IT back-up staff. Anyone familiar with schools and computers will tell you that this is already a massive problem in the existing situation with computers used by staff and students

Interesting. But really, aren't the Democrats irrelevant in the current Australian political landscape

Until the June next year there'll still be Democrats in the Senate. They have as much right to speak & influence policy there as anyone else.

Despite their annihilation at the ballot box, that doesn't mean their point of view should be ignored. Their championing of human rights, transparency in government, justice in our judicial system etc - these shouldn't be considered irrelevant despite their lack of political power.

Personally I hope that someone else takes up these issues and runs with them in the Parliament, and that the Dems get their act together and become electable once more.

Promise everything - do nothing!

More liars in the lair!

http://www.abc.net.au/rural/wa/content/2006/s2118261.htm

Perhaps Lynn could donate her taxpayer-funded lifetime pension to help poor countries deal with climate change. I mean, she doesn't really need it. You are going to get a real job now aren't you Lynn?

God forbid we have to put up with the likes of Lynn and Andrew Bartlett sitting in their pyjamas in front of the computer, spraying over the online opinion pages for the next 20 years, funded by the dole for purged pollies.

So...how are those sour grapes tasting?

I concur with Leigh on the fact that the laptop promise doesn't appear to have sufficient backing to make it work. In fact, the entire 'education revolution' doesn't really have the resources to back significant change, given that the modest investment we're putting forward still places us behind more than a dozen other nations in terms of per cent of GDP invested in education.

If, on the other hand, instead of giving tax cuts worth $34 billion, which are sure to fuel interest rate rises, they had spent that money on education, well then we might actually be walking the walk instead of talking the talk.

Grn, I take it then, you'll be giving up any pension and living in a shoebox? Or if you already are, I take it you'd refuse any option of extra money?
By your logic, nobody who has actually had the drive, ambition or intelligence to get ahead and amass some kind of wealth or pension can actually comment on any problem in society unless they're willing to reduce themselves to a pauper.

It's a shame the democrats are on the verge of extinction. Oh, for another Don Chipp.

"If, on the other hand, instead of giving tax cuts worth $34 billion, which are sure to fuel interest rate rises, they had spent that money on education, well then we might actually be walking the walk instead of talking the talk"

Everything is a trade-off. If you don't give the tax cuts, middle income earners, in particular, will miss out on tax relief that is well and truly due to them. The immediate question is: who deserves the largesse more? Middle income earners or the learners? Or can they both be looked after over a period of time with a bit of compromise all round? I suspect the latter is where the world is heading.

The $34 billion in tax cuts is a hoax and all of you would know that if you bothered to read the damn policy. Next year some money will be returned through bracket creep, then the next year a bit more and the next year. The next two years were "maybes".

With Rudd the tax cuts for next year were rammed through the parliament before it rose, then there is a change in the rates over the next two years and the following three years are maybes.

The tax take per annum is $250 + and rising, the tax cuts are $6 billion so it is like whining about spending $6 dollars when you have $250 in your pocket. You wouldn't know it to hear the stupid remarks made but the taxes are already spent and the money "thrown" around are merely the suplus taxes.

And while I have always appreciated the Democrats and even worked for a Democrat senator they were elected in record numbers in 1998 to stop the bloody GST and gave us the damn thing instead. Which is why they are now extinct.

Labor was elected in spite of the me-too-isms and whether or not laptops are the toolboxes of the 21st century.

Because they gave the electorate some expectation they could do better than the vandals who sullied Australia's reputation of the Fair-Go Country.

Because we were embarrassed by Howard's subservience to the USA and once more dragging us into a war of aggression against Iraq under false pretences and lies as they dragged us into Vietnam.

Because of Our Government's inability to establish a relationship with our neighbours based on respect for human rights whilst turning a blind eye to brutal repression of Acehenese and West Papuans,
and cheating the East Timorese of their resources.

Because Howard's Government failed to support an Australian Citizen incarcerated in Guantanamo without charges being laid but eventually did a deal for his repatriation to Australia before the election.

Because they sold Australia out with the so-called Free Trade Agreement that inundated us with B grade American programs at the expense of our own film industry

Because they went too far with their whittling away of Workers hard won working conditions.

Because of the state of our Country's Health & Education Systems which were deliberately debilitated in the interests of 'privatisation' and after eleven years of neglect instigated an invasion against Aboriginal remote Communities in an attempt to gain electoral support.

The list is longer but I hope you get my drift as there are limitations in length of comments.

As for the Democrats,despite your efforts to amend some of Howards excesses, the opportunist deal Meg Lees did with Howard to get through the GST illustrated that you could not be trusted .

whilst you are in the wilderness like the rest of us non-politicians, You will have to wait and see if Rudd comes through with his aspirations and if he doesn't remind him of his promises.

Traditionally,Labor are a high taxing Govt.If they get two or three terms ,they will increase the GST.Bracket creep should be automatically indexed to stop this insane increases of tax due to inflation.

Signing Kyoto was purely symbolic.It should also include a penality for unabated pop growth since Kyoto just encourages pop increases.Their ratio of carbon used per head of pop will always be low.Only 400 million of China's pop are involved on their present economic expansion.There is another 900 million waiting to enjoy this new prosperity.They have no intention of cutting back even if we all live in abject poverty.The same applies to India.

If the doom sayers are correct,then it already too late.I'm with Bob Carter.The temperature variations are still within the normal temp variations over thousands of yrs,so remain sceptical.

"The $34 billion in tax cuts is a hoax and all of you would know that if you bothered to read the damn policy. Next year some money will be returned through bracket creep, then the next year a bit more and the next year. The next two years were "maybes"."

So what's your point? That tax rates and thresholds should be indexed to inflation? I reckon that would be a good idea too. (Ironically, so do the big business lobbies.) But, for Mr and Mrs Average with a mortgage, a bird in the hand is better than two in the bush. They take whatever they can get.

As for the GST, the fungibility of money - which is just a fancy way of saying that all sources of revenue go into the Treasury pot - means that money that is gained by Government from the GST should allow a reduction in other sources of tax like income tax. If you like, the raising of the GST should fund a permanent reduction in income tax.

If what you're really saying is that Government is actually squirreling away money for its own political interests or for its supporters etc, without giving it back to society, then you've got a fair point. This is leakage that should be staunched.

Robp,all Govt Taxes should be limited to a percentage of GDP.It should not exend beyond that limit unless there is a national emergency or war.

We also need to pay our pollies/Public servants on performance.Pay key decision makers more but if they stuff up,they lose bonuses and pay.The Public Service wastes $billions,yet there are no consequences for their debacles,waste or poor management.Until this is addressed,we are wasting our time having this conversation.

Thank you Lyn Allison and Andrew Bartlett for fearlessly raising these topics for public debate. It wasn't till I was handing out how to votes on election day that I realised your contributions to Online Opinion had raised my awareness and formed my opinions about what was happening in Australian society.

For what its worth I think you are better than Don Chip was. Pity about Meg Lees.

Like Peter Garrett, I too, was hoping that Rudd was pumping non core promises. I am gravely disappointed at the Bali posturings.

Yes, pity about the Democrats, Billie, though they do come up with good ideas, they do not study certain controversial areas enough.

Typical was their support for banning mulesing of lambs, which as a retired farmer who got upset when the Country Party lost it's independence to a National Party, did try the Dem's for a while.

But got angry with an ageing Don Chipp when he tried to make me look a fool at a meeting to which I had to travel a long way to get to.

It was about me refusing to support the silly ban on muelesing lambs against blowflies.

All I said as I went to walk out, have you stupid bastards ever seen a mob of fly-blown lambs shaking their back ends to high heaven. In fact, mulesing is the most sensible thing brought in, and as far as wether lambs are concerned having their knackers ripped out or rubber ringing them is scads worse.

But because the Dem's have many academic historians among them, they do have that philosophical sense proven to have initiated the most beneficial political changes back through history - and I guess which is so much needed now.

Arjay,

Can't disagree with any of that: you're right, there's a lot of waste happening in the Public Service and Government.

The problem's that big, that every time they try to do something about it, it just seems to get worse. For example, despite some pretty sharp contrary analysis by ASPI and the Defence Department itself, the former government went ahead and procured new jets for the RAAF which were reportedly already obsolete at the time of the procurement. How dumb's that. All to make Brendan Nelson look like an Admiral??

Billie/Bushbred,

I agree that the Dems came up with some good ideas that were well thought through and fair. They deserve credit for filling a niche that nobody else was interested in. I particularly liked the ideas, intellectualism and policies of Andrew Murray, for example. I hope that the Dems' ideas and values don't die and are subsumed into the policies of governments in the near-future. It's a real waste if they aren't.

The problem with the Dems, though, was that they were never going to be in a position to implement any of their ideas, except at the margins at best. Whitlam's political quip "only the impotent are pure" certainly applied to them.

'All the pre election promises will -um- not be possible to carry out because-'the Howard government left things in a terrible mess' and we do not have the finances to fund them.' This will be the ALP's cry.
It was ever thus and will be again. Promises are very thin airy things,you can't eat promises.

None of us ,I suspect our grand children too, and theirs will ever see the Democrats again.
Nit picking just weeks into this governments leadership, it has only been weeks.
And from the only party that suffered more than conservatives, is the poster sure they will be in the senate till next year?
Next week is one month after the election while every one has the right to an opinion I expected better.
No sorry that is untrue my expectations are about what we got nothing!

Alison presents a strikingly clear arguement outlining why the Democrats are as useful to Australian politics as a back pocket on a T Shirt.

Both her and the Greens to a leeser extent, wallow in the luxury that is found in not having to make any decision on matters that count, indeed implementing anything on a national scale and genuinely negotiating with the big boys internationally on anything from Iron Ore to Ironing Boards.

Her lame echoing of that bloody me too nonsense highlights her fundamental misreading of the Australain electorate - we are content, if indeed not smug with our lot - we thought JWH was great but we got bored - we really think the change will help - but it will be business as usual because we like it that way.

Many seats changed hand on a handful of votes - where she is right is that Chairman Rudd beat the Coalition at thier own game - that makes them better politicians only - not a better government.

She is better off aiming her criticism at the electorate who still see the ALP and the Coalition as partners in policy crime form which for the short term it reaps the benefit. Bagging out the winners ( and indeed the Coalition) is a waste time. Tell the voters, coerce , convince and convert them. Either that or bugger off.

We have two parties - the official coalition and the faux coalition betwen the greens and the ALP - conveniently similar to meet the ends we choose, more or les.

I am no fan of the Democrats, but they did go into the 1998 election promising to support a GST. They did not break any election promise in doing so. They managed to get fresh food exempt - a bad policy in my view, but nonetheless what they promised to do. The Democrats must be the first party in history whose demise has been blamed on their cvarrying out an election promise.