What to make of this?

"Greens candidate now a deputy head of Turnbull’s department

Lin Hatfield Dodds the Green Senate candidate for the ACT for two elections running has been appointed a deputy secretary in Prime Minister and Cabinet in charge of all things social policy. Many Liberal MPs apoplectic. PM one suspects was consulted. If not tells us all we need to know about Turnbull’s appointment of Martin Parkinson (as PMC head).

Bureaucrats (are) upset as well because of lack of public service experience."
heraldsun, May7 2016

LOL, Beach not happy that one of his knuckle dragging KKK types didn't get the gig! Social policy no less. Malcolm can spot talent "one suspects".
Beach, must have been having drinky poos with Sir Humphrey Appleby at 'The Club'; "Bureaucrats (are) upset as well because of lack of public service experience." And to add insult to injury, I googled Lin Hatfield Dodds, and don't mind that she has qualifications as long as your arm, SHE IS A WOMAN! I kid you not, A WOMAN! And "one suspects" she can't even whip up a half decent batch of scones!

Paul1405,

First, here is a buffed up article about Lin Hatfield Dodds. By an ABC reporter of course,

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2010-07-02/dreaming-of-greener-pastures/889586

In my post, the reference to public servants being concerned about this lateral placement was a direct quote. The PS union has been quite concerned about lateral recruitment since the Whitlam Labor government set the precedent of extensive replacement of senior executives. A practice reminiscent of the US 'Spoils System', where the incoming administration brings its own political appointees with it.

Spoils System
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spoils_system

Frankly, the PS unions and others would be wondering and quite reasonably what particular skills the APS is deficient in, ie in the scores of highly qualified permanent staff in the Senior Executive Service, that a lateral recruit to this senior executive position in the Prime Minister's own department was necessary.

Personally, I would very much prefer open competition - that ALL APS vacancies were advertised and automatically open to all comers.

Now, what about you comment on this rather controversial appointment that Malcolm Turnbull must have know about, instead of your endless diversions?

Beach, nothing like a 6 year old "news" story to attack this appointment. Where was the Green hating Beach when Tony Abbott appointed Peta Credlin to the top position in his department. A woman who's biggest claim to fame was she worked in horse racing and was a Liberal Party lackey.

In your opinion Beach who should have got the job, your man Jim Saleam. I thought you were a advocate of equal opportunity, ha, ha, or does that only apply to the old boys in the PS. Where do you see women in the Public Service these days, rising to the rank of 'tea lady' and no more!

I note your thread hasn't attracted the usual suspects from the rabid right. Maybe they will be along later after finishing sticking pins in their 'Bill' dolls.

Sorry so sorry, that was a typo on my part, that should have read 'Malcolm' dolls.

Just seems very naive to me to appoint a member of one of the
opposition parties to a job in his own office.
ie unless it is an example of keep them closer.

Beach, don't worry about Paul 1490, he is getting a bit paranoid laterly.

I wouldn't expect anything else.

After all, Turnbull is more RRG, [radical ratbag green] than he ever was Liberal. Surely you have noticed his dictatorial tendencies, a perfect lefty green.

Turnbull backed his mate Henson taking nude shots of teenage girls in the name of art. The sooner the rational members of the conservatives get rid of or start another party the better. The Liberals are now as grubby as Labour. At least the Greens are proud of their perversion and religous lies.

Just another reason for putting the Turnbull party last on the ballot paper.

I dont trust the greens much these days.

One would be surprised by depopulation comments some international greens have have made.

Jacques-Yves Cousteau, oceanographer and environmentalist said in 1991, “we must eliminate 350,000 people per day."

According to Wikipedia:

Ms Lin Hatfield Dodds is one of Australia's leading social
justice advocates. She is also the National Director of
UnitingCare Australia and is a recognised expert on social
policy and community services. She has served on a wide
range of boards and government advisory boards, and is a
frequent media commentator and respected conference speaker.

Last year (2015) She was a speaker at the Economic and Social
Outlook Conference (Rebuilding Foundations for Reform) along
side distinguished people like Mr Geoff Allen, Senator the Hon.
Simon Birmingham, Prof. John Daley (CEO Grattan Institue),
Mr Peter Davidson, Prof Glyn Davis, Mr John Fraser,
the Hon. Josh Frydenberg, MP, to name just a few.

Ms Dodds chairs the boards of the Australian Institute,
UnitingCare, and serves on the board of the Australian Centre for
Christianity and Culture. She is past Chair of the Australian
Social Inclusion Board, past President of the Australia Council
of Social Service, and chaired the ACT Community Inclusion Board
for four years.

Perhaps the Prime Minister through his own wide range of
experience has found that it is possible to be conservative and
intellectually honest. Perhaps he's also learned through his
own experiences that no matter what political party a
professional belongs to - there are people who do use data
and honest arguments to support their perspectives - hence his
choice in appointing Ms Dodds to the job for which she is
undoubtedly experienced.

Cheers.

Malcolm is smart enough to understand that to win, he has to win the voters in the middle, not those on either side of the extreme. Extreme right wing people simply don't seem to understand that. So the answer is some compromise, but win the election, rather than behave like a dog with a bone who won't budge an inch.

Yabby,

That would be true if Malcolm wasn't holding the far-right line - which he is. Apart from the flags and the chest-beating, nothing has changed re policy direction.

Btw, latest Morgan poll has ALP 52.5 LNP 47.5 two-party preferred.....that's blown out to five percentage points under Marvellous Mal.

Poirot, the change in Superannuation laws is hardly a hard right position. I think that the changes are quite reasonable, but they have upset many on the right. What Malcolm is certainly doing is focussing on innovation, with a number of changes which will benefit the country. We need innovation to dig our way out of the problems we have and his entrepreneurial skills will benefit all of us, if he lands up as PM.

If people think that a trade union leader can solve issues which I personally think that he may not even understand, well good luck to them, as it won't be my kids affected. Yeltsin, corrupt leaders in South Africa, Zimbabwe and now the Philippines were all democratically elected, those voters landed up paying a huge price. Perhaps the same might yet happen with Trump! Democracy is just the least worst option, it does not guarantee intelligent outcomes.

Yabby,

Don't bother trying to spin the "innovation" line with me.

There is no "innovation" in Mal's repertoire aside from employing "innovation" as some sort of vacuous slogan.

This the guy who is hell bent on cutting funding to education...who's presiding over the mass sackings of scientists and the denuding of the CSIRO.

"Innovation" Turnbull-style is nothing but hollow waffle...no meaning...no substance.

Just like his #ideasboom....

http://www.afr.com/technology/new-startmesh-fund-raising-20m-to-back-startups-20160511-got3qk

Poirot, clearly you don't read the AFR, or you would be better informed. Quite amazing what a small change in the tax laws is doing in bringing out VC investments. Turnbull sat down with people like Atlassian, for very good reasons.

I remind you how Californian VC has changed your life, from Google to Paypal and all the rest. We need it here too.

Money spent on CSIRO and education is very much a question of how it is spent, not how much is thrown at them. Much is wasted, that needs to be addressed and money spent more wisely.

"Poirot, clearly you don't read the AFR, or you would be better informed...."

Lol!...get off your high horse, Yabs...I read articles from AFR all the time....they are constantly feeding on twitter (not to mention that's where the brilliant cartoonist David Rowe does his stuff)

Here's one:

http://www.afr.com/news/special-reports/afr-national-policy-series/saul-eslake-says-tax-system-riddled-with-loopholes-for-the-rich-20150921-gjrupb#ixzz481ILjZZ9

"Leading economist Saul Eslake said there is no public policy justification for the 50 per cent capital gains tax discount, negative gearing or the use of trusts to minimise tax.

He told the AFR's Tax Reform Summit on Tuesday that the change of prime minister provided an opportunity to re-engage in a genuine debate about reform, but lifting the GST without closing loopholes that disproportionately benefit the wealthy would not wash with the community.

Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull effectively put superannuation tax concessions, capital gains breaks for investors and negative gearing back into the tax reform mix on Monday after they were all ruled out by his predecessor, Tony Abbott."

"It's simply not right for people who want to broaden the base of indirect tax to resist broadening the base of personal income tax," Mr Eslake told the summit, hosted by The Australian Financial Review and KPMG, on Tuesday.

Mr Eslake likened the tax system to a "giant Swiss cheese" riddled with holes that allow the wealthy to pay less tax, and says taxpayers in the top tax bracket are on average 2½ times more likely to make use of tax minimisation strategies."

Etc...

(I trust you're now "better informed")

Fair enough Poirot. As long as its on twitter or in a cartoon, you will know about it :)

You conveniently moved the goalposts, we had been discussing innovation, which you now ignored, but I did notice.

The capital gains tax "discount", is not really a discount, more a compensation for when inflation indexing was removed, as Keating had originally applied it. A dollar which has suffered from years of inflation, is worth far less than when it was invested. Some people seemed to have trouble using a calculator, so Costello simplified it. If the Govt was actually fair, they would remove taxation from the first few % of bank deposit interest, again to compensate for inflation loss. If what is fair is how you decide things, then you would have to agree

Yes, Yabby..."Fair enough Poirot. As long as its on twitter or in a cartoon, you will know about it :)"

Of course, you'd never understand that political discussion and article sharing on twitter is far more incisive than anything that's waffled on OLO.

Poirot,

Your namesake was "killed off" some time ago on TV. If you really think that Turnbull, universally thought of as the most left-wing leader of the Coalition, has any connection at all with the right of politics, it's time for you to retire and stop displaying your ignorance. There's not a cigarette paper between Turnbull and Shorten - that's why true rightists are looking for other options. Duh! I've always marvelled at the gall you have, taking the name of a super-smart detective; the only thing you have in common with him is a fiction

A discount is a discount, and in a low inflation environment, with a medium term outlook, it has been an enormous incentive to invest in a market that can only rise through lack of supply, as in Sydney and Melbourne housing.

Marry that to low interest rates, the ability to pay interest only, and the lever of NG into increased holdings, and you have a recipe for acceleration of a market into a bubble, which must correct.

Removing NG is removing the pimple on the arse of the problem. Also, NG is not a "concession" can fund gov't expenditure by its removal. This is because reducing taxation by applying losses must still be embodied as a basic principle of a fair tax system (by company structures or new provisions for individuals to carry losses forward). This means nothing is gained by the taxman, in the end, by removing NG.

In its class war mantra, Labor is cutting corners with the truth. If it's looking for ways to fund its dreams in the current financial circumstances, conjuring up savings from the NG tax "concession" is a mirage. Either Labor is stupid or it believes voters are.

ttbn,

"...If you really think that Turnbull, universally thought of as the most left-wing leader of the Coalition, has any connection at all with the right of politics, it's time for you to retire and stop displaying your ignorance..."

Lol!

Mr Turnbull has sold his soul for the top job.

There he is attempting to continue the delivery of all the IPA's key points...he's not doing it very well though.

Apart from ditching the plethora of flags and cancelling Abbott's chest beating on the world stage, can you name me anything Mal has done that isn't hard right-wing?

Luciferase, "In its class war mantra, Labor is cutting corners with the truth. If it's looking for ways to fund its dreams in the current financial circumstances, conjuring up savings from the NG tax "concession" is a mirage. Either Labor is stupid or it believes voters are"

The socialists don't want those 'wealthy'(sic) landlords to indulge in positive gearing either.

One wonders where all of the social housing is to come from. Because government says it has no money to develop new property and government shies away from being continually burned by welfare tenants.

I suspect that both parties believe that they can keep everything
ticking along by means of the magic pudding just about forever.
I wonder if they really believe this or just hope that it all hangs
together until they are political history.

I think that they might just get away with it provided they make sure
they have left the scene by the early 2020s.
However there are opinions that we do not even have that much time.
I think the magic pudding may have gone off !
Have a read of Gail Tverberg's latest article;

http://www.resilience.org/stories-list/79716-energy

How aware do you think Australian politicians are to the situation
described, particularly as far as the average worker is concerned ?

This why I repeatedly say our pollies don't have a clue.