I recently posed the question as to why you would want Rudd back, but now that Rudd has moved past the shadow boxing I thought it would be interesting to look at why Julia should, or shouldn't, stay.

She's unpopular, hasn't been able to make an impression on Tony Abbott and doesn't have a lot of successes to her credit. She's widely regarded as dishonest (although so was John Howard, and that didn't hurt him) and seems to lack conviction.

I know that there is a view abroad that it doesn't matter who runs Labor, they are doomed. It's not a view I necessarily share. Perhaps Julia could come back, if only Rudd would leave her alone.

Graham look at it the other way.

What on earth have we done to deserve either of the twits. I, & most of my fellow citizens have not been nearly wicked enough to deserve either, let alone both of them.

At least if Rudd were to win, we'd get an election. Even he should be smart enough to know now that he could not last more than a couple of months, without stuffing something up badly enough to remind us how erratic & incompetent he is.

Kevin Rudd looks better from afar but less appealing close-up. Julia Gillard does not look so good from afar but more appealing close-up

Avery clear and strong NO.
And a question.
From my heart.
A trade unionist till death.
And ALP why should my movement UNION, speak on behalf of Australian voters.
And the party we gave birth to, as is the case for every child, has built its own life and paths.
As it needed to to survive, we should let both movements stand Friends but free of.
Self interest, it was not the will of ALP members, Union members, to install Gillard /remove Rudd.
Take Lady's and gentlemen, power brokers, in these next days this thought on board.
You sit in seats others sat in before,others will in the future, you do not own them.
If Gillard survives YOU tell us, our views do not matter, our party/union is yours not ours.
Kevin 07 or Gillard is Black Caviar vs a donkey.
Have the Australian Labor party members In a reform year the right to be heard?
If you vote Gillard you say no.

Yes, Gillard should survive if the alternative is Rudd the dud.

Belly, I think you have inadvertently shown a major part of Labour's problem.
It is just too beholden to the the Union organisation.
The problem has been illustrated and reinforced to the public in the
Craig (ahhh can't think of his surname) MP and the go slow at Fair Work.
It is just so obvious that there is real conspiracy, a wink & a nod
or just unspoken compliance with the need to keep their government in place.
It has become trite to say the Labour party is owned by the ACTU and its faceless men.

Going on Sunday ?

I think the very best we can hope for is that our pollies finally -finally!- learn we don't cotton to leaders with blood on their hands.
Wouldn't it be nice if either contestant showed some self sacrifice for the common good?
Julia could step down for the good of the party, or Kevin could resign from the Labor Party. His resignation from the foreign ministry was more an act of war than of any genuine sacrifice.
Where's my crossbow, I think I see another flying pig.
To my mind, this issue really highlights our need for a popularly elected President, instead of a PM hostage to party machinations.

Graham, you seem to be doing what the media does best, not reporting on situations but taking part in them as a partisan player.

I really don't care who runs the ALP. I see a disgraceful situation unfolding with the far right wing Craig Emerson supporting Gillard, his once lover, who is supposed to be in the socialist left but is happier snuggling up to Jim Wallace from the ACL, while Doug Cameron the SL convenor is coaching Rudd, who is even further right wing than Gillard or Emerson.

Odd behaviour all around and they all deserve each other.

That said, no one deserves Tony Abbott and his demented cheer squad, the 'Non's'.

Graham, why don't you and your game-playing media chums alert the punters to some of Swan's expose, by reminding us all of how Rudd operated, with the full support and assistance of Swan and Gillard, in a secretive, closed-shop, unconsultative process?

I think this is a very relevant point overlooked by all since Gillard stabbed Rudd in the back, with Swan and Tanner.

They were all an integral part of the dysfunctional machinery, as was the whole of caucus, never mind cabinet, who so thoroughly endorsed the dysfunction by first of all gifting Rudd the right to bypass the decision making processes of caucus to appoint his own ministers.

Also, this rot is set even deeper than Rudd and Gillard, who played mischevious roles behind the scenes for a long time, during the ever revolving door with Crean-Beazley-Latham-Beazley leaders.

Following Keating's crash, Beazley did less than nothing to reform the ALP, thinking he 'deserved' a run, and because of that total lack of leadership then, we all suffer a total lack of not just leadership but also purpose now.

Journalists who focus on the banal, fail to do the job they claim they are there for, as with almost the entire NewsCorp stable, but frankly, the ABC and Fairafx are no better, baying for blood, any blood, from anywhere, and not providing reports without emotion, or even truthful reports by the sounds of it these days.

What are you going to do if Rudd is content to sit on the back bench.

Julia does not deserve to survive, however I seriously doubt that KRudd will dance to her tune and contest the leadership on Monday. So far, Rudd has acted and Julia has reacted. I expect that to continue on Monday by Rudd sitting pat and leaving Julia further exposed.

Another thought, what is the Coalition doing? Think strategically. The Independents cited stable government as a reason for supporting the Gillard government. If I were Tony Abbott I would quietly be reminding them of that and would also promise them no early election if they support a no confidence motion in Parliament on Monday afternoon.

This scenario would strike hard at Labour when they were most vulnerable, still in leadership turmoil, and the cat would really be among the pidgeons.

Well GY from different sides of the fence we both get a bash.
But thankfully with feathers thrown from afar.
No question ever put here needs asking more than this one.
That defends GY .
Bazz! inadvertently?
Good Lawd man I DELIBERATELY highlighted just that.
22% of Australians are union members.
It can be far more, should be far more.
SOME parts of the Union movement lost still after compulsory unionism.
Yes after decades , still lost, forget union base was government employment.
Power generated by union dues, is, in SOME CASES being squandered by SOME , who fail to remember WHY unions exist.
SOME unions think rising to the top, gives SOME the right to control both the ALP and Unions.
I remind them, as a member who truly would die, yes I would, for both.
Australians, most, did not ever want Gillard and never will.
A victory for her betrays my party it betrays my birth right the union movement and my ALP.
Both must stand apart, if not Labors vote should represent the unions membership 22%
No party the private property of power owners should rule my COUNTRY.
IF Tuesday morning Gillard leads then my party will suffer another NSW.

Does Julia deserve to survive?

If you believe what the media tells us (and the polls)
the answer would have to be a resounding no. Kevin Rudd
seems to be the preferred PM.

However, as we all know in Australian politics it's
the party caucus that decides the leadership of the
party, and not you or I. So what we think although it,
if we're vocal about it -
may influence some MPs, but the ultimate decision is
not ours to make.

We could look at the achievements of the Labor Government
under the current PM - and debate her skills in government - but
as I said - it would not make the slightest bit of
difference. The final decision will be made by the 100 +
members of parliament that make up the caucus of the
current Labor Party.

Good Luck to Them! The country will be watching!

Personally, I think she's done a remarkable job - considering
the difficult circumstances she's had to deal with.
Unfortunately she's learned somewhat late in her term in office
that you need to advertise and explain your achievements -
so that the average voter can understand them. Still, 2013 -
is still a way off - and there's is time for corrections to
be made - providing of course that the party can be united -
and all this distraction stopped.

579
'What are you going to do if Rudd is content to sit on the back bench.'
Are you a comedian. If we was totally uncontent as Foreign Minister you could not seriously believe he would be content on the back bench. You display an ignorance of human nature.

cont'd ...

The big disadvatnge of the Australian Parliamentary System
is - the fact that
a miniscule minority, the Elected Parliamentary Party,
the Caucus, decides the Leadership of the Nation.
And not the millions of voters that elect them.

Perhaps it's time that the millions of voters do get the say
in who their PM should be - and not a handful of factional
supporters. Maybe that's why we need a Republic?

There will be a vote at 10 am monday no matter what Rudd says.

In response to Lexi, perhaps it's time people understood that they don't vote for a president but for a party or parties to run the country. The media reduces election campaigns to popularity polls, with policies taking a back seat.

There are no fewer "faceless men" behind one party over another, but that will be the new coalition mantra going to the next election after Gillard sees Rudd off on Monday. Whether labour or capital runs the country, the men are faceless. The only things standing in the way of complete domination by either one of these powers is our ability to vote them out and the good men/women in parliament with balanced views on individual versus group rights.

I cannot agree with Lexi on electing the PM.
The way the Westminster system does it means that the majority party
from amongst themselves selects their leader to be the PM.
If the public elects someone else they may vote in a PM from the
opposition party. That would be totally unworkable and would be like
the US where the government ran out of money back in 1998 and nearly
did so a couple of years ago.
They stood the public service down for a week or two in 1998.
That happened because the two houses locked up.
The US does not have a Governor General to send them back to the voters.

The current situation has only happened a couple of times in 110 years
so I think it is a quite stable system.

Graham, disentangling the policy from the personalities would take a hundred years to make sense of. Rudd has the added bonus of 'starting afresh’; Gillard can credit herself with steering the water logged Labor ship through some treacherous seas. Neither of them have been able to inspire the imagination of the wider electorate, hence the reason why the soap opera analogy is so apt. Tony Abbott might not be everyone's cup of tea, but he does present himself as a modernist (not post modernist) political force to be reckoned with, and Rudd has correctly identified him as a dangerous opponent. People often vote for the style of politician they are familiar with, in much the same way people voted for Joh here in Qld. Most punters don't understand the GFC, carbon trading, or how the trickle down benefits of the mining boom requires a government that is able to clearly explain how this works. Out of pure luck, more than anything else, we have dodged the GFC bullet, but not for long. I would not be surprised if the ALP leadership ballot on Monday is split three ways.Gillard, Rudd and?..Take your pick. Whoever wins on Monday is in many ways irrelevant because the federal election campaign will begin from that moment onward.

Caucus Lexi is the word to describe the inner circle running the ALP and being a republic changes nothing.
All party's have a caucus.
But the ALP , even in 1970 had problems.
Victory in 1972 was partly due to Gough, being able to take some power from *the faceless men*.
36 I think, not in politics strong behind the scenes controllers.
Union heads, no one stronger than my then Unions head Charlie Oliver AWU.
This is a reform year, it must be.
Kevin Rudd is not wrong, he was knifed by remnants of the faceless men.
NSW and both Rudd and Gillard have been pushed and pulled by these control freaks.
I say again, my biggest pride is my service to both union and party was from belief in both.
But to far too many it is a ladder, a tool to find a spotlight to be seen in.
A Gillard victory screams reform is dead faceless men own my party.
Tell us the 4 for Rudd to one for Gillard in todays polling the 7 page is not worth seeing, that caucus can act against Australia and ALP interests, again as they did on dumping our elected PM.

Chances are that if Rudd contests, and looses, he may well quit altogether and take up some cushy consultancy job that he may well have up his sleeve.

I for one think this would be the best option for all concerned, as it would get rid of Rudd and hand the people the election they both want and deserve.

The only ones out don't want an election are the faceless men, their puppets and their die hard supporters.

What ever happens, labor looses, because Gulias call for Rudd to recind any future leadership ambitions,just shows she is constantly looking over her shoulder.

I just wish that the faceless men would govern in the best interests ofmthe people and not the party they pull the strings for.

As for Julia, she was not voted in by the people, is not popular with the people, so yes, she should call an election so the people have the say on who runs the country.

As for who leads labor, frankly, I don't give a danm.

Heaven help us if we sink to the US style of electing a saviour president Lexi, for that will be the outcome.

Far better we stick with our mortals, elected individually by their own electorates and then collectively bu their colleagues, be that ALP or Coalition camps.

In fact, there is no need for a president at all, since they are only there to represents gods, which increasingly are not believed in here.

I am stuggling with your contribution Belly.

Are you pro-Rudd or pro-Gillard?

Those of us in the ALP during the Goss years knew only too well that Rudd was a dud, and we knew what would happen if he were given a big canvas to tear.

He tore it. But not on his own. Gillard, Swan and Tanner encouraged him all the way.

Then they dumped him.

Gillard has proved to have over reached her limited abilities, and has been ill served by her cronies from the right. In doing this she has been seen to be two faced and without ideology beyond 'power'.

That said, Gillard should remain, in my view, and Rudd should retire from his whingeing ways.

It really barely matters who sleeps in The Lodge these days with a wafer thin difference in politics between Humpty and Dumpty.

However, Abbott should also remove himself and at least allow Turnbull to have a crack at the job. I am sure if he were facing either Rudd or Gillard, the polls would favour the Libs not just because so many loath Gillard but because Turnbull actually has a feel for a middle of the road form of liberalism that is not quite so offensive as Abbott's dark world view offers.

If even only 50% of the Latham Diaries is accurate, one thing is guaranteed during this leadership instability:

- spin
- evasion
- backroom deals
- obfuscation
- betrayals
- horse trading
- lies (dare one use that word in PC times)

There might even be some surprise wavers at the end, just look for those who are veiling their comments in neutral and sharing praise for both leaders. It could be a sense of fair play or something else.

Labor should learn from this series of events since the 2007 election.

The major lesson is do not put in a leader just on the basis of winning elections and abilities to manipulate the media. While Rudd was a good campaigner, I reckon a less media savvy candidate with principles could have taken government at the 2007 election given Howard had soured.

Especially if his/her leadership style, behaviours, and personality raise concerns. While it is not against the tenents of the Westminster system it is hardly an ideal situation when a sitting PM has to be removed down mid-term when those other known flaws come to the fore.

Belly, I need some clarification.
Are the faceless men the senior officials of trade unions and ACTU ?
Is the Labour left mainly from Melbourne ?
Is the Labour right mainly from Sydney ?
Is there non faction faction ?

Is Julia a member of the Labour left ?
What faction does Rudd belong to ?
Where do the other states fit in or do they just do as they are told ?

It can be a bit difficult when the news reports do not clarify.

TBC as a green supporter you know my view, strongly anti Gillard pro Rudd, and who ever wins DD election to weed out the greens.
Bazz yes the heads of Unions are part.
Faceless men are no longer as in charge as once,but put Gillard on the ALP horse, she galloped it to death.
Ask this , and answer as you think not wish.
Is it not true the voters want Rudd.
Is it true he is the most wanted out of Gillard Abbott and Rudd.
Why is Labor caucus the only place, Gillard has the numbers?
She will not win by beating Kevin Rudd, watch closely.
By vote time Australia will, in terms that should not be ignored, have said Rudd should lead.
Ignore that and no return for Labor.

Blue Cross you are so obviously a labor supporter. Your suggestion that the libs should have that Rudd clone, Turnbull as leader says it all. You like his feel for the middle, which is exactly what is wrong with labor. You could have another slime ball in the job.

No idea of doing the right/best thing, just what will get him elected. The man was to stupid to not have seen through the global warming fraud, or could he perhaps see dollars for investment bankers in the thing. Which ever, he is not to be trusted.

We would have another no principle prime minister, just like Rudd & Julia, giving us what we probably deserve for electing such rubbish in the first place.

If you want Turnbull, go draft him. He could be Labor leader by Monday. It would be his only chance to be PM, sensible people saw him for what he is, & got rid of him.

*Kevin 07 or Gillard is Black Caviar vs a donkey.*

Belly me old mate, methinks that you have this one very wrong,
but time will tell.

Rudd was ditched for a reason. One man cannot run a Govt and his
running of it had become completely disfunctional. So even if
he should win against Gillard, he won't be able to run an effective
Govt. Sadly your own party is destroying itself and handing
Abbott the whole thing on a plate.

What you have now in Rudd, is a very bitter man, bent on revenge.
Australia, all of us are paying a price for that. Now he might
impress little old ladies as he kisses babies, but that is not
what we need from a leader of the country. We need somebody who
can lead a team.

Rudd failed as a leader and those working with him most closely
could see it, that is why they voted him out for good reasons at
the time. Ignore that at your peril.

Sorry 'been, old chap. I am not an ALPer at all.

I was, until Beazley led the mob, and I resigned.

Neither am I a middle roader, but I am trying to see things from that perspective, and I do believe that most of our fellow citizens are very much in the middle, not on the wings, like you, Belly, myself and others here.

Rudd and Gillard lack any signs of humanity. Abbott sounds like a wind-up gasbag, a hotair merchant of no value whatsoever, leaving Turnbull and even, maybe, but for the fact he's in the Seante, Arthur Sinodinous.

Hasbeen,

Turnbull lost by one vote as I recall - not exactly a resounding rejection by the party room.

Why do you think he's stuck around if not to wait his opportunity for a go at the Prime Ministership?

Sorry mate, I think you'll find he's Liberal leader again, sooner rather than later.

I want Labor to self destruct so a new Libertarian Party can rise from their ashes.They have not represented the workers or the middle class for many decades.We can see all their dirty washing been laid bare now with their own survival being paramount to the prosperity of the entire country.

Let them self destruct,they deserve it and all the pain and suffering they've inflicted on good decent hard working people is now coming back to bite them.Look in the mirror Labor and see the "Conga Line of suck holes" that you've become.

Poirot,

I agree with you about Turnbull. He once tendered his resignation but then withdrew it and there can only be one reason for that.

Wobbles,

Yes, initially I think his decision to return was spurred by Rudd's decision in April 2010 to put the ETS on hold. Turnbull's support for the ETS had been the catalyst for his own overthrow.

Turnbull had announced his decision earlier in the same April to retire. I think he was so incensed that Rudd had jettisoned the scheme that he reassessed his decision to move on from politics...but it's obvious that he's just biding his time before mounting a challenge to Abbott.

Poirot, one hopes sooner rather than later.

Had Abbott been the least bit skilled in being in opposition, rather than just adopting his heavy pugilist stance, he could have destroyed Gillard with her Rudd distractions by now, and enhanced his own standing within the community.

Were there a better ALP leader (neither Rudd nor Gillard) Abbott's efforts to date would have been sidelined long ago.

His 'popularity' is only the result of community resentment against Gillard, not for anything he brings to the job.

Sure, old hasbeens, leftovers from the Howard era, froth at the mouth and enjoy the Abbott style but they are a minority in the community.

Thankfully.

I think that Kevin Rudd's behaviour at this point illustrates his credentials as a clever political tactician; not unlike John Howard.

However like John Howard, it's all about him, not Australia's best interests. As Howard proved when he signed the Boeing Stealth Fighter contracts against the best judgements and advice from the ADF in a motel room on tour in the US, he is grandstanding, posturing for personal recognition in the U.S. , with devastating and costly consequences for us in Howard's case.

Rudd's rhetoric today, refers too "un-australian behaviour", angling for a John Howard style sense of an Aussie fair go. Fishing for public sympathy, whilst at the same time attempting to influence U.S. official opinion (behind closed doors ?) in favour his restoration as Australian PM.

If there was such a thing as un-australian that would be it, wouldn't it ?.

Alarmingly Tony Abbott was bleating in an article in the Age today about how he would be an even more loyal brown noser to U.S. than even Rudd, proving that even he is concerned about a U.S. sanctioned return of Rudd too the top office.

Perhaps we should continue with what, (for all intensive purposes) is an independent reformist and infrastructure building, Labor Gov't.

The question is, "can the Gov't be led and re-elected to do so, by a Gillard ", with Rudd carping from the sidelines, even from the back bench. I think not.

Therefore a third candidate will be required. One that Rudd cannot line up like a fish in a barrel.

Clearly Julia Gillard could have been a great PM and I believe that with the value of hindsight will go down as a great PM, but only if Labor can survive this onslaught from Rudd and be re-elected to enact a policy platform that can only be good for Australia and bad for vested interests.

con't....

con't....

Even LNP voters would be alarmed by Julie Bishop as Foreign Minister as her recent writings and positions made on behalf of her party. (Mindless warmongering to say the least) but suddenly Rudd as Foreign Minister has lost it's gloss for me, much the same way that Kim Beasley has as Ambassador in Washington for a long time.

Above all else the last thing we need now is a John Howard Version 3 in Tony Abbott .

Does Julia deserve to survive Graham Y ?, most definitely. Whether she can or not is another question entirely.

TBC,

Yep, I think a pretty accurate gauge of Abbott's leadership qualities is the fact even in the midst of Labor consistently whacking itself on the head with a frying pan, that he and the Liberal party can only manage to stay neck and neck. They should be whooping it in under the circumstances.

To my mind, using a cricket analogy, Abbott comes across as a blocker, a night-watchman.

That could be drinks boy in fact Poirot.

It could indeed, TBC

What is it with you lefties? How did all your taste descend to your posteriors?

Just a while back you were all over Latham, showing great judgement.

More recently you were in love with Rudd, he was the messiah, leading you to the promised land. Fat lot of good that was, when he fell into the temptation of spending all our money.

So you jump horses. Talk about out of the frying pan into the fire, you pick Julia. We all rapidly find that her voice is her best attribute. When it comes to doing anything but lie, she is about as useful as tits on a bull.

So now you have the hide to assume to advise the libs on who they should chose to lead them. With your record, your recommendation must be the kiss of death.

If you had any self respect you would do the decent thing, & crawl into a hole somewhere, & keep quiet for a couple of years. Come out in a few years & see what a great job Tony has done.

Yes I am an ALP foot soldier, 4 am start to set up a booth 70 one am away, and full day alone, then scrutineer.
Yes I am trade Unionist, and those drives have been much longer
2 am hundreds of klm use two tanks of fuel, home and sleep in cloths
1 m
And yes I get in to my side.
Throw rocks, here in OLO at faceless power brokers I forever admire them,almost all of them from progressive Unions.
A third candidate, may be the answer, I like TBC do not give air to those just hating Labor here.
I ask each caucus member, on Monday to remember this.Every time as Union delegate, or official I sat in a meeting I silently reminded my self with these words.
*I sit here on behalf of those who pay my wages/sent me here, not me, not my ego, I work for them or am nothing*
Rudd was sacked and replaced by the wrong people and he is the peoples choice.
He today and over this weekend will tell us he has changed and he has.
Do we faceless men vote to tell every one we need to keep our movements viable they have no voice?
Power Lady's to the people.
Abbott? what a great country ,future if in months Rudd faces Turnbull across the dispatch box.
If the people, not faceless men are heard.

Belly, you say, If the people, not faceless men are heard.

if labor had any concerns for the people, they would call an election, as well as a leadership ballot.

Now even you can't disagree with that.

Meanwhile, our wonderful independents, Windsor and Oakshot, are residing over this fiasco, unwilling to withdraw their support as they know that an election now would be signing their own political death warrants.

So Graham, not only doesn't Julia deserve to stay, but nor do labor, unless of cause, the people get to have their say, as opposed to the faceless men who run the country.

Belly,
you should apologise to the horse for that.

Isn't there anyone out there who finds struggling families & the unemployed as more important that those two hits ?
They have had their chance & failed. Give Abbott his chance now at a run of the place. If he stuffs up then vote him out again. I just don't want any more of this Labor incompetence.
It's cost me & many others dearly. Enough is enough !

Hasbeen "So now you have the hide to assume to advise the libs on who they should chose to lead them. With your record, your recommendation must be the kiss of death."

I've found it amusing to see Labor members pointing out how unsuited Tony Abbott is for the PM's job given their history of choice of leaders.

Just looking at a few recent ones
- Hawke, from what I've read a serial cheat on his marriage
- Keating, sets the standard and arrogant and the devisive politics apparently so hated by Labor supporters.
- Beasley, seemed to be a decent guy but unelectable over a long period.
- Latham, we dodged a bullet.
- Rudd, reportedly described by one collegue as a psycopath. At best very difficult to work with and two faced.
- Gillard, seemingly no problems at all with habitual lying. Even what's been admitted in the last couple of days shows how many lies were told when Rudd was deposed.

I don't know enough about Crean but my impression is of a bully given to misuse of power. Less than favorable recollections of Whitlam and Hayden (although Hayden seemed to do a good job as GG).

Perhaps Abbott does lack what he needs to be a good PM, I'm not a big fan but given Labors track record in picking leaders I think I'll treate their recomendations on that front with the respect they deserve.

R0bert

Yes, I'm with you on that one indi, enough is enough.

I to have taken a huge hit from the actions of these incompitent fools.

Just watched Rudds media conference, he was brilliant in my view and I would vote for him tomorrow.

The trouble is, whoever leads the labor party will always come a distant second to the faceless men, as it is they who actually run the country.

Of cause, he can always joint the other team.

Even if Julia wins the ballot, contested by Rudd or not, the people have lost all trust and respect for her.

She is a back stabbing liar. Nothing more.

Faceless men faceless men faceless men faceless men faceless men faceless men faceless men faceless men faceless men faceless men faceless men faceless men faceless men faceless men faceless men faceless men faceless men faceless men faceless men faceless men faceless men.......

After adopting the lotus position and chanting this for several minutes I experienced a warm inner glow and hallucinated that Tony Abbott is PM. Try this yourselves! I think I even saw Christopher Pyne held aloft on a fluffy cloud by a troupe of captains of industry heralded by a Fairfax fanfare!

Read all the posts here with much amusement.

I agre with Indi and Robert. We now have Labor supporters trying to tell the Libs who should be their leader. After the last few Labor leaders, that has to be the best joke of the year.

Abbott is untried, and yet they critisize him as unsuitable. Let me say that anyone could be better than the current mob.

The last few years have shown they could not run a raffle in a pub on friday afternoon. They have spent our money like drunken sailors, with nothing to show for it.

It will be amusing to see what happens on Monday.

Labor deserves the turmoil, for always putting up a messiah instead of a team leader. Rudd failed and they went for Gillard hoping to get the womens vote. Another failure.

Wow rehctub, how can 2 people have such different perceptions.

I heard Rudd's speech, for that is what it was, & after a while, I had to turn it off. I could not stand the smug self satisfaction oosing out of my radio. The bloke was putting it on with a knife.

The loudest message I got was his condescension in talking to all his inferiors. How anyone could not detect it I find hard to believe. You are obviously more generous than me, & are prepared to take him at his own assessment of himself.

Sorry, I simply hear a schooled linguist, saying one thing in words, but with absolutely no commitment to the meaning. It is all slime, when ever he speaks in public. If I hadn't turned the radio off I would have been sick.

I'll bet he practiced the thing in front of a mirror. With Rudd it's is all an act, & he is playing injured, but brilliant leader. Well, many fall for it, but I don't think he is that however, I don't like Geoffrey Rush either.

im..leaning to where has been is[was?]
im sick of hearing their voices

sick of hearing one point up
or two points down...all this destraction..
and nuthin on the doings govt just keeps on doing...[on behal;f of those faceless few...with the ear of the liar who delivers]

juliars negotiations ith stakeholders
didnt extend to the mugs[the smokers]
who' apparently dont have a stake'

so if yiour not into it lobbying for your own cash cow
[like that 10 billion 'green fund'..or the other purk lurks
like spending tax money..on adverts against smokers/pink batts
or free computers..or free school buildings[as long as they arnt for actual teaching]

how about that neat lobbied postition re the nbn
or the govt pension trust fund managment

or at the state level..beurocroratic control of semi privatised water/power/phone..and tv/radio etc etc

a nice govt warrented cash cow..
just like the licence to print money
from when govt gave the fed to the bankser's

its a rather endless list
who ever gets in must clean out the lobby
listen to all his members..and so much more not one of the current mob are capable of doing[i hesitate to name even one..but yabby named him once]

rudd has a steady mid thirties support
juliar has double..but both should go
or the one will destroy the other

get behind that other leftie
put all power brokers in their requested minestry
but the faceless out of the loop

[all govt minesters meetings..should be recorded
[released publicly..at election time

only that true reform
can beat the hockey/turbull abbot
rush to the slush funding machine..[that passes as governance]

My advice to Mr Rudd at this time is NOT to challenge
the PM for leadership of the Party.
Let her lead the party into the next election
and lose.

The inevitably of a Liberal Party win for a few
years in government is appears to be almost guaranteed.
Let the people
see for themselves the disaster of life under Mr Abbott
and Co. THEN, at the next election Mr Rudd could
challenge for the leadership - and guarantee
a Labor victory for many years to come.

This strategy would also embarrass Mr Rudd's current opponents
in the Labor Party.

Lexi,
You are right, there is no hope for Labor no matter who is PM after Monday.

The next election will see a wipe out of most of the current Labor members and they can introduce new blood over a few elections. That would have to be better than the current mob and they might even get a benefit of an Abbott failure. Turnbull could even change sides and become Labor leader, that would be good.

Also bear in mind that the Libs will be flat out paying for the current Labor debt, so unlikely to have funds to build any major infastructure.

And we get benefits like no carbon tax, the boats stopped and the complete death of multiculturalism. Too much to expect a dramatic drop in immigration though.

Yep, responsible government begins with the next election.

Dear Banjo,

The sad thing about all this is that this fight is
not about policy but about personal ambition and
personalities and I think it will do severe damage to the
Labor Party as a result. The only winners that I can
see are - the Coalition and the Greens.

Oh Lexi please. I don't know if I could stand much more of our electronics filled with these 2 drop kicks. I do think you may get your wish, he won't be challenging, unless his numbers improve drastically. I may have to emigrate, or elope or something to get away from them.

What are you doing next week?

Up here the ABC are in love with Rudd, & have been bleating about him for weeks, it really is a bit much. I gather you have a Julia clique on the ABC down there.

On the other forecast, don't hold your breath. I"m getting a feeling that Tony is going to be so good, that he may challenge Menzies for the crown of longest serving PM, before he retires.

Wouldn't that be wonderful. We could use a bit of stability after 4 years of Labor.

Don't be too sure you want that "new blood" in the Labor party Banjo, have you thought where that blood would come from.

I think you'll find it would mostly be in the form of graduates of the young labor movement from our larger city universities.

Can you imagine an influx of arts/law graduates, [like Julia] flooding the halls of power. We'd all be screaming for a return of the pensioned off union bosses, who had at least seen someone working, even if they had not actually done any themselves.

They would be as incoherent as the old Democrats, but with out the redeeming character of an ideology. Please don't wish that upon us.

Hasbeen, are you anti-graduate, or just anti ALP graduate?

You are aware that Abbott is a graduate are you not?

He has never driven a tractor, has no idea how to milk a cow, has not a clue where eggs come from, cannot weld, dig a hole, lay bricks, work in a bank, or sell brussell sprouts in a green grocer (like Maggie).

He's 'u akademiklee'trained goose too.

Oh, and he rides a bike FOR WHICH HE PAYS NO REGO! No rego hasbeen! Imagine that, bludging on we car drivers. NO REGO!

Now, yer man you loath, Turnbull, he's a real worker. Law degree,banker, IT firm creator, all sorts. A real liberal in the Menzies tradition, not a clapped out ex monk.

Where would the nation be without people with uni' training hassie?

Not everyone can come up from driving a dray to owning Linfox old boy.

There's no more drays to drive, after all.

Time for you to get over your very Stalinist-Maoist hatred of 'intellectuals'.

Why, a course in the Humanities might even broaden your mind!

Hay Blue, I was one of those engineering students throwing eggs at the arts/ tiddlywinks students back in the days of the Vietnam moratorium marches.

Many of those twits were on teachers scholarships at the time. We should have seen where our education system would go in the next 40 years & tried to do something about it then.

I have always believed in education, just not big on propaganda, as "taught" in what passes for institutions of higher education in Oz today. Some of those courses weren't much better back then, but they have got much worse over the years.

Yes I know Abbott has a number of degrees. The one that really worries me, about him, is the economics. Very few of those types seem to get much right.

Dear Hasbeen,

We'll know soon enough about Mr Rudd.
Watch TV around 1.30 today.
What am I doing next week?
What are you offering?

Dear TBC,

Malcolm Turnbull would be great!

Hassie, an engineer eh?

Like I said, doing a humanities degree might broaden your horizons.

Still, you're on the money with Abbott and his economics degree.

Clearly, he had no understanding of what he was taught in it, never mind whether or not an economics degree, as taught today, is of any value beyond the fact that many regard it as valid.

Lexi, I doubt that Turnbull would prevail too much with his colleagues.

Many are as dense as lead, devoid of humanity, prigs, buffoons and layabouts, never mind their leanings to xenohopbia, bigotry, rampant flag-nationalism and witch-burning attitudes when it comes to religious matters but like you I do think (hope?) that were he to prevail there, he'd at least offer a slender glimmer of hope that his cronies could turn the Howard corner and try to rediscover a softer form of liberalism than the neocon claptrap they ingest and leave on our footpaths for others to fall into today.

Sorry Blue, about the only thing I have seen a humanities degree broaden is the backsides of the students & teachers involved.

Lexi, I thought a few months sailing around my old haunts. The Solomons, & the Carolines are nice this time of year. It would be wonderful getting away from all this rubbish.

Don't worry about those health problems, a short but merry life is the best to aim for. Just imagine the philosophical discussions we could have on those long tropical nights.

I was so lucky to be out there during most of Whitlam's efforts, with no satellite communications to keep me in touch. It all drifted by, & was no more important than weather to have the cod, or the corral trout for dinner.

Actually a few months out there on an isolated island alone together would do Ruddy & Julia the world of good. I wonder who would cook?

Hi, please forgive this "ad" but as Kevin Rudd has invoked people power I thought On Line Opinion should give him a hand so have set up a short survey at http://bit.ly/zB9twc.

As with all of our surveys it is serious. It is short, but it is definitely not a "tick and flick".

Apologies for cross-posting.

I say Hassie, how jolly of you to offer to take them both on a cruise. As host, naturally, you'd cook.

Can you take the drinks boy with you too, to serve up a sundowner as yard-arm time approaches?

He needs a worthwhile job and he's had a while carrying the drinkes to learn how it's done well.

In between drinks, why, he could clean barnacles off the underside of the yacht.

Dear Hasbeen,

A few months sailing around your old haunts?
Sounds wonderful - but can't be done as I've got so
many depending on me not only at work but on the home
front and beyond. We've just had to relocate my
mother-in-law to another aged care facility and I've got
to keep on working to pay the increased bills. Life is
a bit complicated at the moment. But you've given me
something to dream about so Thank You for that. ;-)

Politically - you're right, things are in a huge mess
aren't they? Who knows what will happen next.

Lexi I'm shattered, but good luck with all that complication. Have to be next year. You're still having that road trip I hope.

Blue, the whole idea is that they be alone together. Perhaps who's cooking what may not be as important as what's cooking. I wonder if they would both survive.

Well laugh? love it! every anti Labor post.
Those telling me and others to stop interfering in? Liberal politics are a grin.
Tuesday morning, Gillard still leads.
Caucus not the people rule.
What future the ALP.
What platform for post landslide defeat.
Will party members and electorate except being told your opinion does not matter?
Deep breath Australia, my party may well have been hijacked.
Kevin 07 go you good thing.

What future the ALP.
Belly,
What about what future for Australia ? We can't afford Labor again for at least 3 terms.

Dear Indy,

Can we really afford Mr Abbott and Co?
Isn't it time for the Libs to have a
leadership spill as well?

Lexi,
There are only two ways this can go with Abbott. He either is as bad as Rudd/Gillard or he is better. There's simply no way he could be worse.
I have way more hope in an Abbott Government that the other two.

Dear Indy,

The voters will get it right in
2013.

Julia has not survived.
She in all probability will enter Parliament as Prime Minister on Tuesday.
Attempts to make lite of these days, her supporters bile, will be made but fail.
Her polling low always,is never to return to preferred leader.
She has entered the twilight zone, no way back, only out.
Another candidate will rise, maybe Rudd too.
But only Tony Abbott can save Labor from two terms in opposition.
[Individual by this I say he is so bad he may force voters back to Labor]
The knife waiting for Gillard, will come from the hands that put her there.
And the replacer is strongly supporting her now.
I feel betrayed, my party is not acting like a Democratic one.
People, voters, public, want one candidate Caucus another.

Dear Belly,

Caucus knows that Mr Rudd will not tolerate their
influence and that he also plans to bring in reforms
to lessen their control. Of course they're not about
to support him. And the PM is their choice. She seems
to be content to do as she's told. A pity for Australia.
A pity for the Labor Party. She will win Monday's spill.
She has the numbers. Still one can dream - and hope.
Abbott is not an option for any thinking person.

Lexi, the voters got it right in the last election too.

They did not want either Abbott or Gillard.

The move to a supported government was legitimate though, given the voters actions.

Abbott could have been King, but for the fact the independents did not see him as a reliable alternative.

It is Abbott's fault that Gillard became Queen, something that no journo bothers to investigate at all.

That is his fault, not Gillard's, or ours, as voters. His alone.

Are voters upset now?

Well, they have no one to blame but themselves, they created this situation.

I doubt whether voters ever 'get it right' anyway, they just vote as individuals and don't care about much beyond themselves, as an observation after 20 years of HTV activities tolerating abusive w-ankers and total tosspots who don't even know what the election is, state, federal or council.

But then , I'm a voter too, so what would I know, except of course, that I always get it right?

*People, voters, public, want one candidate Caucus another.*

Well Belly, I remind you that the American people voted twice for
George Bush and his administration went on to be largely responsible
for the GFC.

The Russian people voted for the drunkard Boris Yeltsin and he gave
away most of their assets to the Oligarchs, who are now living it up.

Sometimes I think we should do whats best for the country, not who
is best at kissing babies. Rudd was a failure as a team leader,
that is why his work mates turfed him out.

But if you think that Australians should learn the hard way, just
like the Americans and Russians did, well so be it. As they say, people
need pain to learn. Clearly many Australians need a bit more pain.

It will take a couple of posts but needs saying.
Kevin Rudd needed to change.
But he did not need to be thrown out, he was not warned/council ed just ambushed.
I think right now, with Shorten not standing only he can reduce Labors loss, maybe win.
Kevin, I, Lexi, know reform must take place.
Lets look at Gillard then Crean, a Cretin if ever there was one.
Gillard with a leftist base, until it abandoned her, linked herself with Mark Latham, and Simon Crean.
Not every one has sat in a room,invited, to hear Gillard address Labor foot soldiers, I have, pre Kevin 07.
She, in my opinion, is power hungry and has no intention, ever,of following other than her plan.
She rewards suck holes, of little or no worth.
Hence, Fitzgibbon, Chief Government whip, Labors Pyne, an upper class twit prone to childishness.
Remember the man, and his fathers links to China, free travel accommodation more.
Simon Crean, gained power from his union back ground and links to both Gillard and Latham.
Never confuse this man with his great father, Simple Simon is not his shadow.
A question must be asked here.
How many fathers passed ALP seats to sons,as unworthy as Crean and Fitzgibbon?
How many Unionists, no not the truly brilliant Shorten/Swan/Combet, and others, get rewarded with seats in Parliament?
Thomson if conservative would be howled out of Parliament, by Labor!
Under that tree of knowledge, in dark coal mine lock outs,the battles for 40 hour week then 36.
What was the date, the very day, Labors leaders first said.
We will tell voters what they want?

ALP voters need to understand this, we know we are up to our knees in untrue and unfair slanders.
We know too Gillard, as much as any one is the reason,but that things are not as bad as is being said.
First Gillard, *live however by this basic rule,truth remains the true measure*, @covering up her faults will not remove them@.
She never truly tried to tell why she said no carbon tax then yes to one.
She spoke of peoples forum, junk though, cash for clunkers, silly , she has no idea of policy development.
We should under stand,SOME barbs and arrows hurled at Labor here are in the right hands,modern weapons for some, understanding is absent.
Gillard lets insults get air while Abbott's plans,dreadful ones,get left alone.
Rudd if trounced, will leave Parliament next election,a brilliant mind gone,Gillards suck holes will remain?
Lexi I lived this before we will not pull a rabbit out, a Rudd loss kills any chance a government that achieved so much.
Will bring about one that threatens damage to this country's very fabric.
I ask The ALP has on Monday to think this,union members are watching, more are lost than won, after seeing power brokers use them not consult them.

TBC
'They did not want either Abbott or Gillard.'

On essentials, even accounting for the recent events, voters will have the same dilemma at the next election

The choice is between yesterday's loser and today's loser. Kevin O'lemon, and Juliar.

No thinking person would want either in power. Abbott is the wise choice.

Belly, the cry that Rudd was ambushed may be partially correct but the ALP in Qld knew very well what Rudd was like.

His aberant behaviour was on the record and deeply ingrained within the Qld ALP psyche.

He was loathed, simple as that.

To allow him to lead the ALP was foolish and dangerous.

He remains loathed, except by those few groupers who have been jilted, overlooked for their brilliance, and cut by Gillard.

Most of them have little talent and are left overs from the Keating Beazley era.

Funny how the Left is supporting Rudd, when their member, Gillard, is fighting for survival.

Rudd should join Abbott, carrying drinks.

It is about self-preservation. Some from the Left, like Cheeseman are supporting Rudd because they sit in marginal seats and there is a perception Rudd is the better schmoozer at election time and he is playing the hard-done-by underdog card to perfection at the moment.

The list fed to the media about allegiances is not correct. Already MPs have come out to declare their allegiances, some contrary to the official list. The vote is a secret one though, and who knows if what the Caucus is declaring publicly will be reflected in the vote.

Lexi said;
Abbott is not an option for any thinking person.

This what I meant when I said rhetoric.
That is all we seem to get, that sort of statement over and over, not
just from Lexi, I only used her post as an example.

Some physiologist had a name for that sort of character assassination.
Now I bet someone comes up with $1 billion dollars and the medical
financing, even though that was answered years ago.

The opposition to Tony Abbott as far as I have been able to see is
just made up of rhetoric, you know give a dog a name etc etc.
They even bring religion into it, shades of the Catholic Labour Party.

Anyway, he could not be worse than we have experienced recently.
Did you ever see the list of dud and abandoned Labour projects.
I wish I had kept a copy of it.

On 24th February, 2012 at 2:13.18 pm, the resident population of Australia was projected as 22,840,328.....

I find it extraordinary that among such a population, the best we can find to elevate to positions of leadership are the present rather sad examples.

Perhaps our criteria for such positions is in need of a tweak.

hasbeen,
From any 'new blood' there just maybe some hope for a few with a bit of common sense. They could not be worse than the current mob. I cannot see one that is the least bit compedent. Just look at the stuff ups, they are across the board.

Belly,
Just what makes you think Rudd has or will change his style? Don't forget he was the one who opened the door to the illegals, and look what that has cost us. Then ther is his dream of a 'big Australia'. Lepards don't change their spots!

Abbott is untried, so you are simply speculating or wishfull thinking about him not being a good PM. We did well under the Libs previously and they did operate as a team and not a one man band. He has little charisma, but that does not make him an unsuitable PM. He may well put Australia first. I don't necessarily put my money on the best looking horse. Time will tell

Lexi,
You assume Abbott is not for thinking person ?
Well, Rudd & Gillard have proven that they & Labor definitely are not.

True Poirot, and I am sitting at home just waiting for the call....

I think this situation is a reflection of the falling interest in joinging political parties, or at least the major parties.

Back when ALP aspirants and members stood on street corners, on a soap box and addressed hordes of men on bikes with upturned handlebars and Gladstone lunch bags, there was a vibrancy about elections and politics.

That is all gone now, as is the appearance of the member in the Branch meetings, and the role of the branch in policy making.

All is centralised, sterilised and santitised and reduced to boring and irrelevant to potnetial members.

The ALP exists only for union officials, party officials and poor saps who see a career path therein.

At least the Qld Nats still retain their party as a 'party', with its main function being to socialise with others, even though they are subservient to the Libs, totally now in Qld.

The Greens offer an exscape into nowhereland for people who would like to be an 'activist' but have no idea how to become one.

Frankly, some of their party reps need to be put to sleep too.

Depressing, eh?

We on this OLO blog are not representative of our fellow citizens, whatever our views heer are. Most simply couldn't care what goes on, so lomng as petrol costs less, child care is better for less, schools are better for less and tax is less but supplying more.

Where's the Koolaid?

Dear Bazz,

Sorry but I don't tend to use "rhetoric" and "spin,"
I have actually lived under Liberal Governments and
have experienced first hand the damage that they do.
Jeff Kennett was a disaster in Victoria, and the current
Liberal government is equally so. The problem with
conservative governments is they pride themselves on
being able to manage things "economically." However,
in order to do that they cut back on things like
infrastructure, education, health, transport, and so on.
They sell off assets and yet provide tax loop-holes for
the wealthy. It's a question of balance - and that's
something the conservatives are unable to do well.
Labor has to come in and fix the mess
that is left behind. You go on believing that Mr Abbott
will make a good PM. I don't see any evidence of that.
To me he's not offered anything in the way of policies
that make any sense. From what I observe all he's done is
condemn and criticise - and that's not a reason to vote for
him.

Labor has to come in and fix the mess ,
Lexi,
You mean irresponsible spending sprees ? What you call cutbacks are in actual fact measures to live within our means not beyond them.

Lexi,
When the Libs, under kennett, came to power in Vic the state was bankrupt because of irresponsible spending by Labor previously. Was not there a Premier by the name of Kirmer who, like Gillard and Rudd, was a disaster.

Kennett did the only thing possible to get Vic back on track and that meant tight budget control, and selling assetts to pay for the Labor debt.

Lexi I am sure you know, a few posters here, while in all probability good people know nothing.
Gillard has no way back, Tuesday, if she wins Labor and her are lost, defeated.
No way round this.
A future leader is emerging, Anthony Albanese is talking in the back ground
I have always admired him, never more than today.
I would remind voters who will not vote Labor after Gillard wins, to remember this.
Greens are not the answer, TBC will give me heaps but they prosper only on Labors lost numbers.
If Gillard is returned, if it costs me my history as a proud unionist, I charge those voting for her/removing Rudd, as the new DLP.
A group who both betrayed the ALP and kept conservatives in power.

Hang on Belly. A week ago you were spruiking for Shorten.

You are not very loyal to Billyboyo.

There you go Lexi, more of the same.
Show me your pink batts.

I am still waiting for Belly to define to me what exactly the factions
are and how they line up. Rudd appears to be battling the two
combined factions, which I suspect makes Gillard unbeatable.
Is it true that Rudd does not belong to either faction ?

Still, I don't have an accurate idea of what is going on in the ALP.
That makes it hard to vote for them.

My thoughts are that Julia will win the battle, but loose the war.

What I mean is if she wins, there will most likely be a vote of no confidence, or at least there should be.

Perhaps the ind's will see this as a LIFE LINE so they may save what little credibility they still have.

Alternatively, if Julia retains her job, against the wishes of the people and, they continue to support her, then they are tarnished. No doubt about it.

TBC let us be honest, you misquote me.
I say Bill Shorten is the man, but right now we should watch this unfolding tragic crippling of my party.
Bill is, without doubt a genius.
He how ever was a big part of the knifing.
And continues to support Gillard.
As events unfold, Gillard backers have behaved awfully, not in the party's interests.
And got it wrong in removing Rudd.
Australia wants him back, I , unlike my party's Caucus, think giving the people what THEY want, is our mission.
After Gillard wins, IF she wins, we are dead meat.
Greens are vitally interested in the out come ,as Brown said, and you and I know, all their growth comes from Labors loss.
Vultures who feed on others ,who are without a Chance of ever being other than that.
They pick and peck at Labor, and all anti conservative folk.

Australia wants him back,
Belly,
Are you saying all Australians are hangers-on ? I'm pretty confident that there are still plenty of decent people out there. Hopefully more now than at the last election.

*And got it wrong in removing Rudd.*

You still don't get it, Belly. The people who were closest to Rudd,
worked with Rudd, worked for Rudd, could no longer do so, as he
was losing the plot. Listen to the truth, which is coming out now.

One man does not make a Govt. Govt means teamwork. By supporting
Rudd now, you are in fact part of the reason why your own party
is being dragged down. Rudd had his chance and he failed miserably.

The essential difference between a democratic style of government and a republican style is that in a democracy, representatives are obliged to do as the majority of their constituents direct, regardless of their own feelings, whereas in a republican style, representatives have considerably more self determination. They are elected to make their own decisions, according to what they believe is the best for their constituents (or themselves?).
We already follow the republican model, obviously. It will be interesting to see which way the frogs jump on Monday.
Sadly, the best boss is quite often the one least liked by his immediate subordinates.

There's an awful lot of misinformation going around
currently about how "difficult," Rudd was to work with.
However the facts are different to this rhetoric.
And people who really worked with him deny all this
rubbish that's currently being spread. Things did get
achieved under Mr Rudd - and they couldn't have been
accomplished without team effort and consultations.
He did not do things all by himself. And seeing us
through the global financial crisis was no small feat.

However, be that as it may - we'll have to wait and see
what develops after Monday's spill. Whether the Labor Party
can unite under whatever leader it chooses remains to be seen.
One can only hope that whatever the outcome in the leadership -
set policies will be achieved with positive outcomes. It's
still a while to the next election - and with continued
policy achievements - voters can still be swayed in seeing
which party can best deliver outcomes that are for the good
of the country - and not just a small elite minority.

I wish the Party success. It has to get over its major current
hiccup - and get on with doing what it does best - governing
the country for all our sakes.

I think the labour supporters are worrying unnecessarily as after it
all blows over they will reunite, bury a few hatchets and get on with it.
Then they will say how they are all good boys & girls together.

That is what politics is all about, and they have no alternative.
Someone this week said that there are no friends in politics, or
rather he did not have any friends in politics.

The only worry I have is that they might cover up misdemeanors of
members to save the government. That is in fact illegal if it could be
shown that they knew and either by action or the omission of action
interfered with an investigation.

It is cause for investigation anyway.

I am content with my own views yabby, and mate in fact nothing else will do for me.
I take all views on board, except Individuals,even he devalues them.
Rudd, immensely popular with voters, in comparison to Gillard.
More liked within the party and Union movement, so in a two horse race?
Party rank and file public and workers want him.
How will Labor recover?
Can they recover A Gillard win says no.
It says all the above voted to__ give away to others their right to be heard.
Flog me claim disloyalty, but know, my party is not private property of power brokers.
Would you yabby have me use that lie, that word the hobbles both my movements SOLIDARITY?
A word used to sweep truth under the carpet.
To stop fixing problems.
Used here to reinstall a woman who can only self destruct after a win.
NSW a nightmare had its roots in power brokers /faceless men, my party needs reform, it needs Kevin Rudd, or the third candidate Bill Shorten, not another Latham/Gillard plant Simon Cretin.

belly/quote..""Rudd,..immensely popular with voters""

no not really matye
he is good at getting a flash crowd
just for the media..[much like juliar]...never bigger than a bussload

mate did you hear him with laurie oaks
sounding so smug..poor dude,but remiding me so much of juliar
[she has adopted many of his worse points

""Gillard...More liked within the party
and Union movement,..so in a two horse race?""

it has to be a non unionist leader
ryunning on a union ticket..[like a war cabnet]
not mates and factions

the less both of them say the better
its their voices both of em
im sick of hearing both of em

""It says all the above voted
to__ give away to others
their right to be heard.""

parties shouldnt be re leaders
leaders deligate duties..then TRUST them
oppointed by the people of the party..to do their job

""my party is not private property of power brokers."'

absolutly
if they arnt there for fairness
what are they there for..[it should all be under secret ballot!]

no party line..all by conscience vote
each notifying..their voters..as minesters release the facts

""..that lie,..that word the hobbles both my movements SOLIDARITY?
A word used to sweep truth under the carpet.
To stop fixing problems.""

concensus?
conscience?
888...up the worker?

""Used here to reinstall
a woman who can only self destruct after a win.""

asa will rudd
MATE THE PARTY SYSTEM..has failed
regardless of which ego leads it...we need no more leader ego

no more mates rates
jobs for the boys...[greenie car scemes for mates]

""it needs Kevin Rudd,
or the third candidate Bill Shorten,
not another Latham/Gillard plant Simon Cretin.""

mate..it needs a polygraph
or a ventilator..[de-fib-relator]

*And seeing us
through the global financial crisis was no small feat*

Hang on Lexi, it was ten years of Costello's work that saw us
through the global financial crisis. He'd set it all up,
Rudd simply took the credit.

If the Libs had had any brains at the time, they would now have
Costello there rather then Abbott and that would certainly have
been better for them and for the country.

The problem is that alot of the public prefer arse kissers.
Howard was an arse kisser, so is Rudd, people fall for it.
It pushes their emotional buttons.

People like Keating and Costello are not arse kissers, but
if you look back in history, they are the politicians who've
made the changes that benefitted the country.

That is the problem with democracy. When it turns into a circus,
we land up with such disasters as Bush in America and Yeltsin
in Russia. The cost to those nations was huge in both cases.

In the end I focus on what is good for the nation, not on who
is good at kissing babies, or gathering star struck teenagers around
themselves and thinking it matters that they like to be photographed.
Justin Beaver can do the same, that does not mean he can lead a
country.

Yabby,

It was Keating that put in place the reforms that Costello in turn managed. Was Costello a reformer or someone that was innovative in the economic realm?

After the Liberal rout of 2007, Costello gleaned much satisfaction in telling his colleagues in no uncertain terms that they could stick their opposition leadership where the sun don't shine. Never in a million years would he have dreamed that he'd have a chance to gain the Prime Ministership in under two terms. Nope, he envisaged he'd have to wait at least six years before he'd get a look in. As it turned out, if he'd stuck around he probably would have won the 2010 election.

You can argue till the cows come home whether it was Rudd's quick intervention of fiscal injection into the economy and infrastructure that saved us from the ravages of the GFC...or not....or whether they were "too" hastily implemented.

In any case, Costello's work was only one factor in seeing us through the financial crisis. His stash of savings would have lasted five minutes compared to the billions required stimulate the economy amidst the GFC.

pureo..it wernt keating or costhello
it was the people who paid

in so many ways..selling telstra/common wealth bank
water rights..wheat export etc[federally]
states selling infastructure and creating huge debt locally

but a debt free dollar on the other hand
while all our mates have huge deficits

as i told kevin..when they all devalue
we must follow them...downwards..[or watch our rising dollar explode]

se getting debt was virtually debt free..[as all are broke]
being the only debt free..state is insanity..we let fools clear the debt..by stealing public assets

now that concept [asset stripping peoples infastructure]
is going global

and with our high dollar[artifically kept low
by howard spending on his mates..like ordering billions of jets]
just to keep dollar parity low...

while stealing us blind..to only loose it again..
via too expensive dollar values..stock market collapses

the combined crimes of the parties
seving demon autocratic favour

while impoverishing us into sublimated poverty

im too angry to explain

*His stash of savings would have lasted five minutes compared to the billions required stimulate the economy amidst the GFC*

Not really, Poirot. Costello had more stashed away in the Future
Fund alone, then Rudd gave away to the public. main thing he
got the Govt out of its huge debt levels, so that there was money
in the kitty to be spent. Business had the confidence to invest
in Australia for all those years, which is why we are doing well
now. Economies don't turn around on a dime, it takes years.

Costello continued what Keating started. Both men deserve credit.
Things like reforming APRA were vital for our banking system.
Had the Australian treasury been stripped bare, as say Obama faced
after Bush, what would Kevie have done then?

Costello felt that his party should have backed him, when Howard
had passed his use by date and could not see it. I guess the party
looked at the polls and Costello never was popular with the public.
So he rightfully pointed out that there were other jobs that he
could do apart from being a politician. So now you voters should
be thrilled, you have Abbott instead!

The Australian public gets what it deserves and the public clearly
prefers arse lickers.

yabby,

I agree that Costello was incensed that his party didn't elbow Howard out of the top job. One of the enduring scenes in my memory is watching (yet again) Howard promising to hand over leadership (sometime after another Liberal re-election) to Costello on the Seven Thirty Report just prior to the 2007 election. Costello was sitting next to Howard and they were presenting themselves as a double leadership act to take to the election. After all the Howard years, it had come to this!...and Howard still lorded it over Costello's ambition - and Costello still hadn't nurtured the strength of character to force Howard out. It was pathetic. Costello must have known he was on the Liberal's version of the Titanic - we all did - and yet he still couldn't convince the party room to turf Howard - quite amazing when you think about it.

*and Costello still hadn't nurtured the strength of character to force Howard out. It was pathetic. Costello must have known he was on the Liberal's version of the Titanic - we all did*

Ah, there you go, Poirot. Forget strength of character. If everyone
could see it, yet those around him who voted could not see it,
why bother with the job dealing with such people? People like
Costello have lots of options outside of politics and not everyone
would sell their arse and integrity for the job. For me that kind
of thinking displays far more strength of character, then selling
your soul for the vanity of being PM.

Yabby,

I agree that Costello decided he had other options...eventually.

My take on it is that he derived much pleasure from abandoning his colleagues in the life boat. After all, they had allowed Howard to continue well after his use-by date. Costello was merely letting them know that although they now looked to him to steer the craft, that he wasn't going to be used by the same bunch of idiots who had not lifted a finger to avoid the resultant political decimation.

When you say Costello wasn't going to sell his arse and integrity for the job...it seems to me that he was exactly what he was prepared to do as he sat next to Howard for that interview. It was only when they were pulverised at the election and he couldn't see an opportunity in the near future (and after such a long and tedious run of leadership impasse) that he finally told them to stick it.

Let us look at the over all picture again yabby.
It is true over all Rudd is the most popular politician in this federal Parliament.
Using the same polls Liberals use to shame Labor.
And that more conservatives want him than Gillard.
True too more Labor voters want Turnbull.
But too, that both within rank and file followers of their party seem well in front of their current leaders.
Dislike of either, is it strong enough on its own to say forget popularity.
Would Labor lead by Gillard have won in 07.
Tuesday will we learn to love her ever.
Will those wanting Rudd/not wanting her ever for give her?
Without a third candidate three choices exist already, Gillard the unloved till death, a long one, Rudd.
OR a party struggling to be believed after saying it wants reform but is controlled by others.

*it seems to me that he was exactly what he was prepared to do as he sat next to Howard for that interview*

So do you think Poirot, that behind the scenes, he was not lobbying
his workmates etc? He was probably telling them exactly that" we'll
get hammered if we don't act." But it would have been pointless to
move, if they never believed him and he never had the numbers. No
wonder he enjoyed telling them to shove it :)

*Tuesday will we learn to love her ever*

Belly, if you want a politician to love, vote for Kylie Minogue.
This is not about love, but about respect for somebody's abilities,
like leading a team. I want a leader for the country that has
a functioning Govt that gets things done. You want a love affair.

No wonder we land up with crappy politicians, if people want to fall
in love.

Yabby,

Obviously by the eve of the 2007 election it was way too late to change leaders. Howard, if he had been wise instead of merely cunning and had put the interest of his party beyond those of his own ego, would have handed over the reins in 2006.

And yes, of course Costello was lobbying his colleagues all along, yet they remained glued to the leadership spot, they'd had such success with Howard that they couldn't perceive that such a golden goose could become a burden instead of an advantage.

One of the doctrines of good leadership is to nurture your successor(s) and to hand over to them at the appropriate juncture. Howard might have had a successful leadership politically speaking, however, the damage he ultimately inflicted by not following the precepts incumbent upon a leader diminish his stature considerably IMO.

Dear Yabby,

Just for the record I'd like to quote from Ian McAuley's
article on the web. McAuley is a lecturer in public
sector finance at the University of Canberra and a fellow
of the Centre for Policy Development. He tells us that:

1) The Howard government enjoyed the dividends of the
Hawke-Keating economic reforms at a time that the
world economy was enjoying a long speculative-driven
boom.

2) It left the books in surplus (a surplus of 4 per cent of GDP)
when it left office. This is not difficult to achieve in a
time of strong economic growth which delivered very high
tax revenues. But the Howard government left Australia with
significant liabilities in terms of our physical and
intangible assets - our common wealth.

3) The Howard government neglected our surface transport,
our interstate roads, railroads, and urban public transport. It
starved our tertiary education sector of funds. It neglected
investments which could help us to cope with challenges of water
shortages, climate change and fossil fuel depletion, in short,
it let fiscal impression managmeent displace sound economic
management, and directed political attention to only one
side of the public balance sheet, the debit side, while ignoring
the asset side.

If the Howard cabinet had been the board of a publicly listed
company, the shareholders would have thrown them out for
weakening the company's asset base.

McAuley lists four other areas of mismanagement - but I won't go
into them here due to the word limit imposed on our posts. As
McAuley states - suffice
to say that Mr Abbott has done nothing to establish his, or
his party's economic credentials. Mr Abbott seems content to coast
on the public perception that the Coalition is more competent at
economic management than Labor. It's a perception fed by
sections of the media which are clearly partisan. Mr Abbott
has shown little understanding of the economics of labour
markets - or of any other markets for that matter.

Lexi, isn't McAuley one of those economists that believe that growth
will respond to financial investment and does not realise that growth
can only respond to energy supply ?

Beware the economists that you hang your hat on.

I would vote for Juliar to head Labor, as she makes the case for Abbott.

Yabby give me a break mate.
Do you think Gillard can ever win back lost ground.
And can she rest in peace after this.
Will her polling never again get in front of Abbott.
Are you aware far too many vote on personality's not policy.
Love?
Bloke I love my party, enough to give my good name in it away.
And to say sacking Rudd was never explained to us.
It appears, HONESTLY, to be compared with the Fiji take over.
Gillard is no winner tomorrow, she in fact can not win.
Victory is a very bad but certain defeat, for her and my party.
Reality is this, my party's policy's are good, it has let its self ignore us.
It, in miss placed self assurance,thinks it can turn around Gillards polling and the party's.
If Julia could look in to the future, just 6 months, she would not stand.
Be seen as heroic for putting party first.
MANY who vote for her tomorrow, need to be graceful enough to hold them selves accountable.
They with deliberate forethought smash my party tomorrow.

You've got to laugh at the declaration that the 102 Labor caucus members will have a free vote, free from those that endorsed / preselected them. As if any of them are capable of voting without one iota of consideration for their own survival.

It’s a pity that individual branches of the Labor party are not able to declare their support for candidates at least one week before the ballot.

From this you would get a much clearer picture of Labor's internal democratic liberalism nationally and according to those well cited but often amorphous indications of Left and Right within Labor's rank and file. I'm sure there are hundreds of union members who wrongly think the unions they are members of are Left wing!

Whatever the outcome tomorrow, Labor has to bite the bullet and admit that many of its parliamentary members do not come from working class backgrounds. The "modernisation" of Australia’s Labor party actually meant that the professional classes got a Guernsey ahead of many rank and file working class people. Rudd’s ambitions to revamp a “New Labor’ through ridding it of the faceless hatchet men is not based on anything more than revenge for his own assassination.

Here’s hoping that somewhere in the future ‘working class’ sentiment and political mobilization is not the sole political franchise of the stinking Labor party

Quite so Rainier, "As if any of them are capable of voting without one iota of consideration for their own survival,", in relation to the tearey eyed Albanese, sobbing that his career had just gone up in smoke because he was foolish enought to ask his branch whom to back.

A real jerk too for trying to appeal to the gormless masses with his lament that he was a) brought up by a single mother b) believed in the Pell Patrol without question c) mistook a bloody sports team as something worth mentioning in anything beyond a gents urinal converstaion and c) well, I'll allow him his belief in the ALP because, well, that's why he's there, I suppose.

What a pathetic lowgrade populist this 'iron man of politics' really is.

Lexi, I remind you that Costello operated in the same global economy
as Greece, Spain, Italy, Ireland, USA and the rest. It is exactly
because he was frugal, that we did not land up like them. It makes
perfect sense to build public infrastructure, when there is an
economic downturn, if you have money in the kitty. Better then
give it away, so that people can blow it at the pokies, like Kevie
did.

No matter how much money you throw at infrastructure, Govt depts
will spend it. So best to give them less, make them spend what
they do get a bit more wisely. That is exactly what Costello was
about. So it cannot be denied that Costello's frugalness and having
paid off Govt debt, got us through the GFC. Kevie got the credit.
But plenty of us know the real story.

Belly I remind you again, Labor did not win Govt, they won a huge
compromise with all sorts. They would have been better off to tell
the whole lot to shove it and call another election, but Gillard has
made the best of an awful bloody mess,with her hands tied behind her
back by the Greens, Wilkie and all the rest.

The problem for Labor is that its supporters are not unified on things
like a carbon tax or asylum seekers etc. As I've said before, its
more like herding cats.

Kevie's not going to solve all that for you, but I would not be
surprised if the party machine pulls somebody like Shorten out of
the hat if they need to, which would be a far better option then Rudd.

A number of things come to mind this morning, first GY I saw your story in the Australian this morning.
I understand we are quite different in our views and yet respect lives here too.
Yabby, well see I do not believe that.
Yes the numbers say it, but had Abbott got his wish you would have to say, then and now,his or her government,was/is a coalition.
Bitterness is no reason to devalue the independents.
Well not Windsor, or the more Gullible Oakshot.
The single green got in on conservative preferences.
Wilkie? a man who can not count, and is all over the place,a man we should never see again after the next election.
I want to say this, anti Labor, not those of us humiliated and hurt, damaged by the Gillard supporters actions.
Real true anti forever Labor/Greens in self interest, trying to snatch the shovel and bury Labor, are acting silly.
Labor has that shovel, this morning it digs its own hole, and with enthusiasm jumps in!
Gillard can not survive, after her win today, every ALP voter appalled by her team,the cretins lead by simple Simon, will never forgive her.
She will fall, this year,in to that huge hole she dug.
Rudd? maybe, but for sure todays Gillard knife men/power brokers will be knife in hand behind Gillards fall.
Crafted to look heroic her fall will bring joy, within her fractured party
continued

Commenting here is just that for most of us.
But Belly, my lifetime nick name, my surname is known.
Oh I am an X nothing more X than one.
But in deifying that word, that lie, SOLIDARITY in putting my party first.
My great UNION first, I trash my reputation.
You have no idea how much that hurts.
I could climb any stump [ slang for addressing a group of unionists] and be warmly welcomed.
Sit with them joking and at home, miss that still, hear them tell me they want unions out of politics.
But I must not ask, not think, why are a few power brokers saying who will be prime minister this morning.
I understand yabby and others not wanting to hear the views of Australians for Rudd,but why this self inflicted wound?
Right now, BANK ON IT, a plan is being formed.
After Gillards win, WHEN/they say IF Gillards damaged leadership slips, the very same folk who this morning save her.
Are ready willing able and going to knife her.
Reform my party my union movement.
Power generated by membership should belong only to membership
Charlie Olivers days are long gone, Unions have much to do, and members vote for every party not just or even most Labor.
I am this morning hoping Gillards head kickers do not shame my party.
And this is true I and many will never forgive them.
My lifetime brothers? remember solidarity is a lie free speech not.

The polls may be up for labor, but it's only due to the Rudd factor.

If he looses, my bet is they will plummet.

Hahahaha Rudd 29 Gillard over 70.

Now that nonsense is over, let's wait to see Rudd resign in shame and humiliation.

Frankly, it matters not who leads the ALP, they are gone anyway.

Unity, leave the past in the past, its over,solidarity!
Hopeful lies, or just hopeful but impossible?
Well both, Gillards forces know as I do, this is just the beginning of her end.
And my party's sad times.
DLP never inflicted deeper wounds,never could have.
Rudd can try again, may, believe me, be asked to, by those who knifed him today.
He will leave Parliament, at the next election.
Shorten will replace Gillard, surely?
But it will be a very long time, if ever, before before a public figure such as Rudd comes along.
I am not hiding this, my party today fixed nothing, it knows it, but will pretend it did.
I knowing my party is outstandingly better than this, will watch in pain as it continues to paint its self
*Self Interest*
Not ALP.

The figures were 71 votes for the PM, 31 votes for Mr Rudd.
The PM has retained her leadership and now has a free reign
to get on with the job. Mr Rudd must do as he promised, and
support the Party that he claims to love so much. Only with
positive outcomes now - will Labor stand a chance of
convincing the Australian voters that they are worthy of
support. It is all up to what the party does next that matters.
They should not be swayed by the partisan media, or anything
else. They should stay focused - and show the Australian
people what they are capable of achieving - in the year ahead.
United, they can achieve a great deal.

cont'd ...

We should now be asking the question -
"Does Tony Abbott deserve to survive?"
The PM has survived - very nicely.
But with his total negativity - and not
much else on offer - does Mr Abbott deserve
the leadership of his party? After all Mr
Abbott has done nothing to establish his
party's economic or any other credentials.
He seems content to coast along on what was
done in the past and has shown little
understanding of what the future should hold
for this country. It's time that this dinosaur
was placed back in the past where he belongs.

Yabby, you tout mythology, when you say "Lexi, I remind you that Costello was frugal".

Costello, weakly (under Howards stewardship) was far from frugal when it came to pork barrelling the big end of town.

Selling the countries valuable and profitable assets in isolation enabled them, (Howard and Costello) to show a temporary surplus (not through good economic management) but at the cost of now owning nil profit generating infrastructure of our own. What would they do if they were in Gov't today ?. There's nothing left to sell !. Infrastructure long neglected since, by the new privatised owners, now requires funding. They wouldn't tax the profits of the mining sector, banks etc, so I guess they would do what they profess too, and embark on a dire and dour and severe process of slashing and burning, cutting public funding for schools and hospitals, slash the wages of public servants, introduce Workchoices 2.

They would take the funding (for their purely ideological program) directly out the taxpayers pockets. Maybe they could sell whats under the ground this time ?. Perhaps that would fix our comparatively small (but evil) debt problem (sic). Never mind the standard of living for every day taxpayers; as long as the business sector is happy, our future is assured. (ideological nonsense)

Had Costello stayed on we may had had Abbott and Costello running our economy now and " what a fine mess we would be in Ollie" if that were the case. Abbott providing backwards thinking squared and Costello lurking indolently once again the background, doing the bidding of the leader once again, even if he disagreed with the economics of it.

Today we find Keating on the board of the China Development Bank, getting on with economic management, whilst Howard (certainly) and Costello (most probably) couldn't get a job running a hotdog stand if the view of the international community has any bearing in hindsight.

On the Rudd and Gillard thing, hopefully Rudd will put up and shut up this time and stay on the backbench giving the Gov't some air at last.

A very relevant comment you make Lexi, regarding Abbott.

Does he deserve to be opposition leader ?.

I can't see why he should. He would never be PM.

The brand spanking new Julia Gillard?
Then why now.
Why not last year.
A new start.
We must not be over come by the impulsive wish to cuddle our selves.
The ALP lost today, JG did too.
For a time the only and best thing the ALP has going for it is Tony Abbott.

I think Kevin Rudd is the People’s Princess.

Hey Belly how long after the next election will Shorten take over? I would have lost respect for his intelligence if he threw his hat into the ring on such a sinking ship. It's good that he knows the time isn't right.

We might be blessed that the smart people with communication skills are choosing their time. Hopefully Turnbull, one of the few non-career politicians or union hacks with achievements in the real world is similarly biding his time.

So there we have it, Belly old mate. All that major kerfuffle for
no good reason The ALP don't need Abbott to pull them down, they
do it all by themselves.

Never mind, Kevie can now bury his weary head between Theresa's
big bosoms, sobbing a tear or two as he reflects on how life is
unfair.

No more first class flying around the world, hobbnobbing with the
rich and powerful, at our expense. She'll just have to give him
a few chores to do around the house, like weed the roses.
And he did it all to himself through poor judgement.

Poor Kevie :)

True Holley I think before the election.
He is the one, in every way, he has the ego Rudd has and the brains.
He is no phantom.
I think before because of one thing, Labor needs a blood sacrifice, some one to lessen the fall.
He can do it.
Amused at the very thought this is the end let the love in Begin.
Right faction, my faction, the one unseating Rudd, backing Gillard.
Shortens faction, may well bring about, no! why hide? WILL BRING about Gillards fall.
Unless she can fool every one in to thinking she was just asleep for two years.
Abbott? only he is of true service to Labor.
So out of control so unrelated to good government he helps my team.
Pyne, gee true, is put up as his replacement?
We have had a big day ALP children lights out sleep tight, lets hope we dream of a fairy Godmother turning Gillard in to a frog, whops princess.

*but at the cost of now owning nil profit generating infrastructure of our own.*

Best you stick with music, Thinker 2, for anything to do with money
does not seem your strong point.
I remind you that Costello used money from asset sales to pay off
Govt debt which Labor had run up. Thank god he did. When those
scoundrels Telstra were a Govt monopoly, they used to charge me
9$ an hour for internet access, as they had the monopoly. Selling
them changed all that, to all our benefit.

As a matter of interest, Costello has gone on to do advisory work
for the World Bank, plus is a a director of the Future Fund's board
of guardians. Then he does corporate advisory work as a managing
partner in BKK Partners. To put it in your language, corporations
pay him to give them financial advise. So now he gets handsomely
paid for his opinions

Peter Costello working for BKK ?
Isn't that the outfit set up by former
Goldman Sachs & Co. How appropriate.
He couldabeenacontenda - for PM, now
he's probably more suited to his current job.

"Those who fail to learn from history are doomed to relive it".
Obviously, the Pyramids, Stonehenge et.al. were not built during periods of high employment.
Equally, it's common sense for a farmer to NOT start building sheds and silos during the planting/harvesting seasons.
Clearly, the time for the gov. to put money away for infrastructure is during periods of high employment/productivity.
Sadly, the very limited vision of Howard/Costello gave us a 'future fund' which had no other purpose than to cover the costs of Public sector superannuation.
The 'Building Australia Fund' (and 2 others) weren't created until '07-'09, -just when we should have been dipping into the funds, instead putting into them.
Costello too little, Swan too late.
Costello has certainly proven to be an able administrator.
Perhaps he just recognised his limitations.
Personally I've always ascribed to the theory that anyone who actually wants these jobs, should immediately be declared ineligible.
Too much show, no enough go.

*now
he's probably more suited to his current job.*

You are probably quite correct there Lexi. Not
everyone has the skills to do what he does now,
but anyone really can become a politician, if
they are prepared to join the circus and do a bit
of public crawling at the right moment.

People get the politicians that they deserve. That
is exactly why some of the brightest and best would
never dream of becoming politicians.

Dear Yabby,

You're right about some of the best and the brightest
not wanting to be politicians. However, that did
not apply to the case we're discussing - Peter Costello.
He (and Mr Howard) were always there for the BET (Big End
of Town) so it's no surprise that after Costello's political
career ended that it's the BET who ends up supporting him.

Oh deary me, Lexi. One day you are going to have to get over this
"I am just a poor little librarian/architect" thinggy.

As a worker you would also have superannuation, so you are in fact
one of the owners of the big end of town.

If the big end of town isn't doing ok, nobody does ok. We are all
in it together, get used to it. But the big end of town is likely
to be more intelligent then your average voter, that is why they
are where they are. So they reward talent, unlike the common,
gullible voter.

Keating and Costello are both highly regarded by the business community,
as both have made a difference to all of us. Unlike
your average politician, who might have a job finding a job outside
of politics.

Dear Yabby,

Kindly don't patronise me with your own - "thingies."
I don't qualify you as some kind of farming "hick,"
along the lines of - "when I itches,
I scratches," thingie.

The fact that Howard and Costello were NOT great
economic leaders can so easily be brushed over and
changed in the minds of many people such as yourself,
by repeating a mantra over and over,
and a compliant Media accepting
this without question and repeating it ad nauseum.
Mr Abbott is an artist at this. He speaks in codes
and CAPITALS and repeats it over and over. In the
absence of a questioning and critical media, it works.
As is obvious from your posts. You of course are
entitled to your opinion - but as I've stated to you
in the past - opinions are one thing - facts are another.

Well the facts speak for themselves, Lexi. See you go and
bog this down about Abbott and all the rest. At the end of
11 years of Costello, the Australian economy was in great shape,
with businesses investing, plenty of jobs, low interest rates,
Govt debts paid off, money stashed away for the future.
The Australian economy was doing better then ever before,
those are the facts.

Clearly this bothers you for some reason, but facts is facts.
The business community, who happen to understand things to do
with money, clearly understand this. Lexi does not. Tough titties.

Dear Yabby,

Ian McAuley a lecturer in public sector finance at the
University of Canberra and a fellow of the Centre for Policy
Development tells us that:

The Coalition had the fortune to hold office in
good economic times. The period from 1996 to 2007
when the Howard government enjoyed the dividends of
the Hawke-Keating economic reforms, and when the world
economy was enjoying a long speculative-driven boom,
it was more to do with good luck, then good management.

The Howard government's economic report card is overall
a dismal one.

The first of its claimed virtue of leaving the books in
surplus of 4 per cent of GDP when it left office - was not
a very difficult thing to achieve in a time of strong economic
growth which delivered very high tax revenues.

But the Howard government also left Australia with significant
liabilities in terms of our physical and intangible assets -
our common wealth. It neglected our surface transport -
our interstate roads, railroads and urban public transport. It
starved our tertiary education sector of funds. It neglected
investments which could help us cope with the challenges of
water shortages, climate change and fossil fuel depletion.

In short, it let fiscal impression management displace sound
economic managment, and directed political attention to only
one side of the public balance sheet, the debit side, while
ignoring the asset side.

If the Howard cabinet had been on the board of a publicly listed
company, the shareholders would have thrown them out for weakening
the company's asset base.

Then of course there's also the Howard government's ham-fisted
attempt to deregulate the labour market. Instead of addressing
rigidities which were impeding productivity, the Howard
government in its final term went on a rampage of removing
workers' bargaining powers.

Had WorkChoices not been reversed by the
incoming Labor government, we would be heading down the USA
path of even worse inequality than we have now, and even greater
stresses on the public budgets to divert money to poverty
alleviation at the expense of important government services.

Now you have put your foot right in it Yabby. Inflation was higher when Costello left Govt than when he received the treasury from Keating. Unemployment was higher, interests rates were higher. In fact all the economic indicators did not improve under the Howard Costello Govt at all, but in fact deteriorated despite the selling of valuable public assets.

The facts can simply be stated without any personal derision or colourful invective at all Yabby.

The messiah(Costello)was not messianic but a very naughty boy whom failed to display anything but indolence in govt, even when handed a golden economy on a platter by Keating.

All he and Howard actually did, was redistribute the wealth of that golden economy to the rich.

Dear Lexi,

Workchoices is once again handing over extortion power to unions.

http://www.businessspectator.com.au/bs.nsf/Article/Is-BHP-the-new-Qantas-pd20120227-RUQUP?OpenDocument&emcontent_Gottliebsen

Companies will have to rethink where they invest, hardly a good thing
for your grandkids.

You of course rely on your whole judgement on the opinion of one
academic. Now let me tell you a thing about academics. When one
academic from ABARE was asked why his prections had been so wrong,
he responded by saying that if he could accurately predict things,
he would not be working for ABARE. That kind of sums it up.

Thinker 2, go and recheck your numbers. Clearly they confuse you.

Dear Yabby,

Wrong again. I do not rely on the information of
only one academic. I merely quoted one finance
expert to you. However, I do my research from a
wide variety of sources - having access to many
databases as part and parcel of my job as an
information provider. Again, I stress I frankly
don't care what you think. You're entitled to your
opinions. It's only your facts that need correcting
and that is something that I feel compelled to do.
But possibly not for long. Especially as I can see
that I am wasting my time.

*Wrong again. I do not rely on the information of
only one academic.*

Dear Lexi, given that you have quote the same academic twice in the
same thread, with the same old stuff, clearly your understanding
of economics is quite limited. Stick to sorting books on shelves.

You are clearly out of your depth.

Dear Yabby,

Poor show.

And - to correct you again - (getting a bit tedious)...

Libaries have junior and casual staff for book shelving.
You should visit one sometime.
However, take your own advice. Stick to what I assume you
know - farming.

You're not only out of your depth - you sinking in it.
We'd hate to have you disappear altogether.

Dear Lexi,

So now we can add poor judgement to your list of abilities.

Clearly you have not yet clicked that farming is simply my hobby
and not how I make serious money.

Back to sorting books for you, its what librarians are good at.

Now back to the economy. 11 years of Costello achieved results for
all to see and know. Give credit to Kevie if you will, but even
librarians should understand that economies, investment etc, are
about years and years of confidence and sound policies, not pulling
magic rabbits out of hands, which might fool some voters.

The world "gullible" comes to mind.

Dear Yabby,

Wrong again.

Librarians are not book sorters. They are information
providers.

As I've told you previously - you are entitled to your
opinion - but not your facts.

See ya.

For once your correct Yabby.

Economics is a long term thing. Which is precisely why it is correct to say that the prosperity you felt in the Howard years, was because of the policies of the previous Keating regime.

Late in the Howard's term and continuing onwards we are experiencing the effects of the Howard policy settings today.

The Govt of today however is effectively legless and armless, in that the regulatory regimes are virtually non existent after being smashed by Howard and Costello, the public wealth all but gone. . This is the Howard legacy.

And finally when Keating took over from the Howard Treasury, inflation alone was running at somewhere in the late teens. The economy was in fact stuffed. It took Keating nearly 13 years to fix it.

It took Howard less than that to stuff it up again.

I can provide the figures that prove this Yabby, but in your case, I couldn't be bothered, because your ideological (quasi religious) faith is unshakeable, even if the proof could be provided for you by a count of bales of hay.

Perhaps confusion is created by watching to much TV or reading the Murdoch press.

Musicians and Librarians are generally people who don't do much of that.

Perhaps a new Govt could be made from people who don't watch much TV. If that were possible we might actually get somewhere for a change.

*I can provide the figures that prove this Yabby*

Well you can't Thinker 2, because you are confusing your figures.
When Howard was treasurer under Fraser, it was a totally different
ballgame then when Costello was treasurer under Howard and you
are you are confusing the two.

Yes, things were not good under Fraser, he refused to reform the
economy, cut tariffs and all the rest, which Keating to his credit,
which I have mentioned many times, finally undertook.

To his credit, Howard was on the point of walking out on Fraser,
as he knew changes had to be made and Fraser had his head in the
sand.

But things were still pretty crook, when Costello took over, many
reforms had yet to play out and more had to be introduced. I paid
18% interest under Keating, but I also know that he had to do what
he had to do, to stop Australia becoming a banana republic.

It was under Costello that business finally gained the confidence
to invest, despite the dotcom crash and all the rest. Costello
reformed APRA and our banking regulation, which was one of the reasons
why our banks came through the GFC so well.

I have always given credit to both Keating and Costello, for their
work in reforming the Australian economy, which was long overdue.
Both men were great debaters in parliament and both men are smart.
But neither is a crawler, which it seems is what the public prefers.

Just push those emotional buttons and the Lexis of this world will
come running.

I do respect your argument Yabby, and I do have some respect for Costello,
but when you say,

"It was under Costello that business finally gained the confidence
to invest",

that, I would re-word as "business took advantage of a complicit and compliant Gov't.

Conversely Yabby I continue (without confusion) to purport, that the figures (at the end of day), that being inflation, interest rates, and levels of unemployment were all worse, than the same figures when Keating handed over the economy in 96. An economic treading of water at best. No public wealth as well at worst, after the fire sale of assets.

In addition Howard changed the ways we calculate inflation (including imports), which may have been necessary with changing times in fairness. This method, none the less adequately disguise's the every rising cost of privatised essential services.

This is the regime we live under now. There are no public instruments, such as a Prices Surveillance Authority with any power over prices, there is no Arbitration Commission making independent decisions about wages, with any real power. No restraint on margins etc and so on. Fuel being a great example of this.

In a nutshell, today we live under the Howard and Costello rules structure.

All Govt's can do, "whomever they may be", is cow-tow to the current owners of our country. Our living standards, meanwhile ever deteriorating, inch by inch, minute by minute.

The hard and despicable right, in our country are now again, flexing their muscles (they must believe opinion polls), feigning balance as an excuse, and using catchphrases like flexibility in the workplace (double speak for more work, no money), with regard to IR policy. Bit early for that isn't it. They usually wait till after elections to tout that stuff.

Costello might have some of Keating's savvy Yabs, but Paul had the balls, and couldn't be bought. How could you say that about any of the current lot ?.

The best and greatest corporate line-toer in the country today is Tony Abbott, which precisely why he could or should ever be our Prime Minister.

*that, I would re-word as "business took advantage of a complicit and compliant Gov't.*

More likely Thinker 2, Govt understood the benefits to Australians,
if business bothers to invest. They could always go elsewhere, capital
is highly mobile. Australians have reaped the benefits of all that
investment.Like you and your kids, have a job.

*the figures (at the end of day), that being inflation, interest rates, and levels of unemployment were all worse, than the same figures when Keating handed over the economy in 96*

Not so Thinker 2, I did point out your confusion. But feel free to
do some more homework.

*In addition Howard changed the ways we calculate inflation*

You will find that alot of these calculations were standardised
internationally, so that economies could be compared etc. Australia
went along with the international standards, fair enough.


*Fuel being a great example of this*

Is that why Caltex Australia has just announced a huge loss, of
hundreds of millions of Dollars? Perhaps competition is actually
quite fierce, even if you are just not aware of it.

*Costello might have some of Keating's savvy Yabs, but Paul had the balls, and couldn't be bought.*

Oh I am not denying that. We still benefit from both men's policies.
The thing is, despite his good work, Keating was thrown out by
the public, as he was not a crawler like Howard. Costello was
of much the same mindset as Keating. But that is not what the public
wants. They want a Howard or a Rudd, people who know how to crawl and
push emotional buttons. Which has been my point all along.

Looking at the ballot results from another angle, Julia polled 69% of the vote.

Now if that were the marks for a student, it would be considered a pass, but hardly one that would pave the way for a career.

When 30% of your own party doesn't respect you as leader, I think that's cause for concern.

The days/weeks ahead will either make or break Julia and, given that KRudd is no longer a candidate for leadership, that narrows down labor's options and, it also ups the anti on Julia to lift her game, big time.

The other problem she faces is that if she does lift, then where was the real Julia for the past year and, would that mean the unreal Julia implemented the carbon tax, as opposed to the real Julia we supposedly have now.

Food for thought!

The PM polled 71 per cent with Mr Rudd 31.
She won the leadership quite substantially
and Mr Rudd has stated quite clearly that
the PM has his full support. The PM has
shown her ability to lead. Labor will now be
forced to look towards implementing reforms
within the party, and achieving positive outcomes,
in the long term. They can now get on with doing
the job of governing.

However the Coalition needs to look at its own leadership -
prior to the next election because Mr Abbott is not
popular with the electorate. Interesting times ahead.

Julia's authority has been eroded, as when she tried to appoint her own candidate to replace Rudd and Arbib, she got slapped down by her own cabinet.

Then she was humiliated in parliament whilst waffling in question time to as usual avoid answering questions, the speaker first asked her to answer the question, and then when she wouldn't, she was told to shut up and sit down.

Then finally Wilkie told her to shove the Pokie sham trial in Canberra.

Looks like the chickens are coming home to roost.

I've got a couple of questions.

Could anyone take a look at the make-up of the
current Liberal Party and tell us who amongst
them would make up a good team to govern our
country - starting with the job of PM,
Deputy, foreign affairs, et cetera - and why?

The only name I could come up with was Malcolm
Turnbull - but he's only one man and not a team.
I could not for the life of me see anyone else
that I thought could be part of an efficient team.
Julie Bishop for Foreign Affairs - I don't think so.
Barnaby Joyce as Treasurer? Joe Hockey anyone?

Seriously, before slagging off at Labor - take a
good hard look at the alternatives!

For starters Tony Abbott would make a far superior PM to Juliar, Julie Bishop would make a fine FM, etc.

Lexi, Try and take off your Rudd tinted glasses.

SM you are aren't you?
Pulling our leg.
Gillard is not much good but Abbott?
And Bronwyn? nearest she gets to FM if some one deports her for over acting.
Abbott is gonesky! Bronwyn is too.

Lexi, 69 or as you say, 71% of the vote is hardly what I would call huge support.

Either way, almost a third of her party don't want her in the top job that's almost one in every three.

Now as for your questions about the libs, well, where to start.

The most inportant role is that of leader, and with regatds to Julia V Tony. Tony wins hands down.

Now the other issue is one of party trust.

How on earth can someone (Rudd) hold such a high position as forieng minister, when he does not have the trust of the PM and most of her ministry.

At least thats the story today, but a month ago he was doing a wonderful job and was an excellent representative of the labor government.

So which one is he, a wonderful minister, or a back stabbing no good trouble maker.

Will the real Julia please tell us, as there are two of her, it's sometime confusing to know just who says what, the real one, or, the not so real one.

I thought the real one was the one who became PM and, ultimately appointed Rudd as FM.

Perhaps there's three!

I repeat, I am not confused for a minute Yabby. Economic conditions and indicators were slightly worse when Howard handed the reigns to Rudd than when Keating handed them to Howard. That is a fact sorry Yabby.

A fact you could never face, because such undue faith underpins your argument about the LNP and economic credentials. Instead of accusing me unfairly of confusion, you could actually present figures that prove my confusion if this is what you believe.

And SM there has never been a worse front bench lineup in the history of Australian Politics than the one presented to the Australian voting public than the current coalition offers.

And Lexi I don't think Julie Bishop is acting, thats actually her !. It's truly scary to think that she may one day hold public office.

http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/allprimarymainfeatures/B4DEE8EADE6ACC5ECA2572040020575E?opendocument

Well that is just the first of many, Thinker 2. If you read the
document, a bit further down it shows how unemployment dropped from
around 8% to below 5%, employment increased by 2 million.

But you are the one making the wild claims, so its up to you to
do the homework and produce the evidence for what you claim.

http://www.loansense.com.au/historical-rates.html

Another statistic for you, Thinker 2, if you scroll down a bit,
home loan rates are listed month by month since the 60s.

March 96 10.50%
Dec 2007 8.30%

As I said, you remain confused.

Dear Thinker 2,

I admire your patience and civility.

It is a sad political fact that the
Coalition's current front bench is
lacking in substance and direction orchestrated
to all appearances by their leader. No previous group
of politicians has ever appeared so totally
unproductive in ideas and co-operation in the
interests of the people that they represent.
The mind boggles as to why anyone would support them.

Lexi,

It is easy to see why your mind is so easily boggled. You cannot even differentiate between fact and labor's own propaganda. This is especially telling since the majority of the public disagrees with you.

Some real facts:

Most of the Coalition front bencher were successful cabinet ministers,
Labor in opposition did little to bring policies forward until just before an election, and never submitted them for costing. Labor in opposition opposed negatively every thing the coalition did. Which is not surprising, as they were the Opposition.
Just about every policy Labor has introduced since 2007 has been a fiasco, and more about spin than substance.

As for Abbott's popularity, the reality is that in a successful government the opposition leader's popularity is typically far lower than the PM's. That Abbott is preferred PM shows how low Juliar is. For example Turnbull never got above 20% preferred PM.

Dear SM,

Lets face it - the current government is doing an admirable job
in an increasingly toxic environment. Credit where credit is due.
Mindless knocking by incompetent people does not change the
facts. Looking forward to 1 July - MRRT, carbon pricing - then
small budget surplus, and so on. The government will get on with
it - they will do an excellent job - and the glass jaw Coalition
will be seen for the incompetent spin doctors that they are.

Lexi,

Lets face it, Labor with its incompetent ministers has done a poor to mediocre job, having botched just about every policy, and the opposition has done a fantastic job in holding them to account.

On July 1st we will get the world's biggest carbon tax, which on top of the high dollar will drive more businesses to the wall. Given that the last budget was for a $12bn deficit, and is now approaching $37bn, I have full confidence that whatever surplus is announced, by our incompetent treasurer, will not be achieved.

Dear SM,

You're spouting the usual mantra fed by sections of the media
which are clearly partisan. Opinions are not of equal value.
Mr Abbott has done nothing to establish his, or his party's
economic credentials. He seems content to coast on the
so called spin that the Coalition is more competent at economic
management than Labor. The opposite has proven to be true.
Labor has done a brilliant job in repairing some of the damage
left after a decade of poor economic management by the Libs. It
still has a long way to go - but it will get there. No matter how
hard the Coalition tries to stop them.

The voters will get it right in the end.

Lexi,

From the other side, what you are saying is directly from the labor spin sheet and does not add up at all.

Juliar has done much to reaffirm labor's poor economic credentials with profligate spending and waste, with little to show for it.

Dear SM,

Time will tell which of us is correct.
We can argue backwards and forwards ad infinitem.
However, the Autralian voters will make the final
decision. It will be interesting to see what that
will be.

I'll "here here" that Lexi.

cheers T2

Ah Thinker 2, not a peeps from you about my quoted figures.
It seems like you were wrong after all. But rather then admit
that, a sheepish support for Lexi and silence about the rest.

Integrity IMHO involves admitting when we are wrong, but I kind
of thought that this would be too much to expect.

Never mind, your silence kind of tells the story anyhow.

Dear Yabby,

You shouldn't be offended if Thinker 2 chooses
to no longer respond to your arguments in this
discussion. That doesn't mean that you're right
or that you've won. This isn't a competition of
some sort afterall. It may simply mean that it's
pointless and a waste of time - that nothing
constructive will be achieved by continuing to
argue with you.

Dear Lexi,

Well of course I am right lol. The figures are plain as day.

But keep floating on the clouds, we won't let facts interfere
with all those feelings.

Dear Yabby,

I'll let you have the last word
as long as you understand that you're wrong. ;-)

More lies yet again.

Can this woman ever tell us the truth?

Can we ever trust what she says?

How anyone can support her defies logic if you ask me.

If she was a kid at school, she would spend a lot of time in detention for compulsive lying.

And you want us to trust her!

Yea, right!

Dear rehctub,

Why just once why don't you come up with something new -
like placing a bit more scrutiny onto the Coalition
and holding them to account? Afterall if you think
things are so bad with the current PM - take a closer
look at the alternative - put the alternative under
the microscope and see what you can come up with
(if anything).

Heres a link for your reading Yabby, enjoy.

http://www.thepunch.com.au/articles/howard-was-good-but-keating-was-better/

Meanwhile I will look for some other specifically selected stats re the other factors such as interest rates, inflation etc. And on the jobs front, Keating's Treasury produced many more real jobs than Howard did. Not part time or casual positions without sick pay or holiday pay etc.

Stats don't show the whole picture anyway.

*Without Keating, Labor would be a poll-driven, economically illiterate, intellectually barren and pea-hearted political party too timid to pursue a market-based reform agenda.*

Your author got that bit right, Thinker 2. The things is, the
reforms that Keating undertook, only needed to be done once and
then continued. Like sell Govt businesses, drop tariffs, reform
the tax system, lower tax rates, give business confidence to invest.
Pay off Govt debts, cut spending, cut waste etc.

That is what Costello did. Govt sometimes achieves more by not
fiddling with the system, which creates stability. In the end it
is private enterprise that creates jobs by investment, not Govt.

Reform of the labour market was also sound policy. What we have now
is unions wanting to take over the running of the mines etc, so we
are returning to union thuggery by Govt mandate. Hardly a great
reason to invest here.

I await those figures that you mentioned, the two I linked to so
far, show the exact opposite of what you claim.

T2, what these stats don't tell is the IR regulations, se by Keating a d I hearted by Howard.

It was un fair dismissal that started the casualisation of the workforce, the worst policy ever in my view.

Lexi, you seem to always forget that it is governments role to govern, not those in opposition.

Now as for Julia, what you are suggesting is it's fine to lie to the people, repeatedly in might add.

Take a good hard look around and see the damage these fools have caused to many small businesses, the backbone of our society.

As I have said before, this year will be the last for many, and for many others, who can't afford to walk away, there is little chance they will continue once their leases have run out.

It's mostly due to lack of confidence.

Just take the solar rebate, just wiped out at a heart beat.

How do these people in business who have set u to to do this work get on now.

You simply have no idea.
ask not whether Tony Abbott is worthy, ask whether or not Julia Gillard deserves the trust of the people for another term especially considering her compulsive lying.

Dear rehctub,

Not good enough.

We all are aware of the role of government. However
you don't seem to be aware of the role of the Opposition.
It isn't simply good enough to consistently point out what's
wrong with the government while offering and nothing else - at least
not if you want people to vote you into government come the next
election. Only an idiot would vote for people who do not put
forward alternative proposals and views and only condemn.
So again I say to you - put the Opposition under the microscope -
hold them up to account - and see how well they fare.
Criticising is easy - offering new ideas is much harder.

Lexi,

To claim that it is the job of the opposition to develop policy is not only unrealistic given the lack of access to treasury and other departments, and hypocritical as Labor in opposition did very little.

Also labor then pinched some of the policies that the coalition put forward such as welfare to work.

No, the only time the opposition needs to reveal its policies is when there is a serious prospect of an election. Until then the main purpose is to hold the present government to account, which they are doing admirably.

"Only an idiot would vote for people who do not put
forward alternative proposals and views and only condemn."

Lexi I don't think that for most of us advertised policies make a giant difference in voting intents, in my case it's more about past performance and general philosophy of the party. Abbott does not fit to well on either count but a better fit for me than Labor.

Too often the devil is in the detail, a policy might look great as an outline but be poorly implemented or become one of those non-core policies that just does not happen. Both sides have been guilty of all of that.

R0bert

I am fully aware that the role of the Opposition is
to assess and test government actions and policies
and expose any weaknesses however I still feel strongly
that they are also obliged to put forward alternative
proposals and views. This bunch currently on the front-
bench in Opposition only seem to be capable of condemnation
and nothing more - and for me at least - they have not given
me one good reason to vote for any of them.

Howard invented the concept of "non core policies" to avoid keeping election promises R0bert.

Howard created the casualization of the workforce Rehtcub. Now it turns out that this casualization is causing the destruction of regional towns and causing job losses in manufacturing through the market power of duopolies in food, for one. The effect of mining in regional area's devastating the living standards of the locals, another . In addition Consumer and Industrial participation by the state, is all but non existent since Howard.

Actually unions are trying to recover the losses of entitlements and real wages Yabby, lost during the ideological Howard years. The balance is still not restored in my view. Mining magnates using money they haven't paid in tax to advertise on TV with stomach turning and misleading propaganda about their value to our country, is truly appalling .

Wayne Swan is right SM, the Coalition has always been "in the pockets" of big business, only more than ever at this time. Today they conspire with them from the opposition benches. Without consideration for Australia's best interests or future.

They (the LNP), have policies Lexi. It's saying no to anything our Govt suggests, whilst saying yes to anything oligarchs want in private. With the election of Abbott we risk plummeting down the abyss of a Russian model of democracy as pointed out today by Bob Brown.

The Victorian Gov't is a good example. Riddled with sweetheart (and downright dirty) deals pledged in secret prior too the election. It's very concerning and largely un-reported by the Murdoch Press, speaking of oligarchs.

Someone has to represent the people or we are stuffed. Someone has to call the bluff of the magnates or we are doomed. The Abbott Coalition wont do it unless instructed by people like Palmer, Murdoch, Forrest and Rhinehardt .

Gillard Labor, the Independents and the Greens are at least heading in the right direction with spending on public infrastructure and services and despite all the negative spin have managed to get things done.

http://www.businessspectator.com.au/bs.nsf/Article/BHP-Billiton-unions-Qantas-Rio-Tinto-Queensland-mi-pd20111121-NSRGY?OpenDocument

Err not so, Thinker 2. Unions want their old power back, which
means virtually running the place, despite the 6 figure salaries
paid.

Years ago, this kind of thuggery nearly turned us into a banana
republic. Perhaps we'll head back again that way, the way things
are going.

Dear Thinker 2,

The concept of the Opposition is the politics of money and power.
Theirs is the ideology of greed, filled by an unbridled
commitment to "individualism. It leaves no room for social
security, compassion, or the idea of an egalitarian society.

Theirs is an absurd viewpoint - in which business has the right
to get whatever it wants. Is this in the best interests of the
working people of this country? I don't believe it is. Neither,
thankfully, does our current government.

Of course, unions need to be more sensitive to the realities of
modern economic conditions. Sectarian attitudes and greed serve
the cause of labour badly. We are in critical times and Australia
requires a reassessment of the relationship between labour and
capital, a reassessment which takes into account the politics of
industrial democracy, profit, and job sharing, and long term
planning which allows for the proper protection and preservation
of our environment. What we don't need
is the "kick-the-worker-today-and-take-the-money-tomorrow,"
attitude that comes from the Cold
War warriors who are currently at work around the place.

The only way in which the country can work properly is for
management and labout to co-operate with one another, not
condemn one another. But the sad truth is that condemnation is
the only language that the Opposition and Big Business seems to understand.

Take this quote from Peko-Wallsend boss Charles Copeman:

"It isn 't a matter of conciliation. It's a matter
for arbitration. We are not prepared to conciliate!"

Obviously the inevitable expansion of capital with its
attendant social inequality and natural destruction brooks
no interference and allows for no moral judgements.

What a great pity that the glorious mess of money and greed
that makes up part of the world we see on television every
night is the vision of conservatives come true. Mr Abbott
and his colleagues should not be encouraged to allow it to
come any closer to home.

Lexi,

Your last post consisting mostly of delusional fantasy about what the coalition stands for leads me to recommend that you avoid driving or operating heavy machinery.

I don't think that there was any ever danger of you voting for the coalition, and given your rant I am surprised that the ALP isn't too right wing for you. Perhaps you should join the loony far left of Lea Rhiannon.

Dear SM,

How did I get it wrong?

You mean to say that conservatives do believe
that both government and associations of
working people (unions) should
be able to restrict the proper application of capital (money)
in the economy? You mean that it's not their view that people
either sink or swim. And that welfare is good for business?
You mean that they are not anti-conservation, anti union,
anti multiculturalism, and anti government? You mean they don't
believe that big business has the right to get whatever it
wants? That theirs is not the politics of money and power?
That theirs is not the ideology of greed, filled by an unbridled
commitment to "individualism?"
Are you trying to tell me that secretly you're not really a
conservative? Well - who would have guessed? So you guys are
prepared to conciliate and the quote from Charles Copeman,
(Director & CEO of Australian, Mining Co - Peko-Wallsend Ltd)
doesn't apply? Interesting.

cont'd ...

BTW - Thank You for your concern however I don't
drive or operate heavy machinery. And as for your
suggestion of my joining the Loony left? That is
not an option that I have ever considered. But then I
haven't considered joining the New Right either.
I don't like being pigeon-holed and I'm not really a
joiner.
And as for my not voting for the Coalition - I
would (and have done so in the past) - but not
under the current leadership - and its
front bench.

Lexi,

Yes, you are wrong in every just about every case, and is as nonsensical as my comparing the labor party to Stalin's regime.

Dear SM,

I would love to be proven wrong in just about every case
However so far the records has not been good.
As for comparison's with Stalin's regime and Labor?
You'd better research your history on that score.
Otherwise you're going to look even more foolish.

Coherent, succinct and balanced is they way I would describe Lexi's post SM.

Referring to Lexi's sobriety as a counter argument lacks any of those qualities SM, and is devoid of respect. Your pulpit it looking a little shabby.

The Business Spectator link you posted Yabby, panders to it's constituents(the rich and powerful and the would be rich and powerful) and could hardly be accused of any balance whatsoever.

I see Indian Mining Magnates complaining about our Mining and Carbon taxes today Yabs, perhaps we should just let them buy and mine our resources and employ our citizens for a chapati a day for the greater good of Australia ?. Seems Clive Palmer, the LNP and they (India's magnates) are in agreement.

The truth is , that if we left our resources (which we own), in the ground at this time, they would simply increase in value. The notion that they would take their business to Zimbabwe or some other place, is false. There is no other place that offers the political stability of Australia and the massive, easy to get at resources.

They are on the greatest wicket ever, and their obscene wealth and the symptomatic meglo-mania they display demonstrates this. This is their public face. What on earth are they up too privately ?.

In other news today, the Victorian Gov't and Marshall Bailleau was photographed showing the bird to protesting nurses.

http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/baillieu-apologises-for-giving-the-finger-20120307-1uk0u.htm

Nurses who can't get commitments re patient care and ratios, and pay from their employers (the Vic Gov't) whom, did a sweetheart and dirty deal with the Police Association before the election over the very same sorts of issues. It is an unmitigated disgrace in my opinion.

*The Business Spectator link you posted Yabby, panders to it's constituents(the rich and powerful and the would be rich and
powerful) and could hardly be accused of any balance whatsoever.*

Not so, Thinker 2. Business Spectator is part owned by Alan Kohler
and that article was written by Robert Gottliebsen. Kohler appears
nearly every night on the ABC news.

If the information that they put out is not accurate, they would not
last 5 minutes.

You confuse opinion with facts. What is happening with public
companies and how they make their decisions, is very much public
information, especially a large company like BHP.

The real problem here is that as an arty type of person, you really
don't have a clue as to how business operates and it shows.

One minute you complain that workers wages are going down and when
miners provide thousands upon thousands of people with 6 figure
salaries, you still complain. Perhaps you just like complaining,
Thinker 2.

Lexi,

The coalition stands for efficient government that regulates good business practice, and environmental controls, but does not create vague and restrictive red tape that prevents entrepreneurial endeavor.

The coalition believes in governmental involvement in capital ventures only when the nature of the market indicates so, and does not want to have anti competitive regulated monopolies such as the NBN.

Similarly taxes should be a last resort to fund infrastructure to promote future business education, health, and welfare.

Welfare is a safety net not an alternate lifestyle, and with the appropriate safety net in place, there should not be a right to remain employed, and businesses need the ability to get rid of employees that are no longer productive.

Business and employees need flexibility. The one size fits all assumption that all businesses work 8am to 5pm, hurts businesses that don't fit this model, and EBAs that pay everyone the same for the same job position means that an individuals extra effort receives no reward.

No mention of the Victorian Gov't I see Yabby.

The Anti Federal Gov't front page of the Herald Sun in Melbourne today amounts to nothing more than dangerous sedition. Sure to invoke more death threats to our PM. This has got to stop.

They haven't mentioned the State Gov't either Yabby, whom it seems can act with absolute impunity without the slightest reporting or examination from the Herald Sun. Linking health and the carbon tax by airing a completely biased report that is nothing more than incitement aimed at the low brow, is disgraceful.

You claim I have no understanding of business as your position Yabby, but let me assure that even musicians know the difference between right and wrong. My fear is that you don't care about this at all.

I didn't bother to read the information about Victoria, Thinker 2.

You had made some wild claims about Business Spectator, after they
published an accurate picture of how things are in the BHP coal
union dispute. I responded to your claims. Feel free to wander
off on your own little tanget if you wish, but I will focus on
the nonsense which you claimed.

If you understood business, you would not be making such foolish
comments.

Dear SM,

Your arguments are indeed looking shabby as Thinker 2, pointed out.
We all know that you are capable of quoting the Liberal mantra -
but how about presenting us with constructive evidence of what
you claim are the facts. We would be delighted with some humour
in your presentation. Waiting for your reply - and not the
usual BS please.

I suspect your actively encouraging others not to view the Age on the Ballieau matter, because you know how disgraceful and embarrassing it is for all LNP supporters.

Pictures inc and video. Caught red-handed with their attitude on display for all to see.

The Herald Sun alternately indulges in sedition on a daily basis.
Dangerous and inciteful gutter journalism and tactics that only those short of a brain cell would give any credence. Worse than the Australian.If that's possible.

The only truth you conservatives will utter privately amongst yourselves is the fact that your leader Abbott is totally unsuitable to lead the country or your party.But your news family(the Murdochs) wont have this, they want a puppet PM, as they had in Howard.

So I guess your just stuck between the devil and the deep blue sea.

Gawd Thinker 2, you are becoming a grumpy old thing, you really are.
You remind me of that "Grumpy Old Men" tv show.

I landed up reading the Ballieu story on one of the websites that
I was checking out. The bloke involved was a private citizen. So
he gave some protesters the finger, who were using their megaphone
right close to him. I would too lol, they deserved the finger.

More then anything, I thought he showed a sense of humour, but the
grumpy old things clearly prefer to stay grumpy, rather then see
the amusing side of life. How sad.

Dear Thinker 2,

Australia's "fair go," is under threat from the rising power of
vested interests. A small number of elites increasingly feel
that they have a right to bend the nation's future to satisfy
their own self-interest.

We see this most obviously in the ferocious campaign waged by
the likes of Gina Rinehart, Clive Palmer and Andrew Forrest
against the Minerals Resource Rent Tax. We see this in
Victoria with nurses being forced to go on strike to get a fairer
deal for patients.

Thankfully, the interests of ordinary people have not yet been
drowned out by the desires of a well-funded, noisy handful.

But the fight continues. The "fair go," has never been guaranteed.
It's something we as a people have always had to fight for.
Some obviously simply don't get any of this. They never will.
They are not capable of understanding the bigger issues - and the
importance of implementing critical reforms - to ensure all
Australians receive a fair return.

Lexi,

"but how about presenting us with constructive evidence of what
you claim are the facts."

That is a little hypocritical considering you have never provided evidence other than links to fluffy opinion pieces. Secondly, I provided general objectives not "facts". Pity your grasp of English isn't sufficient.

As for a comparison, The coalition has spent its 11 years running a comparatively fiscally responsible government repaying the biggest debt in Australia's history left by Hawke and Keating, vastly lowering the taxes and taking unemployment to historic lows, and divesting the country of companies that the state has no justification being in such as Telstra and Quantas.

Labor has taken a surplus and once again returned the country to record debt in a record time, its record of spending has been inefficient and yielded little return for the tax payer's money. It has raised new taxes and taken the IR back to before the reforms of Hawke and Keating causing small business and the service industry to shed jobs and a plunge in productivity and and increase in industrial time lost. To top it all it is wasting billions building a new legally enforced monopoly that will increase communication costs, and is imposing the worlds highest carbon tax, that on top of the high Aus dollar will crush the struggling manufacturing industry.

Dear SM,

What wild and outrageous statements.
The Coalition had the good fortune
to hold office in good economic times. From 1996 to
2007 the Howard government enjoyed
the dividends of the Hawke-Keating
economic reforms. It was a time when the world economy was
enjoying a long speculative-driven boom. Good luck, but not
good management.

Howard government's economic report card was overall a dismal one.

We're all sick and tired of you (and the Coalition) banging on about
the Howard government leaving the books in surplus. The Howard
government did achieve a series of surplus budgets: that was not
difficult in a time of strong economic growth which delivered very
high tax revenues.

Why don't you give us the complete picture though. And that is that -
the Howard government also left Australia with significant
liabilities in terms of our physical and intangible assets - our
common wealth. It neglec ted our surface transport - our interstate
roads, railroads and urban public transport. It starved our
tertiary education sector of funds. It neglected investments which
could have hel-ped us cope with the challenges of water shortages,
climate change, and fossil fuel depletion. In short, it let
fiscal impression management displace sound economic management,
and directed political attention
to only one side of the public
balance sheet, the debt side,
while totally ignoring the asset side.

If the Howard cabinet had been the board of a publicly listed company,
the shareholders would have had them thrown out for weakening the
company's asset base.

There's much more - but enough said.

You are entitled to your opinion - I'm just no longer
interested in hearing it.

I wouldn't like this post to end with your party line mythology pitch SM.
I feel the tide is turning.

The PM has survived, will survive and as consequence deserves to survive another day.

The Melbourne Herald Sun attempted to provide a newspaper today, instead of a front page beat up with the following 5 pages consisting of a seditious Gov't bash, the next 5 soliciting consumer opinion on the first 6.

Gina Rhinehardt's family are about air their dirty linen,Twiggy Forest may have his right to run a company removed by the courts soon, and Clive Palmer showed that he's a buffoon last week.

Abbott,s latest idea is an Audit Commission, "does he mean one like the Perth Firm that "audited" his dodgy set of of unachievable aspirations that were presented to the voters last election. Will this Commission do its work after the election and independent of Treasury ?.

As was the case aforementioned "audit",

Will the authors of this audit be fined several thousand dollars by their own organisation, and warned about having their ticket removed for allowing such a document to be described as an audit, as well ?. Not if Abbott and Co are in Gov't, that's for sure.

And finally Sm, it is a fraud to suggest that the NBN is either unpopular, expensive or can be provided by other technologies. It will be a revolutionary communications tool, particularly for people living in regional area's. Such a thing should always be publicly owned. As Telstra was before it was sold, it will be a profit making publicly owned asset that should never be privatised. It will pay for itself eventually and bring the future too Australia now. The roll out is occurring in my area at the the moment, it's exciting, the possibilities and benefits endless. It is a shame you can't see this SM.

Like the National Dental Health Scheme we would have had, if we had have re-elected Keating in 96, the NBN will be much cheaper to do now than it will later.

P.S. Yabby I will admit to grumpiness.

*It was a time when the world economy was
enjoying a long speculative-driven boom. Good luck, but not
good management.*

Whoah, hang on there, Lexi. I remind you that in the year 2000,
iron ore prices were around 30 bucks a tonne. There was no mining
boom. America had its dotcom boom and dotcom crash.

What was driving Australia's economy was higher productivity,
small business investing as they had confidence in the Govt and
deregulation of the labour market.

Our present Govt has the benefit of a huge mining boom. What would
they do without it?

Lexi,

The taxes from mining are nearly 4x what they were in Howard's time, and Labor has installed very little infrastructure, and what it has done has been very costly and seldom what was needed.

In spite of the huge mining bonanza labor has been lucky to get, it still has accumulated record debt in record time.

The reason you don't want to hear what we say is because the truth hurts.

SM you know that it is not luck at all that the Govt resides over a mining boom, but in fact is driven by the worlds essential need for resource's.

You also know that miners are experiencing massive increases in their profit margins.

You also know that Australia did not share in those increasing profits of the multinational miners in the Howard years,(even though they are our resources).

You also know that the only beneficiaries of not having a resources rent tax or super profits tax are the international miners and our own greedy local types.

You also know that the LNP cannot simply sell our assets and abrogate our rights at the behest of their mates in big business this time because they trashed most of our rights and sold all our assets last time they were in Govt.

You also know that the Gov't must raise revenue somehow to keep the country afloat.

You also know that is the plan of the LNP this time is to take from the citizen to subsidize the bottom lines of the rich and powerful.

You also know that the NBN is a threat to corporate power.

I fail to understand how any political party could genuinely harbor such beliefs and still claim to represent Australia's best interests.

The only people that would actually support the LNP's berserk ideological platform this time are vested interests and the least cognizant amongst us, lathered up by the massive propaganda campaigns conducted against our Govt by News Ltd and their corporate partners in crime.

And you also know, that that the last thing Australia needs now is another PM that bows and scrapes before them.

The word treason comes too mind.

Dear Thinker 2,

Well said.

A small number of elites increasingly feel they have the right
to bend the nation's future to satisfy their own self-interest.

As I stated earlier - we see this most obviously in the ferocious
campaign waged by the likes of Gina Rinehart, Clive Palmer and
Andrew Forrest against the Minerals Resource Rent Tax.

This has been supported by an Opposition that's all too willing
to kneel down at the feet of the vested interests than stand
up for the interests of Australian workers.

Thankfully, the interests of ordinary Australians have not yet
been drowned out by the desires of a well-funded, noisy handful.

Labor is implementing critical reforms like the MRRT that ensure
all Australians receive a fair return from the resources they own.

While it is touching that T2 and Lexi feel the need to prop each other up, the elephant in the room is that Swan was the idiot that after promising the miners extensive consultation on a proposed mining tax introduced a massive tax with zero consultation. He then kept his yap shut and let KRudd take all the heat, and happily stuck the knife in when it all turned to dung.

Now there is a back room agreement that favors the 3 big miners, he is picking a fight with the smaller miners who were not consulted at all, and whom are not surprisingly a little Pssed off and prepared to say so.

Whine Swan is now trying to claim the divine right to present his spin on the topic without criticism and is attacking the independent miners in a stoush to try and deflect attention from his own staggering incompetence and failed policies.

Dear SM,

There's a new thread that has just been started by
Anthonyve - "The Measure of a Nation - and a Party."
I would be interested to read your input into that
discussion. How about contributing?

Will do.