The Australian politics thread

[Burgey]

Originally Posted by Bracken

True. Personally, I don't think she was talking based upon any inside knowledge. I highly doubt that, with her previous ministerial portfolios, she would have ever been privy to those sort of operational details.

I think it's more likely that she just got so carried away with what she thought was a successful stay-on-message attack on the government (with the generalisation that "all" countries forge passports) that she didn't realise that the journo was manoeuvring to pin her down on the specific question.

All assumptions, of course. I just can't imagine ASIO briefing the Minister for Ageing on their counterfeiting activities.

They brief the Shadow Foreign Minister though.

It was a terrible error of judgment. They all make them, but the question was asked to her in clear terms, and she answered it unequivocally. She's been around long enough to see that coming, surely.

It was just bizarre tbh.

Generally though, I've been very disappointed in my side's failure to sell its message. Honestly, go OS and see how ****ed everything is. Not going through a recession has meant people haven't realised how good we have it here compared with other economies. Not saying it's all beer and skittles, but comparatively we've done well.

They should be out there pumping that line for all it's worth. It not only would help their economic credibility, it wouls also soften the impact of not delivering all they said they would.

I mean, how hard is it to say "Yeah, there are things we wanted to do but haven't, because we had to divert resources to stopping the joint going tits-up"?

FMD, these back-office ****s get paid too much. On both sides. Just sell a message ffs, it honestly isn't that hard to do.

That's where Keating and Costello had it - they could do what an old judge once told me is the key to effective advocacy - reduce the complex to the simple. Can't put too big an emphasis on how important that is.

[Top_Cat]

Originally Posted by Bracken

True. Personally, I don't think she was talking based upon any inside knowledge. I highly doubt that, with her previous ministerial portfolios, she would have ever been privy to those sort of operational details.

I think it's more likely that she just got so carried away with what she thought was a successful stay-on-message attack on the government (with the generalisation that "all" countries forge passports) that she didn't realise that the journo was manoeuvring to pin her down on the specific question.

All assumptions, of course. I just can't imagine ASIO briefing the Minister for Ageing on their counterfeiting activities.

You're right, she's full of ****. Some backyard rumour she's heard and propagated. Put it this way; surveillance operatives in police units do all they can to hide their methodology from other operational cops, starting their training on a month-long course where they're kept away from their families and the job. And that's just guys who get trained for local ops. There's little doubt that contrary to job description, a lot of guys in the field love to talk (opsec? Yawn.) but I'd rate it as highly unlikely anyone would be let a pollie in on stuff like that. ASIO/ASIS types aren't even supposed to let people know they work there.....

[Matt79]

Would love to be running question time for the govt today. Every government questions would be "Can the Minister explain the harm done to Australia's reputation with allies/national security by such irresponsible comments from our alternative foreign minister?" and the answer to every opposition question would be "and this is why Julie Bishop is unfit to hold high office and why Abbott must sack her". "mining tax bad for Australia? Not as bad as having a loose cannon like the Abbott-Bishop team ****ing up our national security and shredding our reputation!"

[howardj]

Last chance to influence Newspoll today.

Abbott should be out there with a big announcement.

[Burgey]

Originally Posted by howardj

Last chance to influence Newspoll today.

Abbott should be out there with a big announcement.

He's been very quiet in QT this week. Not asking many questions tbh. Reckon he'll be front and centre today.

[howardj]

I can't understate how important it is to keep the "50/50 anyone's election" narrative going in the media.

The major polls are a huge part of that.

If I recognise that sitting in leafy Brisbane, surely Abbott's full time Hollow Men in Canberra do too.

[slippyslip]

Originally Posted by Burgey

Generally though, I've been very disappointed in my side's failure to sell its message. Honestly, go OS and see how ****ed everything is. Not going through a recession has meant people haven't realised how good we have it here compared with other economies. Not saying it's all beer and skittles, but comparatively we've done well.

They should be out there pumping that line for all it's worth. It not only would help their economic credibility, it wouls also soften the impact of not delivering all they said they would.

The ALP have been saying that. But if the media dont want to report that message then it doesn't get reported.

All of News Ltd new services have spun the line that it was solely mining that "saved" us from a recession. Of course they dont explain how mining saved retail and service industry jobs which have nothing to do with mining. Or that retail and the service industries employ vastly more people and make up a greater % of GDP than mining does.

Listened to talk back radio lately? They're all pretty much spinning the Coalition/News Ltd line.

Even the ABC is so desperate to been seen as fair and impartial it is overcompensating. I know if I turn on the 7pm news the first thing I'll hear is the "The Opposition leader says ...".

And at Fairfax the political reporting is pretty fair to the ALP but the opinion columns are more biased towards the Coalition. Miranda Devine, Paul Sheehan and Gerard Henderson can match anything that Dennis Shanahan and Janet Albrechtsen can pump out over at the Oz. Mike Carlton is obviously extremely anti-Coalition but hes hardly an ALP lover. Ross Gittins tries to debunk the economic myths that the Liberals have manufactured over the years but hes not immune to taking a swing at Rudd when he feels its justified.

And lets not forget the crusade the SMH is having against the NSW government. Calling for re-call elections like in the USA??? While the ALP is NSW are beyond terrible and corrupt as hell, for a newspaper to actively try and get a government kicked out of power is pretty bold. Even The Oz isn't that blatant in its anti Rudd rhetoric.

To be honest I'm surprised that the ALP isnt doing worse in the polls federally than they are at the moment with so much stacked against them.

Between the end of WWII and the 2007 election the Coalition had been power for 42 of the part 62 years. If you cant from their first election victory in 1949 42 of the previous 58 years. The 2007 election was only the third time the ALP had taken power back from the Liberals since 1949.

And people wonder why Liberal supporters have a "born to rule" mentality.

[Burgey]

All that may be right mate, but they ought to have been out there selling that message months ago, not just now. Just hammering it into people.

[howardj]

Originally Posted by slippyslip

The ALP have been saying that. But if the media dont want to report that message then it doesn't get reported.

All of News Ltd new services have spun the line that it was solely mining that "saved" us from a recession. Of course they dont explain how mining saved retail and service industry jobs which have nothing to do with mining. Or that retail and the service industries employ vastly more people and make up a greater % of GDP than mining does.

Listened to talk back radio lately? They're all pretty much spinning the Coalition/News Ltd line.

Even the ABC is so desperate to been seen as fair and impartial it is overcompensating. I know if I turn on the 7pm news the first thing I'll hear is the "The Opposition leader says ...".

And at Fairfax the political reporting is pretty fair to the ALP but the opinion columns are more biased towards the Coalition. Miranda Devine, Paul Sheehan and Gerard Henderson can match anything that Dennis Shanahan and Janet Albrechtsen can pump out over at the Oz. Mike Carlton is obviously extremely anti-Coalition but hes hardly an ALP lover. Ross Gittins tries to debunk the economic myths that the Liberals have manufactured over the years but hes not immune to taking a swing at Rudd when he feels its justified.

And lets not forget the crusade the SMH is having against the NSW government. Calling for re-call elections like in the USA??? While the ALP is NSW are beyond terrible and corrupt as hell, for a newspaper to actively try and get a government kicked out of power is pretty bold. Even The Oz isn't that blatant in its anti Rudd rhetoric.

To be honest I'm surprised that the ALP isnt doing worse in the polls federally than they are at the moment with so much stacked against them.

Between the end of WWII and the 2007 election the Coalition had been power for 42 of the part 62 years. If you cant from their first election victory in 1949 42 of the previous 58 years. The 2007 election was only the third time the ALP had taken power back from the Liberals since 1949.

And people wonder why Liberal supporters have a "born to rule" mentality.

Interesting to see things from another viewpoint.

You get a good run in the media when you're doing well in the polls- Rudd got a dream run in 2007.

Anyway, you can't complain about the line "the mining boom saved us from recession".

Labor used the mining boom in 2007, to explain away the economic prosperity of the Howard Years.

[stephen]

Well the mining tax is still big news. Who cares about possibly offending a couple of friends (ahem look at what Smith/Rudd did to our friendships with India and Japan) when the government is planning on taxing the central core of our economy out of business.

It scares the hell out of me.

[James90]

Originally Posted by Burgey

All that may be right mate, but they ought to have been out there selling that message months ago, not just now. Just hammering it into people.

That's right. It's incredibly difficult to sell the message with the media the way it is and the

But there's a few things Rudd's done that I think should have been done differently

1. Given the MPs an opportunity to go out and sell the policy
I think a large part of the "all talk no action" thing is due to the fact that the Government is just producing a series of media releases. First it's MySchool, then it's national curriculum, then it's four health policies in succession, then it's asylum seekers.

Give people a time to sell what they're doing ffs!

2. Not beating the opposition to death with the stimulus package and state of the economy
Best example is when Rudd went on Insiders and said, "I'm sorry for not doing all that I should have and I accept responsibility for people's disdain".

No! You've actually spent a huge amount of time and effort avoiding us from recession and have had several bills blocked by the Senate! Why the **** don't you say that?

3. Climate change backflip
Why the **** didn't he just say, "we're not going to re-introduce the CPRS this term because it's not going to get through the Senate. They've had three opportunities to pass it but the Greens decided to vote with the Nationals. We're not the ones backing away from the issue"

But no. The **** says we're going to delay it until 2013 contradicting everything he'd said up until now.

FFS! I'm not particularly savvy politically, but deadset reckon I could do a better job than some of Rudd's advisers.

[howardj]

Originally Posted by slippyslip

And people wonder why Liberal supporters have a "born to rule" mentality.

Jolly right, old son.

Now go fetch my pipe.

[Burgey]

Originally Posted by stephen

Well the mining tax is still big news. Who cares about possibly offending a couple of friends (ahem look at what Smith/Rudd did to our friendships with India and Japan) when the government is planning on taxing the central core of our economy out of business.

It scares the hell out of me.

Why? The industry uses the natural resources of the entire country. They're not slugging them out of existence, they're taxing their profits above a certain level.

If that means smaller divvies for shareholders so every working person in the country has a better retirement, who gives a ****? The thought that the size of a dividend to a shareholder in a mining company should be the basis for denying nearly everyone better retirement savings is repugnant tbh.

The industry is unique in that it all it does is use the natural resources of the country to make its way. It's not like other industries which take resources and value-add.

The idea that this will mean mining companies will up-stumps from here is prepsterous. We have the resources, they need them, as do other countries. Simple as. There's all this talk about them taking off to Canada or what not. FMD half of Canada's mines are owned by us now anyway.

**** the mining companies anyway. They should have nationalised them in 1947.

Bring back Ben Chifley. WAG - he had the balls to stand up to these arseholes.



^ Hero. Legend.

[howardj]

Why? The industry uses the natural resources of the entire country. They're not slugging them out of existence, they're taxing their profits above a certain level.

Those resources are worth zero stuck miles underground. It takes enormous investment, risk and capital to extract the resources and turn them into anything of value. The alternative to these mining companies doing that, is that we get zero return on those resources. People make out like they are taking them at our expense.

If that means smaller divvies for shareholders so every working person in the country has a better retirement, who gives a ****? The thought that the size of a dividend to a shareholder in a mining company should be the basis for denying nearly everyone better retirement savings is repugnant tbh.

The RSPT does not fund our retirement savings. The increase in the Super Guarantee from 9% to 12% is paid for by employers.

The RSPT funds the following - a $700 million infrasture fund. The rest of the $12 billion per year goes to fund recurrent expenditure namely a small reduction in the company tax rate (most businesses are run through partnerships, trusts and sole trader structures and therefore will not benefit from this), a tax break on your interest earnings, and a small maximum $500 annual Government contribution to your superannuation if you earn below $37 000 per year (basically part time workers will be the only people that benefit).

So we have a massive new $12 billion tax on the industry which saved us from recession, and the Government is using nearly all of the $12 billion in revenue to fund recurrent expenditure – i.e. company tax cuts, superannuation for low income earners, and tax breaks on interest income. So we get no lasting benefit from this massive new tax other than a piddling $700m infrastructure fund per year; no lasting benefit from non-renewable resources. All we get is the money being hived off to fund recurrent expenditure such as tax cuts. In 20 years time, we’ll look back and think – what is there to show for our super profits tax? …tax cuts and tax breaks…

[Burgey]

Sounds like the Howard years tbh.. what have we got to show for all those years of prosperity when we could have re-built the joint from the ground up? Tax cuts and and tax breaks...

****, what I'd do for decent transport and infrastructure in this country. Honestly, we're a ****ing backwater. It's depressing. We are to the rest of the developed world as West Wyalong is to Sydney - cosy and quaint, but despite how friendly the people are, a **** hole.