The Australian politics thread

[Spark]

Originally Posted by age_master

Im pretty sure it was based on Liberal preferences.

Yes and no - while it was the Liberal preferences that gave him the unexpected swing, it was the Labor preferences that pushed him over the line. Without those he's screwed.

[howardj]

Rudd's health policy is an absolute con. Now, I follow politics very closely, and even I was left with the impression during the last election campaign that his Total Federal Takeover, was a promise to take over the RUNNING of the hospitals - I'm sure this is the impression most other folk had too.

Now, as it turns out, his plan is:

- Nine months late
- Only relates to FUNDING not RUNNING
- Is not a total takover from the States at all, but merely a switch from 40-60 to 60-40 funding-wise.

And, like his promise to take the Japanese to the international courts over whaling, the delivery will not take place until after the next election.

His promises are so big, but the delivery (if at all) is so small.

[Burgey]

Originally Posted by howardj

Rudd's health policy is an absolute con. Now, I follow politics very closely, and even I was left with the impression during the last election campaign that his Total Federal Takeover, was a promise to take over the RUNNING of the hospitals - I'm sure this is the impression most other folk had too.

Now, as it turns out, his plan is:

- Nine months late
- Only relates to FUNDING not RUNNING
- Is not a total takover from the States at all, but merely a switch from 40-60 to 60-40 funding-wise.

And, like his promise to take the Japanese to the international courts over whaling, the delivery will not take place until after the next election.

His promises are so big, but the delivery (if at all) is so small.

Can't believe it took the Young Libs this long to get their material out .

We'll see how small the States think it is when they complain about how it will affect them. Every commentator I've heard over the past 24 hours has admitted (even the dire ones like Kieran Gilbert and David Speers) that he talked about funding last election campaign. I'm pretty sure that if he didn't we'll hear about it soon enough.

Be interested to hear what Abbott says, as it closely resembles what he was after. That, and the fact he was health minister for years and did SFA. The other benefit for Labor is that this puts Dutton in the spotlight. Gold.

[stephen]

Originally Posted by Burgey

The other benefit for Labor is that this puts Dutton in the spotlight. Gold.

For a politician, any publicity is good publicity. Dutton could use as much publicity as he can get running up to the next election, given the razor thin margin here in Dickson.

[Burgey]

Originally Posted by stephen

For a politician, any publicity is good publicity. Dutton could use as much publicity as he can get running up to the next election, given the razor thin margin here in Dickson.

The electorate he wanted to leave? Will be very interesting to see how that one playes out come election night.

[James90]

Dutton is still in with a chance for the fact that the ALP candidate should have been campaigning six months ago but is yet to be endorced.

Was an excellent article on Crikey yesterday about how deaths in the construction industry have risen almost 20% since the Libs brought in the ABCC, significantly restricted unions right to entry and stopped construction worker's ability to strike over safety concerns.

If anyone's responsible for industrial manslaughter it's surely Kevin Andrews.

[James90]

http://www.abc.net.au/elections/fede...ts/sendVIC.htm

As you can see the Libs gave their preferences to the DLP (they would have undoubtedly preferenced FF over the ALP though if the DLP had been excluded by that stage)

It literally got down to a scenario where the Greens and Family First both sat on 72% of quota and the ALP preferences would decide who got elected. All 219,000 above the line preferences flowed to FF.

Fielding got 56,000 votes in his own right and another 500,000 from other group's preferences.

Diabolical.

[Redbacks]

So will there be uncapped spending on health procedures or will we stick with a set $ budget for each hospital a year? Probably a fair question to ask which leads to:
a) we need to do more with less but get the balance right between efficiency and effective treatment of patients.

Maybe the $7 a day for TV can be taken and put back into health

[howardj]

Originally Posted by Burgey

Can't believe it took the Young Libs this long to get their material out .

We'll see how small the States think it is when they complain about how it will affect them. Every commentator I've heard over the past 24 hours has admitted (even the dire ones like Kieran Gilbert and David Speers) that he talked about funding last election campaign. I'm pretty sure that if he didn't we'll hear about it soon enough.

Be interested to hear what Abbott says, as it closely resembles what he was after. That, and the fact he was health minister for years and did SFA. The other benefit for Labor is that this puts Dutton in the spotlight. Gold.

SFA? I'm surprised you didn't say "Twelve years of inaction". lol

So, Costello swung in a hammock for 12 years and Abbott did SFA? I don't think so.

It's just more empty words from the PM.

He specialises in announcements...but loses interest in the follow through.

[Son Of Coco]

Originally Posted by howardj

SFA? I'm surprised you didn't say "Twelve years of inaction". lol

So, Costello swung in a hammock for 12 years and Abbott did SFA? I don't think so.

It's just more empty words from the PM.

He specialises in announcements...but loses interest in the follow through.

What did Abbott do about health again? I forget.

[howardj]

Funding doubled during Howard's tenure.

[Son Of Coco]

Originally Posted by howardj

Funding doubled during Howard's tenure.

And what was the positive outcome?

Funding's good then I guess? Rudd's done well.

[Bracken]

Originally Posted by howardj

Funding doubled during Howard's tenure.

Funding of what? Public health funding or total health funding? Per capita? How about when indexed to inflation?

Work out the relevant numbers in real terms, and the "we doubled funding" line doesn't hold up too well.

[howardj]

$51 billion in 07/08 compared to $19 billion in 95/96

All that inflation is it?

You only have to look at the Labor states to see how well Labor does health.

[howardj]

Originally Posted by Son Of Coco

And what was the positive outcome?

Funding's good then I guess? Rudd's done well.

Yes, funding...that is the principle role that the Commonwealth has in relation to health. If you have a look at the Constitution, it's up to the States to actually run the system- something that Labor has failed at. You only have to look at the difference in the hospital system between Victoria on the one hand, and NSW and QLd on the other. It shows what a difference a good State government can make and that health is a State matter.

Nobody thought it was Federal until Mr The Buck Will Stop With Me pledged a "Full Federal Takeover". Turns out, much like his other promises, that it's nothing like a full takeover.

At least with Hawke, Keating and Howard...they had substance. Rudd is just a salesman. Fuelwatch, Grocery Watch, ETS by 1 July 2010, take the Japanese to the international courts over whaling, laptops for high school kids, full federal takeover of health...it's just an announcement-athon...with no interest in the follow up.

Got that out of my system. lol